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 -
And do those conditions remain, today? How many couples can afford to have a non-working outside the home member? People make economic decisions based on what they would like, and what they can get. Mortgages for houses generally assume a dual-income couple. Renting is a problem as well (see housing shortages, space for kids, etc.) The cost of living requires that there is some kind of income stream from both spouses, which often leads to the ridiculous result that the wife's earnings largely go on paying for childcare so that she is free to work.
In some ways, I'd have no objections about going back to the 50s or 60s. But you can't stuff all women in a time machine and send them back, while leaving men in 2023. Both together, or not at all, else we won't fix anything and we'll be back at the 50s tradition also of men wanting to sow their wild oats before getting baby-trapped into marriage. Look, for example, at the 1960 movie (so right on the cusp of the turnover of the decade) The Apartment: it's described as a "romantic comedy" but what's so romantic about the premise? men will cheat on their wives because marriage is boring and dull:
The "romantic" part is that the characters played by Lemmon and MacLaine end up together, but what kind of augury is the rest of the movie for their marriage? Now he's one of those execs who want a bit on the side for some excitement, and she will either be the boring housewife who let herself go after marriage (so he's justified in having an affair) or she will cheat herself, given that she already has been engaged in adultery before marriage. The ending message tries to be "true love wins" but the rest of the time has been undercutting the very idea of marriage and fidelity: nearly all the men in it are adulterers, and the image of the "swinging playboy lifestyle" is what will be promulgated in the new decade.
And here we are after the Sexual Revolution, and I wish you well of it.
More options
Context Copy link