This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Just to make a general observation about the gender war as a followup to my comment on the Promise Keepers organization:
I think we can generally observe is that women’s main complaint about men is that desirable hetero men are unwilling to exclusively commit. If we accept this, we can also see that this is actually two complaints rolled into one. 1. The men that are willing to commit are undesirable (icky, clingy, lame, “chopped”, entitled, toxic, porn-addled, skinny fat etc.). 2. The men that are desirable are unwilling to commit. (On a tangent I’d argue that most of the lipstick feminist complaints made in the mainstream media by middle-class women about men in general do usually boil down to the rather similar complaint that 34-37-year-old successful, well-paid, charismatic, tall, ambitious etc. urban men are in no rush to marry 31-34-year-old college-educated middle-class office worker women.)
If we look at this logically, to the extent that it even makes sense to try doing so (which is a valid question in itself), there are two potential remedies for this problem. 1. Focus on the undesirable men that are willing to commit and somehow transform them into desirable men i.e. alphaize the betas 2. Focus on the desirable men and incentivize them to commit i.e. betaize the alphas.
Now I don’t know about you but to me it seems self-evident that #2 has more potential for success no matter how you look at it and yet virtually everyone who makes any sort of recommendations regarding this entire issue (and that does not only include Red Pillers) is promoting #1. No, really – I’ve never seen anyone advocate for #2, not even the Promise Keepers or, for that matter, any other similar group that does not claim to be feminist and is at the same time pushing the nebulous concept of a new positive masculinity.
Am I seeing things that are not there or is this really not the case? Because as far as I can tell, it is. It seems like there is a general unspoken consensus in society that trying to compel sexually successful men to commit to women is a completely impossible, pie-in-the-sky idea that deserves no attention at all; that, in other words, expecting modern women to elicit commitment from the men they are attracted to is laughable lunacy.
Well, the first thought I have is that the general premise of men either being “alphas” or “betas” looks flawed. 80/20 is a myth (summary: 20% of both men and women are promiscuous), and most people only have sex in long term commitments, and no, most women aren’t promiscuous with relative few men in their 20s before settling down in their 30s.
So, if alpha/beta doesn’t exist, why are these women alone in their 30s:
Some women are so damaged, they are emotionally unable to commit. Some can have sex only if emotional intimacy is not part of the package; others are both sexually and emotionally “anorectic”.
Likewise, some women can only get attracted to unavailable men because they feel they are not worthy of being loved.
The reason women are attracted to these supposed “alpha” men is not because those guys are taller or cuter than other guys, but precisely because those men are not available.
So the solution is not to fix men, but to fix women so they can get attracted to men who are actually available. And, likewise, fix men so they can get attracted to women who are available.
I think Ozempic's gonna do a lot for this, honestly. I'm now married but went through the dating app hunger games just after COVID and I feel like a huge chunk of the market was disqualified for me via obesity. If a decent chunk of those get on the GLPs + social pressure to be thin builds back up again I think that could do a ton for the bottom end of the dating market.
I do agree that there's quite a small population of genuinely promiscuous women, though. In my experience with friends and acquaintances who I'd consider 'good sensible women' most of their dating app experiences tend to be 'Make an account for a week or two every 6 months, then either overshoot their tier and quit since that doesn't go anywhere or have one or two meh dates and wander off'.
Also in my experience a lot of people aren't getting meaningful first relationships in highschool/university for whatever reasons, then go to dating apps for essentially their first kiss/partner/whatever and have no idea how to escalate. I saw a lot of preppy 25-35 year old women with zero dating history trying to conduct the whole thing in HR Mode since they had no other framework for processing anything.
People who “passport bro” (date in other countries) can give us a pretty good picture of what dating looks like. As one datapoint, when the obesity rate is 12% (Philippines) instead of 41% (US), it’s a lot easier to find a wife.
As a general rule, when the obesity rate is 20% or lower (Peru in the 2010s, Kenya now, etc.) dating gets a lot easier.
It seems relevant to note that an American man who isn't top of the market, income height etc wise in the Philippines is, uh, probably not able to travel to the Philippines. I don't think 'mail order brides' tell us anything because the bargain is pretty simple- she gets a much higher standard of living with a husband who's less likely to be a violent drunk and her children live in a much wealthier society, he gets a wife. That's not a deal that the domestic dating market will likely have.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link