site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026

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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I am sure that a police officer probably knows much more about violent men than I (a person who has not been in a fight since middle school), and could thus give better advice. My social circle is quite respectful towards women, and the problem there is often that my friends are not forward enough. That said:

  1. Take some time getting to know him before having sex or committing. If you like to go clubbing, stick to places vetted by people you trust, and don't hook up with guys you just met.

  2. If he is violent towards other people, or you find out he has abused others in the past, then leave. Same goes if he is an addict, alcoholic, gang member, or otherwise a criminal. You can probably get quite far by observing the kinds of people he spends time around, and assuming he is similar to them. If he does not want you around his friends or is secretive about his personal life, that is a red flag in and of itself.

  3. Talk with him. If he makes degenerate remarks about women and you can't tell if he is joking, assume that he is serious. If a man has strong prejudices, they are likely to reveal themselves sooner rather than later. If he is needlessly disrespectful towards other women, assume that he will eventually be disrespectful of you.

  4. Make sure to have a good social group. Have friends with whom you can discuss your relationship and struggles so you are not on your own if you have to leave.

Not that any of this removes the risk completely (everything we do in life is risky to an extent), but I think it reduces the risk substantially. At least in my experience, most people will let their mask slip as you start getting to know them, and the kind of manipulator who keeps everyone fooled is very rare.

All of that is great advice for an emotionally healthy person, although I wonder how actionable any of this would be for the kind of person who's already imprinted hardcore on abusive relationship patterns over the course of a bad childhood and a few bad starter boyfriends. For that person, the cleanness of abstinence might genuinely be the best approach, like intermittent fasting for the person who can't manage their sugar cravings.

Fair enough. hereandgone2 had a similar point, and it does make sense.

intermittent fasting for the person who can't manage their sugar cravings

Ah yes, the "I'm sufficiently antisocial on my own, so why can't everyone else be" solution. This isn't actually a problem with the women, by the way; much like it isn't actually a problem with the men who aren't self-aware enough to notice it.

The reason we tend to end up with people who are Cluster Bs to some degree, or at least have some of that behavior- is that it's very difficult to find ourselves, as it were. So what ultimately ends up happening is that, much as the proto-feminists note, is that we kind of end up boxing off/contain the other member. In other words, we settle, for what you may (or may not) know in the workforce as a "shitty" or "subpar" boss, because we're not made of stone and actually do require human companionship.

And that whole "I get to be the authority and better than you" thing is just as much a payment from participant to participant as financial resources and everything else is. We don't teach the nature of this exchange very much[0]- mainly because the question makes men and women who should notice it very uncomfortable, especially in Western nations, and especially especially in New World ones. That attitude has a lot of pros, but this is one of its weaknesses.

Empirically, when women are being pilloried as subhuman irrational whores who need to be forced into line for the future of the race, it's uncommon to see another male poster speak up to contradict those claims.

Yes, because doms take not being better than [their] subs very personally, and it's very important for their proper functioning they get to do this! Both partners do this from time to time; women usually exhibit it differently than men, almost like they compliment each other or something.


[0] By the way, the core of the BDSM movement are mostly autistic weirdos who have both noticed this and have it under control, or use it to keep it under control (or are weird/open enough to cosplay or cargo-cult it). This is why it usually makes relationships go sideways when one or more non-autists get a hold of it, especially when they start saying "liberation".