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 -
Women have spent decades not caring one bit about what men want or what hurts them (which is why so many men are so eager for synths). Turnabout is fair play. (And, as you said, if there's artificial wombs, women are redundant anyway so unlike the modern misfortune of men in regards to collapsing birth rates, etc., their misfortune will only be bad for them, not for society.) I also don't see why having a harem would automatically corrupt a man.
Why do you think women won't just be satisfied with synth man harems or just dating one synth man (if they prefer monogamy)? I actually agree they won't, but I'm curious about your take first.
I'm not sure this is so true. But the power dynamics will be vastly different. In comparison to the current age of so many men simping for a crumb of female attention, you will instead have women simping for a crumb of male attention away from their digital waifu harems. Whether you call that a "real" relationship or not depends, but men may still choose to designate a biological woman as their girlfriend for novelty's sake, though she'll have to work much harder than ever before to earn the continued privilege.
This is needlessly oversimplifying.
More options
Context Copy link
Why would they date one synth man instead of one real man? If the bottom X% of men drop out to their synth harems, with a negligible % of women doing similar, I'd imagine some sort of official harem system for the remaining women and high status men to follow.
But if women were to take on synth harems like the bottom X% of men, I'd imagine they wouldn't be considered low status like the men, for similar reasons as female sex toys aren't considered low status like now. I think it wouldn't be a satisfying situation for most women compared to being a couple with a high status man or in the harem of a top status man, but it'd be satisfying compared to being a couple with a mid/low-status man. Based on the revealed preferences of women navigating the dating climate now, that'd be my guess.
I imagine what might happen is women taking on mixed harems of both synths and mid-status men, since the synths wouldn't lower the women's status like men's, and the mid-status men would be now low-status in the dating market due to the truly low ones dropping out to synths. This might lead to more of these newly low-status men dropping out to synths. Which would push down the next tier of men to low status, until some equilibrium is reached as to meet the demand for women who would prefer coupling with a flesh and blood man, even if low status, over being in a harem or getting a synth.
There might be some sociopolitical movement for enforced monogamy that could stop such a feedback loop from starting and sustaining, but I'm not sure such a one would be able to gain power outside of small subcultures like the Amish now.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not interested in the collective punishment of women for the current decline in gender relations. Even those who do contribute most to that decline today are just falling into socially encouraged patterns, and men would be every bit as short-sighted given the opportunity. I mostly want everyone to be happy, even given all our shared and individual foibles.
By and large, the people I meet that I like the most are the type predisposed to monogamous relationships or already in one. So call it a selfish, aesthetic desire for more people I like.
Probably for reasons similar to yours: status tends to play a somewhat bigger role in women's mate choices than in men's, and synths will always be very low status.
Do you think the current structure of the dating market has been positive for women's well-being?
Hmm. What if there are designer models of synth that you have to know the right people to get? Would a women conceptualize such a synth as high status in its own right, or merely as a reflection of her own status? Maybe if the designer is a high status man and hand-picks which women can have the synths he designs, some of his status transfers to those synths?
There are some weird, unexplored corners to this issue.
Interesting. Reminds me a bit of the market for prestige brand knockoffs and how people still seek out the original. Except instead of pointing to the high quality stitching/craftsmanship or whatever, you'd have people bragging about how their synth is powered by a proprietary real time spiking network running on Nvidia's new limited-edition neuromorphic NM100 chip instead of the peasants' ones running on Azure. I could even see myself falling into that.
So build a status ladder, and the people will come. I can see it happening.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I am.
Nah. Blood for the blood God. Do not think you can cut my flesh and leave yours intact.
Contemporary San Franciscan polycules based in left-wing egalitarian ideologies are/will be nothing like men taking masculine inherently right-wing control (no matter how artificial) of harems. Unlike polycules, (polygynist) harems are, in a word, based (as they are inherently patriarchal).
Yep, basically my reasoning too.
Short-term? Yes. Long-term? No. But the vast majority contributed to it as best they could by pushing it and defending it anyway. (No I don't believe women have the same agency as men, but whatever part they could play they did, like naughty children, though far more malevolent and with far less of an excuse. Punishment is thus warranted.)
Everything you say here is true, but you must realise that it all equally applies to the whole modern Western way of life compared to a traditional one. And yes, I absolutely agree punishment is warranted.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link