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 -
You really have to click through and look at the methodology itself, not just copy-paste whatever clickbait summary it's posted with. Best I can tell, you are misreading this survey in a way that actually reverses its findings.
Here are the actual questions and responses from the Pew survey. Notice how "dating casually" in this survey falls in the singledom region! The figure in the article also confirms: "single" as a category refers to respondents who are not married, living with a partner or in a committed romantic relationship.
So for this survey, all your Chads playing the field are showing up in the same 60% as the incels. Given that respondents aged 18-29 get binned separately from respondents aged 30-49, it's plausible the entire story with any disparities is just the completely unremarkable fact that women date men a few years older, so many of the committed partners of mid-20s women are showing up in the 30-49 age bracket (25% not married or LTR).
They asked additionally about people's relationship goals, seemingly using a single question: "Are you looking looking (for committed romantic relationship, casual dates or either one)?" Answering "yes" to this could match either the Chad seeking more flings or the incel seeking to lose his v-card, and answering "no" could equally well mean "I've given up" or "Nah, I'm cool with hookups, no relationship." So again, AFAICT this study gives zero way of differentiating between incel and Chad; the questions route them into the same buckets.
(Lastly, 39% of women aged 65+ are not married or in LTR, versus 25% of men in that bracket, but I notice you don't express the same concern about those ladies' lonely fate. Why is that?)
Seriously, all survey-based social science is terrible, but it becomes 1000x more terrible if you start with a preconceived conclusion and just Google around for supporting headlines. Consider all the much-hyped survey-based studies claiming to show that Republicans are inherently stupider and less empathic than Democrats. Do you accept these summaries uncritically because Science! No? Then should you also exercise some critical scrutiny about studies like these? [edited for clarity]
More options
Context Copy link