site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 20, 2023

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.

13
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's a meme for a reason: women are the gatekeepers of sex, men are the gatekeepers of commitment.

The idea that women can just set whatever price they want and not end up childless spinsters is delusional. In the end there are only so many possible mates. And society used to recognize this and warn them against this common failure mode.

Society no longer warns them because that's been deemed oppressive. Quousque tandem?

Society no longer warns them because that's been deemed oppressive.

I agree with society. I think that having less of the "delusional entitled woman" genes in society, by the request (implicit and explicit) of their mothers, is the correct move in the long run- yeah, it sucks for the entitled women of today, and it will be worse for the men of today because those women are nowhere near their peak lifetime political power, but in 100 years things will likely be saner than they would have been had they been "forced" to reproduce as their parents were.

I think the eugenic effects of a significant number of women failing to reproduce are under-studied; I am cautiously optimistic that our grandchildren will be better off as a result but things will get worse before they get better as these women will probably try (and have time and money) to take that frustration out on everyone else before they die off.

Have you considered that this would select for women who listen to their parents, rather than for women who have the independent thought to realize their standards are too high(these things are probably anti correlated because independent thought is independent thought).

Im quite interesed in how the modern dating/mating landscape would affect genetics. My priors are that these things take 10000s of years to change not a generation or two. Perhaps consider an effort post?

Not an effort post, but consider that much of the phenotypic diversity we see in dogs developed over the last couple centuries. Selection can be surprisingly rapid.