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 -
I disagree. I regularly work out at the gym and see just how attractive a plain woman can be if (1) she is in her early 20s; and (2) she is in great shape. Such a woman would have no problem getting a marriage proposal from some lonely but successful tech bro.
I doubt this. She can probably get a date, yes, but a lonely but successful techbro is not going to marry his girlfriend on double quick time.
I disagree, there are a lot of lonely guys out there who have money but zero success with women.
What do you make of the experiment I proposed a few posts over:
She'd get a lot of interest. How much of it would be serious is a different problem, and one that is impossible for even the men messaging her to assess neutrally.
Besides the basic problem of a man stringing her along, one of the great tragedies of human life is that your hypothetical desperate tech bro is lonely and has zero success with women, but the moment this girl starts dating him he will not be lonely and he will not have had zero success with women.
Human relationships are so difficult because the deal is changing in real time as it is being executed. We say to the hot girl, go date the lonely techbro niceguy, he'll worship you because he can't get anyone else. But sometimes, by showing interest in the lonely tech bro niceguy, the hot girl improves his status so much, that he isn't lonely and he isn't a niceguy anymore, and he takes his new found confidence on the road.
Women's media pushes this Beauty and the Beast narrative so hard that I feel like a surprisingly large proportion of women have tried this and gotten burned. A while back I happened on a thread in a women's forum discussing people's experience dating shy nerds - among a crowd, mind you, that demonstrably included many, many female nerd virgins as well. The common theme was that the men in this class had turned out to be shockingly inconsiderate and selfish partners, much more so in practice than the gym-bro extroverts.
Sometimes resentment and insecurity were a factor, where a guy took all his former anger at the women who wouldn't sleep with him and applied it to the woman who would. But a lot of women just noted that the shy nerds turned out to be kind of self-absorbed, not generous or interested in their partners. Several people noted being surprised that the jocks they'd dated were actually much kinder as people.
More options
Context Copy link
She could make it clear that there will be no physical intimacy of any nature whatsoever until there's a ring on her finger. Agreed?
He's a techbro, not a sucker. While I agree with your overall claim, this strategy would not work.
I disagree, there are a lot of lonely but romantic men out there. If nothing else, the profile could be put on a Christian-themed dating site.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Men on online dating websites: notorious for respecting women's stated boundaries, infamous for their Kantian commitment to telling the truth, legendary for their long term commitment.
I mean if you want to work on the experiment together, I'll agree to your rules and see what happens. But I don't really think it's the glidepath to marriage to just show up online and say I WANT A HUSBAND.
The glidepath to marriage remains church.
So it sounds like you are saying that in our experiment, the woman will receive a lot of interest but substantially all of it will be from men who ultimately won't offer the marriage proposal the woman is clearly insisting on before offering any kind of physical intimacy whatsoever.
Is that right?
I don't feel like investing the time but in any event, it doesn't seem like it would resolve anything. If the hypothetical woman received 20 or 30 lengthy, seemingly heartfelt messages from serious suitors of financial means, you would conclude that pretty much all the men were either lying or would flake at some point before the altar.
You smuggle in "serious" when there is no way to learn that they are serious until they are, in fact, at the altar.
That's not necessarily true. If the suitor invests a lot of time in the relationship without receiving any physical gratification, it's a pretty good indication that the person is serious.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don't know what would happen. I might be convinced by the evidence. I might learn something different altogether!
A friend once asked me to write a profile to catfish a boyfriend who she thought was tomcatting around on an r4r subreddit. I wrote a quick post, and I was HORRIFIED by the quality of the responses. These men poured their hearts out about how unique and special and smart I sounded with the most tossed-off intellectual references. It's genuinely nuts.
Doesn't seem it given that you said this:
Any response could be written off as part of a long con.
But anyway, it doesn't seem like there is any way to resolve this factual issue. Based on my general observations of men, I'm pretty confident about the generalization I made. And I think that if a female profile received the sort of responses I expected, it would be pretty good evidence. But yeah, possibly every last suitor who writes a lengthy detailed response would not actually marry but is instead playing the long game. Seems unlikely to me, but if that's what you think, then we're at loggerheads.
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
No. Young, thin, athletic women with excellent social skills, in an economically vibrant area might, I suppose. I've never known anyone like that, the tech bro is probably lucky to have her.
In theory, this issue should not be extremely hard to test. You create an online dating profile of a young woman who is plain in terms of facial attractiveness but in excellent physical shape. You say in the profile that you are interested only in financially successful marriage-minded men and that you will entertain only detailed replies which make clear that the man is both financially successful and marriage minded. I'm pretty confident that such a dating profile would get lots of serious interest. I take it you disagree?
I don't have a very clear image of either a 2nd percentile female face, or of what the app scene is like, but the latter sounds pretty dire from reports, so sure, she might get some serious interest there. Or LLM approximations thereof. And then if she generally behaves well, doesn't ghost serious men, makes good choices, is actually compatible with a man who wants marriage, then she might in fact find a well off husband. Or maybe he would string her along for a few years hoping he could do better but still enjoying the sex, and eventually they would break up, and they would be both be a couple of years older, but it would mean more to her than to him.
It's not that the marriage and family version of the story never happens. It's just that there are a lot of ifs and uncertainties, a lot of places where it might not work out, after investing quite a bit of effort. Which happens to men as well, but I'm not arguing that men have it easier.
So my argument isn't that she won't get interest, or even a relationship, but that many of those 99 thin but ugly women will just end up in a relationship that wastes their youth without obtaining a commitment, unless they have a lot else going for them. Especially if the man is sensible and realizes that if they marry and have kids, her body will change, and she will probably become fatter and more sedentary over time.
I'm not sure I understand your point . . . do you disagree with my predicted outcome?
That any specific woman would get a lot of attention, dates, and probably a relationship? Yes, I agree she probably would. That any given woman could find a well off man to marry through the apps in her early 20s? Not with high confidence. I would guess about even odds, worse than a chubby young woman would have by not working out but going to church events. Good enough to try out, not good enough to be planning her entire life around.
I think you are underestimating just how attracted men are to a young woman who is in great physical shape. Just my humble opinion.
That's a separate issue. This is just a thought experiment.
Anyway, are you saying that my hypothetical plain girl with a smoking hot body started going to church events, she should be able to attract a well-off marriage minded man?
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
Women in their 20's who work out regularly do not make up 99% of women.
Agreed and I have not claimed otherwise.
More options
Context Copy link
(And should 99% of 20yo women magically start working out and seek techbro husbands, said techbros would become much pickier.)
Agreed and I have not claimed otherwise.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link