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 -
Re: porn, I'm sorry but this just reads like boo stupid hypocritical bitches trying to take our fun away.
The number one complaint I hear from women about porn is that it gives men a very confused, one-sided view of sex. You could imagine how irritating it is to hear that men spend 30 minutes a day jerking off to porn for decades and then one of them finally gets to fuck you and has no idea how to bring you to orgasm and you leave the experience totally unsatisfied. Consistently!
This seems pretty valid to me, and is a separate issue from deciding to cash in on male appetites for porn.
Women will complain about porn but these reasons are largely post-hoc fictions. They have a gut-level aversion to their partner experiencing lust towards other women that are typically younger and better-looking than them. But because of their vague sex-positive pop feminist beliefs they don’t know how to articulate that and will backfill a reason that sounds less jealous and more socially acceptable.
You would see the same if they found their partner was having sex with dogs. This would greatly upset them but they would state the reason is something to do with animals being unable to consent, which of course is not the real reason.
I agree that's probably a factor, but I think there are other factors in play. Women object to porn not only if it's their male partner consuming it but also if it's some basement-dwelling incel type.
I think that at a deep, instinctual level, women appreciate that (1) without male service, they would quite literally starve to death; and (2) they receive male service in large part due to men's need for female validation, often through sex. So that when a woman sees a man getting sexual gratification without paying dearly for it, she instinctively finds it very threatening. So for example, if a female pop star becomes wealthy in part by flaunting her body on stage, women tend to be okay with it. But if that same woman instead flaunts her body for a porn mag for $200 a week, women tend to get outraged.
But the pop star is getting paid in both cases, assuming it's not a free gig. The men ogling her still have to pay up.
In my second example, I was assuming that it's the same woman but she's not a pop star. Rather, she's just another porn actress getting paid relatively little. And men pay to watch her, but very little. Generally speaking, this type of situation outrages women. Even though fundamentally it's no different from the hypothetical multimillionaire pop-star.
Sorry for not making myself clear before.
I think it has a lot to do with HereandGone's point: the pop star is modeling something that might be fun for a woman and her romantic interest to role-play, while the porn actress often is not.
You mean not fun for the woman in the relationship to roleplay? :)
Yes, that's what I meant. What's the :) for?
To mark my comment as sexist humor. I'm looking at the thread and not finding the argument by @HereAndGone2 that you are referring to.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link