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 can't even offer white boys that! But I agree that, of everything else you've said, that "path to early and stable-enough success" is something that, if you want men to function properly, you need to offer. Early buy-in and rewards for following the system we've set out is ultimately what makes people adopt its values; that's why Boomers still think you can get a job with a resume and a firm handshake, after all.
No, it's genetic. You literally bury the lede in the first part of the sentence then deny it.
Further,
if you're going to go HBD you might as well go all the way. The place they come from is a more violent and aggressive environment and has been for quite some time. Asians (including the natives of North America) had less of that; if having 2000 years of the modern bureaucratic state doesn't convince you of this, then nothing will. The most violent of those groups were living in an area that didn't lend itself quite as well to this- is there any nation the Japanese hadn't gone to war with?
What makes you say that? Having a huge dick and a gold chain on my Glock is pretty awesome, actually.[0] It makes reloading harder but that's just the price you pay for fashion.
That's not really what Girl Scouts do, and from what I can see black women are very and completely uninterested in femininity that isn't [for lack of a better word] hostile. Part of that's just how they look- there's a particular variety of white woman (compare 'gyaru') who make themselves up like black women specifically to evoke that hostility- but a lot of it is the accent that inherently sounds like sass/will track as a disrespectful tone to anyone who isn't black. I'm not entirely sure where it comes from.
If you want an example of this, go watch a season of the Cosby show; Claire turns this off and on when/as convenient, but the kid characters run it full blast all the time.
(Interestingly, the same is not as true of the men. Watching them trying to turn it down to fit in is strange too.)
Perhaps it's simply a reaction to the [evolved?] need to control men who are themselves predisposed to a more extreme form of masculinity? Explains a lot about the "sleep with them early to secure a mate" thing, because that's [part of] how women force commitment from men... but because the abolition of racism as government policy coincides with the sexual revolution/abolition of sexism as government policy, the women are depending on male relatives to make sure that commitment occurs and it can't.
Well, unless the men do what is natural to them and use the unofficial state-condemned violence to force it... which is the thing you think is the problem with them. Go figure.
[0] I do always enjoy being able to post this on-topic. I will point out, that as patently absurd as this is (and whether the people participating in it are aware of that or not is irrelevant), most of it sounds exactly like what 19th century Americans understood masculinity to be (mostly thinking of dueling here but the fact that was even a thing to begin with suggests a more... offensive and proud form of masculinity as standard). And I'm not even entirely sure they are wrong considering what happened once we moved away from that.
More options
Context Copy link