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 -
While I mostly agree with the fact that there's a lot of transgender transformation media that manages to be sexual for a person with a particular kink or fetish without registering as sexual to most of the population, I also think there is a risk with this kind of speculation.
To use an ancient example by way of analogy, look at the animal transformations in Ovid's Metamorphoses. In particular I want to focus on the motif of voice throughout the poem (translation A. S. Kline):
Ovid focuses on the voice, and the lack of it in transformed people a lot throughout the poem. But why is he doing it?
I think there's a temptation for a modern person who is aware of the wide variety of kink content online, particularly transformation media, to speculate as to whether this isn't essentially ancient transformation porn. On this reading, Ovid keeps coming back to the lack of voice that results from a bestial transformation because this is the part that is hot to him, the part where a superior human being is made lesser, and thus, in a pattern that mirrors BDSM, hypnosis/mind control content, etc. the part where Ovid places himself in the mindset of a dom looking down on his literary subjects.
But there is obviously another explanation. That Ovid had a normal, non-kinky interest in transformation stories, and he chose to focus on the lack of voice in ex-human animals because that was one of the most salient differences between a human and an animal in his mind.
We will likely never know which of the two explanations is more directionally true.
But this kind of applies to all media that isn't obviously sexual, while appealing to a subset of the population due to their particular kinks. Plenty of mainstream stories feature body swaps (Freaky Friday being the most famous example), but body swaps are also a popular subject in kink. Short of an author or group of authors just coming out and saying, "This is a kink thing, we're writing kinky porn that only looks non-sexual because you're normal and this doesn't turn you on", there are going to be many examples where a cigar is just a cigar, and no intentional kinkiness was actually intended by the author.
It could go either way.
Transformation fetishes are probably more common in the general population than you would expect.
I thought R. L. Stine's Goosebumps books were fire when I was a little kid (like pre-pubescent). I didn't even know at the time that the animal and monster transformation scenes were giving me (proto-)sexual feelings. I just knew that I was very fascinated by them, for reasons I couldn't articulate.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link