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 are asserting that there exists an injective function from the set of heterosexual monogamous men to the set of heterosexual monogamous women such that every woman prefers being paired to her corresponding man over remaining single or holding out (there are additional conditions, but this seems like the easiest one to break).
People underestimate how difficult the gender wars/dating problem is because they don’t think about it in the proper mathematical terms. The thing that we are looking for is a binary relation between two distinct sets that satisfies certain properties. It’s easy to make a bunch of observations such as, “men are like this, but women are like that.” Okay, what does this tell us about the function space?
It's called Gale–Shapley algorithm. Oh, wait, I see what you mean: at some iteration women will start valuing staying single over the next batch of men asking them out.
This won't behave how we'd naively expect.
Let's take two hypothetical countres:
Country A : 1.5 men per woman
Country B : 0.75 men per woman
Mathematically, we'd expect the women in country A to want to pair since they will have higher quality matches available.
In country B, we'd expect women to resist pairing since high-quality men are scarcer.
Yet, the opposite behavior appears to be true. Given an abundance of thirsty dudes, women will often reject even high quality mates. See: San Francisco.
Uh, in San Francisco, many dudes are thirsty for each other.
True. And it still remains the worst urban dating market for heterosexual men.
Pour one out for all the Chinese families whose lines are being ended because their one son ended up in Silicon Valley.
Honestly I've always been vaguely jealous of the Indian arranged marriage setup since it makes a lot of sense for socially awkward good provider guys. I'm sure there's horror stories, but the Upper class variety I've seen friends of both genders engage with just seems like a super useful social technology that'd broadly benefit the average Mottizen.
The jews have it to, apparently. I've been told that the mormons have an informal one.
AFAIK the Jews aren't quite as strong with it, though I think it depends on which particular geographic region you're in. I've got a Jewish friend who seemed to get kinda-setup with his now-girlfriend who's smart and I think considerably better than he'd achieve on the open dating app market, but I don't think it's as frank and mercantile as the Indian system.
I mean, that could just be because the Jews are more civilized and sophisticated than Indians.
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