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 -
Are you sure about this?
You can observe this behavior by going into a normal office where women outnumber men; I'll caveat this with allowing that if you're looking at turbolib areas, like the Bay Area, this might not hold. But women chasing too few men definitely means they lower their standards of acceptable behavior. Steve Sailor had a good article pointing out observations among Black women, who famously are the least likely to date outside their race, but also hold to the normal trend of educated women not marrying "down"; Black women with a degree wildly outnumber Black men with a degree, and Black women are reduced to putting up with lack of committment, having to turn a blind eye to blatant cheating (or just outright acceptance of soft harems), physical abuse, mooching, etc.
For the sake of clarity I'll outline what I think are observable facts.
It's true that women greatly outnumber men on most college campuses but when looking at society as a whole we see that men are slightly outnumbering women which is a historically abnormal state of affairs as the death rate of young men is usually higher than that of their female peers. In such a situation women are increasingly prone to socially developing a sense of overall male sexual threat as the average level of male thirst keeps rising. I agree with the argument that this is a big driver of third-wave feminism. To the extent that your argument about college girls not actually engaging in debauchery and lowered standards is true, and I think there is truth to it, this seems to be one important cause of it.
I'd refer back to an observation that is supposedly backed up by evo psych research: 1. when (eligible) women start to outnumber men in their social circle for whatever reason, they start engaging in an escalating sexual competition for male attention and resources; this appears rather self-evident 2. however, such competition stops making sense when the sex ratio becomes too lopsided - I can't exactly tell where that point is but maybe a ratio of 130:100 or 140:100 is already there. It gets to a point where sexually unattractive men start propositioning women for casual or commitment-free sex which in turn induces nausea among women and compels them to end the sexual rivalry for male attention. I think it's entirely plausible that at least some college campuses have already entered this phase, which in turn does underpin your argument.
More options
Context Copy link
Common case of “in spite of” or “because of”? Soft harems and physical abuse are tingle inducing for many women.
Rihanna could have dated some other rich, famous guy. Yet, she chose to get beat by Brown. Meanwhile, Brown’s female fanbase only grew and splooshed harder.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link