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 -
Many moons ago, in the before times, in the waywayback a much younger and angrier JTarrou left his tiny cult in a tiny town in the midwest and went off to college. There was a lot of culture shock to go around, but mostly it was my first exposure to a primarily leftist environment. I knew more about politics than I did culture, and clashed repeatedly with professors and other students over these differences. Those who have spent time here will no doubt be shocked by this.
But it was an interesting time. The hectoring years of high-tide PC had ebbed in the late '90s, and by 1999 the pendulum was swinging the other way. A brand new show, low budget, seemingly intentionally poorly produced attempted to ride the zeitgeist on Comedy Central. The opening scene of the very first episode began like this:
These words were spoken by an edgy young comedian in his first TV hosting gig. One Jimmy Kimmel. When you've lived long enough to see Jimmy go from an early-30s masculinist rebel against the politically correct orthodoxy to its most sold-out shill on late night, you have to take the culture war with a grain of salt. Take this little tale as a warning, if any of that sounds familiar.
Politics is a game for grifters. If you play long enough, you'll see the tides of lies rolling back and forth. Do not trust the people. Do not trust the parties. Do not trust the policies. It is all kabuki, and not even played for us.
As a side note, I've wondered more than once how Jimmy Kimmel was accepted by the Left given the Man Show. I remember that in most episodes, there was a segment called "Women on Trampolines" which showed women in skimpy outfits jumping on trampolines. The point was that their little skirts would flip up and give a nice view of what was underneath. Which I enjoyed watching as a young man but it's just hard to see how feminists (which are a significant part of the Left coalition) would forgive this.
I basically agree, I think it's a classic Moloch type situation where there is a big advantage (and therefore a selection effect) in favor of people willing and able to engage in sociopathic levels of lying, cheating, intellectual dishonesty, etc.
As another side note, though, I am pretty sure that Jimmy's former sidekick, Adam Carolla, is a conservative commentator now.
Yeah, Adam never really worked in hollywood again after that, and Jimmy got a late night slot. Adam was a very early podcaster, I believe, and has always been conservative in a centrist blue collar way.
I rewatched the first episode of the Man Show recently, which is why I posted this. What surprised me in retrospect was how not-skimpy most of the trampoline outfits were. Some were in bikinis, and there were plenty of panty shots, but the actual clothing was stuff that you could see in church, more or less. Schoolgirl outfits with knee-length skirts. Long-sleeve sweater combos. It seems like a very old concept of "skimpy".
Perhaps I am not remembering accurately, and perhaps "skimpy" isn't the right word, but I'm pretty confident that (1) you (meaning the viewer) would see a lot more than you would ordinarily see in a church; (2) that was kind of the point; and (3) feminists generally object (so to speak) to this sort of material.
More options
Context Copy link
Therein lies hoeflation. Female outfits have generally gotten thottier over time.
People actually have less sex than ever and the younger generations of neurotic women probably dress less revealingly than they used to as it's become a status symbol to be in a relationship even if you try not to be appealing (I believe that is what a "Pick-Me" or whatever is)
A "pick me" is what people used to derisively refer to as "the cool girl," where her personality revolves around what she thinks will be appealing to men. Basically you're allowed to look feminine or you're allowed to hang out with the boys playing video games, but doing both makes you a pick-me traitor to womanhood. The female equivalent to the male feminist reading Andrea Dworkin to get laid.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There has to be a hard physical limit to hoeflation eventually, right? Thongs as casualwear? The human body can't go above 100% exposed, surely.
Unless the inside of mouths, noses, and other bodily cavities become parts of sexual interest. If 100% outside nakedness becomes the norm, then it stands to reason that women's dental gumlines become hidden fetish zones.
I tend to find lingerie to be much more sexualising than just complete nudity. A body is in the end just a body. But with the right clothes you signal that it is a sex object.
So I would oppose your statement and assert that 100% nudity is not the end point. Clothes and makeup that deliberately try to show off and sexualise are, and we still have a long way to go on that front.
More options
Context Copy link
Hoeflation doesn’t necessarily have to be conducted only through revealing the body but can also be achieved through augmentations of the body itself. On the extreme end of this, think of the women who utilise surgeries and fillers and gaudy makeup to accentuate everything to the point that they look terrifying and emotionless and I’m not sure any man finds them even remotely attractive.
Though now that you’ve mentioned it, it would be very funny to see some episode of some adult TV show take this idea and just run with it, where the thotting goes so far that it becomes downright grotesque and your average woman 100 years in the future aspires to being a Cronenbergian body horror.
We're already there. Dodgy illegal buttimplants because (and this is mostly black women doing it for some reason) you can never have enough butt volume apparently. And some of them do that ugly lip filler thing that makes them look like blow up dolls, I still can't fathom who actually likes looking at that.
More options
Context Copy link
Ah, I forgot about body augmentation. It's just a matter of time before we have the triple breast augmentations, Total Recall style.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The canonical example is Julia Roberts's outfit in Pretty Woman, where she plays a literal prostitute. Her outfit looks downright chaste compared to the modern thot.
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