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 -
I read (glanced over and noted the arguments) the manifesto, and it leaves me with an awkward feeling.
Basically the guy is pretty much correct on the pure factual level about everything he's seeing.
Its clear to me that he has directly experienced the modern, toxic dating pool/culture, and was probably caught between the impulse to adapt to it as it exists, or to lash out against it as an unfair, unsustainable, unhealthy artifact of modern culture.
The fact that he analyzed it with lefty-coded language is interesting but doesn't add much insight.
I find his ultimate methods abhorrent, unjustifiable and ineffectual.
But unfortunately I can't readily point towards a more effective strategy that he could implement on his lonesome. Solving the problems he identifies requires coordinated efforts.
So I'll keep my points brief:
I've pointed out how Male Grievances are almost never given any legitimate airing in mainstream publications. Indeed, it is exceedingly rare for a male writer to get to publish a piece on gender issues at all!
As you noted, Men are not allowed to organize around their own interests as a gender.
No politician ever voices male grievances as part of a policy platform.
So as this guy found, if you have not built up a large following a la Clavicular, your concerns will never get heard, your voice will never raise above the din of social media. You functionally do not exist.
And the one mainstream figure who was willing to voice these concerns was Charlie Kirk, and he got murdered by a lefty.
Oh, and add on that Lone wolf shooters like Luigi Mangione can garner significant female attention.
A lot of guys will connect the dots thusly:
"I have no real hope of getting a wife and happy family in my lifetime. I have no political representation. Nobody will listen to me if I speak out myself. No publications will ever stump for my concerns. I can't organize with other males to advocate for my interests, and if I DO become famous and popular whilst speaking out, I can just be killed in cold blood. However, if I do enough damage and spill enough blood, suddenly I have people paying attention to me... and if I survive I might see increased female attention to boot. Worth a shot."
Something something burning down village to feel warmth.
So my ongoing concern is that we're going to see a serious uptick in young male crashouts that involve (attempts at) mass killings or destruction, many of which won't be as thoughtfully targeted as this one.
Quoth me:
This guy was a 25. A Zoomer. The concerns he puts forth in that manifesto are WIDELY HELD amongst Zoomer males.
And these Zoomers are NOT BEING OFFERED A BETTER PATH FORWARD in the status quo.
Solve for Y chromosome.
You don't solve societal problems on your lonesome. You adapt to them. In the modern dating landscape, you either lean into the hypergamy and superficiality of it all, or you reach a mindset where you are okay with staying a virgin for a long time, potentially forever.
Neither is easy, obviously. If you are of a sufficiently analytical mind, you can't just turn that off on command and genuinely believe that everything is fine. But the other option is a degree of enlightenment that is likely only attainable by the few.
Much more likely then that you just kinda suffer from a lack of romance, sex, and community for the rest of your days.
That said, I think most of this pain will be directed inwards. It is very hard to do stuff in the real world when your need for community is unmet. You just don't have the energy. Much easier to rage on the internet. If anything this will probably just lead to more self harm amongst men, which I doubt society will care much about.
The third option is you lash out at the system itself. For a lone wolf this won't be particularly impactful.
I mean, Clavicular is maybe the ur-example of "lean into the hypergamy and superficiality of it all," he's only twenty years old and is clearly depressed at the life he's now 'stuck' in (by his own doing, naturally). This won't hold over the long term.
Where do we go from here?
MY personal belief is that once we start to lose the Boomers, the primary bulwark against political changes in this country, a LOT of political options that were previously stymied will come on the table.
We might be able to limit how extreme those options end up being.
I don't see why women would want the status quo to change though. They benefit in the short term, and the long term damage is hard to anticipate. Especially so when anyone trying to educate about the downsides is shouted down as "attempting to control women's bodies". In a democracy, we do need the consent of both genders for a norm change to work.
It is also not entirely clear to me that there is a better system to swap to. The old one led to what we have now after all, and it seems fairly undeniable that a lot of people used to end up in bad marriages with people who didn't care much about them regardless.
My ongoing modest proposal is RETVRNing to 1993.
Females attending college en masse seems like the nexus of many issues.
That's where they get turned into lefties.
That's where they incur significant amounts of debt.
That's where they rack up a body count.
That's where they acquire inflated standards in mate choice.
It burns 4+ years of fertility.
In short, they become far less appealing as partners in most cases, on the back end.
So it stands to reason that making it harder for women (and people in general) to secure student loans would reduce their attendance rates and would organically, downstream of that, lead to more relationships, marriage, and children.
I could write a manifesto on that topic, but I wouldn't want to shoot anybody to get it attention.
Probably not (see The Case Against Education). They were already lefties to begin with. Alexa, play the George Orwell quote.
My thesis is that they're just way more susceptible to virtually any ideological brainwashing, just as the Orwell quote implies.
And college is completely captured by lefties at every level, so, that's where the brainwashing pushes them.
College is in my view a large part of the problem. Social Media and Tiktok is another. Arguably that's the mechanism through which they police each others' behavior once they're out of college.
It's a nice thesis. It has the disadvantage of conflicting with empirical evidence, though.
Not the evidence I've seen.
Specifically, college educated womens' voting patterns (in the U.S.) vs. those of non-college educated women.
I would agree that their natural inclinations are towards the left, if anything.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link