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 -
The battle of the sexes is always more about the people having the conversation than it is about the subject matter. You can be glib and say this applies to literally everything, and it might, but it applies to few things more than this topic.
What I mean by this is something like ‘in almost every case, a given person’s sexual politics can be largely inferred from their sexual history’. This isn’t strictly true for actual politics (say the broader ‘culture war’), even if there are clear trends. But it is strictly true, in my experience without exception, for sexual politics. You can challenge me, and declare me wrong if I stumble, but I think that means my calibration isn’t perfect, not that the principle is flawed.
If you present a kind of person - say a woman who married her high school sweetheart who had two kids with him, found out he cheated and was having a kid with a mistress in her late twenties, and is now a single mom in her early thirties who got tattoos, has a dim view of men, and has a public instagram account, you can probably infer her sexual politics. If you present a man who didn’t get laid a lot in high school or early college, but found some men’s forum in his mid twenties, got more attractive, started lifting, and then had a ‘hoe phase’ in his early thirties before setting down with an Asian girlfriend and later wife, you can probably infer his sexual politics. If you present the second daughter of a conservative south asian family who divorced her arranged-marriage husband (they had no children) in her mid twenties and then married a wealthier white guy at 32, you can probably infer her sexual politics.
Another example: the sexual politics of a man who got laid a lot in high school are different - universally - to the sexual politics of a man who didn’t (the same is not true for women, where the exact timing of a hoe phase has a lesser impact). This is true even if ‘body count’, hotness, success etc are identical. This is far more granular than “promiscuity is good/bad”, it’s deeper than that, it’s about the worldview.
More options
Context Copy link