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 -
(I'm new, so I'm not sure if this is Culture War.)
Does anyone have any modern dating advice?
I'm interested in finding out what are the "real" rules that people operate under when it comes to dating, which might be different from the rules they ought to have or the rules they claim to have or the rules that they believe that they have (but subconsciously they use different rules). And of course the word "people" is very broad and presumably various subgroups operate in different ways, so I'd be happy for clarification on that point too. (And then of course individuals differ from the norms of the subgroups they belong to). Ideally I'd like to see some objective evidence, but personal experiences/impressions still count for something.
I identify with the difficulties in Scott's classic posts "Untitled" and "Radicalizing the Romanceless". Generally I'm paranoid about approaching women, because I feel like maybe they think I'm a creep and they're just too polite to say so. My biggest concern isn't that they dislike me per se; it's that maybe I've hurt the woman without realizing it. I'm very sensitive about that.
I've done dating sites and speed dating but I can't seem to find any connections. I should note that I have low self-esteem, so rejection is hard on me, which in turn makes it difficult to put myself out there. (Here's a question: How much time per week does the average single straight guy spend on dating sites etc., assuming he's actively looking for a date?)
I'm not a misogynistic incel, but whenever I talk about my dating woes a good portion of people feel the need to tell me "Don't be an incel!" when I haven't said or done anything remotely misogynistic. I figure the Motte is probably a good place to find people who understand my perspective.
I've been looking for dating advice recently, but everything seems contradictory. You're supposed to treat all people equally regardless of gender (which is great!), but at the same time you're supposed to conform to gender stereotypes and you should expect that most women will do the same. People tell me it sucks and it's not fair, but I'm the man and that means I have to initiate contact and get rejected a lot. They also tell me to be persistent but in the same breath they tell me not to be too persistent and it's not clear where to draw the line.
They tell me to be authentic but they also tell me to "fake it till you make it" and act like I'm a cool guy who dates people all the time. They tell me to express my feelings but they also tell me that "women can smell fear" so I should act confident even if I don't feel confident. They tell me to be honest but I've also had a (female) therapist suggest that I should tell some white lies to make myself more attractive. This woman gave a TED talk about her wonderful relationship with her husband (who sadly passed away) and she admits that the relationship began with lies: He falsely claimed to be a Fullbright Scholar to get her attention. Months later she found out the truth, but she was only angry for a short time. Ultimately, his lie made their whole relationship possible!
People tell me that women like it when you express interest in them, but also they think it's creepy. People tell me I must never express interest in a girl at her place of work, but the only relationship I had in the last 10 years began with that exact scenario, and the girl was flattered! (We eventually broke up, and since then I've also approached a few female coworkers at my own workplace, without success.) People tell me that if I show interest in a girl early on then I'm "too easy" and there's no "intrigue", so the appropriate thing is to give little hints about my feelings so she can pursue me. (In which case, apparently I'm taking the female role and she's taking the male role? I'm not offended by that; I'm just confused.)
People say that they met the love of their life on a dating app, but they also say that dating apps are trash and nobody likes them. (But even though everybody hates dating apps, apparently nobody can think of anything better to do.) People tell me it's ok to wear t-shits with the name of my favorite show or whatever (it displays my personality), but also I should never do that and the only way to be attractive is to wear solid colors with the occasional stripe.
One commenter on the Motte wrote "running a 'playing hard to get' game on a woman seems suboptimal. If you are looking for someone with whom you are authentically drawn to/compatible with, why set up these hoops or create a culture of deception within the relationship?", but in the next breath that same person wrote "it is also a risk to be overly eager. It's unattractive". But if I'm very attracted and I act like I'm only mildly attracted, doesn't that create a culture of deception within the relationship??
Long story short, I'm lost.
(And it surely doesn't help that I've got a long history of mental illness and isolation and thus I missed out on a lot of opportunities for social learning.)
I am actually bi, but in practice it's rare for a guy to get my attention, so I'm mostly concerned about how to approach women.
"Radicalizing" was written in 2014, and the advice at the bottom leads me to essays from 2001. It occurs to me that this might be woefully out of date.
Does anyone have any modern advice for me?
Reposting my original advicepost from the Motte —
Since dating came up in last week's Culture Wars thread and seemed to trigger a bit of brief discussion, I thought some people in this sub might be interested in hearing a bit of dating advice geared towards contrarians. Back in Radicalizing the Romanceless, Scott says -
Male attractiveness seems to depend on things like a kind of social skills which is not necessarily the same kind of social skills people who want to teach you social skills will teach
I think I can give some useful pointers in this regard. Note that as sex and dating are fundamentally gendered experiences, most of my advice is geared towards straight men, and won't be applicable to straight women (though some surely will). I'd be interested to hear female perspectives as a result. I also imagine that a lot of people won't be interested in hearing advice on this topic, or will find some of what follows obvious and patronising. This is probably unavoidable, but apologies in advance.
As to why I feel arrogant enough to give any advice: I've had a fairly long, rich, and interesting dating life, with quite a few painful lessons learned along the way. I discovered the existence of sex and romance relatively late by some measures - in my late teens - when I lost a lot of weight and suddenly found women responding to me differently, so I think I have a bit more insight than someone for whom this stuff came wholly naturally. Additionally, I'm fascinated by sex and dating norms, both on a philosophical and practical level (in fact, I've taught undergraduate classics on the applied ethics of sex and romance), and despite now being happily married I still read a lot of dating and love advice out of raw curiosity. Still, as always, YMMV, and I'm happy to debate any of the below points.
(1) Don't be unattractive. Sorry to start out with this one, but it can't be overstated. This particular bit of advice is usually placed second to "be attractive", but I think being attractive is a lot harder than not being unattractive, so I'd recommend focusing on the latter. Worse still, I think trying to be attractive can lead people to try to be extravagant or unconventional in their personal style or behaviour (see 'peacocking') and this can backfire horribly. Instead, focus on minimising unattractiveness. This means obvious stuff like good personal grooming - don't underestimate the difference wearing cologne, having good dental hygiene, having a good haircut, and trimming your beard regularly can make.
It also means having a good solid wardrobe and sense of style. I'd suggest that for most men conservatism is the right strategy, at least to begin with - stuff like OCBDs, slim or straight leg jeans, smart sneakers or brogues, and fairly slim fitting cashmere or merino wool sweaters. As a rule of thumb, if you're interested in looks, buy clothes that are slightly tighter than is optimal for comfort (surprisingly, this also applies if you're overweight). Malefashionadvice has some good tips, but bear in mind it's a bit of a circle jerk. One of the key purposes of all of these efforts (in addition to looking and smelling better) is to show that you are sensitive to and aware of presentation norms in your peer group.
Of course, it can also help a lot if you have chiseled abs and arms like Henry Cavill, and everyone should figure out a good diet and exercise routine for their long-term health and mental well-being. But that's a huge topic I won't address here. I'd also flag that I think being 'ripped' or 'shredded' or even just in good physical shape are factors that can be overstated in dating - there are plenty of stylish, well-dressed, funny, confident but slightly pudgy men who are also real casanovas, and plenty of desperate depressed singletons over at /fit/. Above all, don't put off dating until the day you have a body like a Greek god: it will probably never come.
(2) Don't assume dates will come to you. Most men can go years without ever once being approached by a woman with explicit romantic interest. You will need to be proactive to find a romantic partner. In the modern age, this sadly means getting on dating sites and apps. The upside to this is that the costs of failure are typically pretty small: the people you meet are people you will never see again, and with whom you probably have no friends in common, so even if it's all horribly awkward it will have few negative consequences downstream. While I've been out of the dating pool long enough that I can't recommend the best current apps, a good rule of thumb is to be proactive about setting up as many dates as possible and to triple your rate of failure (though always remember the human... and for god's sake never, ever send dick pics to anyone you've known for less than six months).
Most dates will inevitably be crash-and-burn ventures, but as long as you learn from the experience and gain confidence, you'll still be benefiting. I would strongly suggest that you don't pay for your date's food and drinks on the first few dates. It increases the costs of a bad date and can lead to bitterness and unreasonable expectations. Besides, it's current year, as the meme goes. Note that each dating site and app has its own norms and strategies. Each has its own target demographics, and while some will skew towards detailed profiles and lengthy intro messages, others will be more of a numbers game (though they all are to some extent). When you join a new dating site, try to learn 'the meta', whether from reading blogs or asking the advice of friends. One big point worth emphasising: the pictures you put up really matter. That may seem shallow, but it's just how it is. Get the advice of friends, and maybe even get a professional photoshoot done. The difference between a bad set of profile photos and good ones is colossal.
(3) Don't treat dating like a purely cooperative venture. While dating is ultimately a non-zero sum game that should lead to happy relationships, early on, there's a definite element to it that requires a more strategic mindset. This is a delicate point, and I certainly wouldn't recommend being adversarial about it, but you should certainly be trying to manage your date's first impressions of you (see point 4 below). While you shouldn't think of a date like a job interview, it's not totally crazy to think of it as resembling a pitch to an investor: you want to accentuate your positives and avoid dwelling on the negatives. You need to be confident and genuinely believe that you have something valuable to offer the other party. Hopefully most of you believe you do have value to offer, whether it's your intellect, your common sense, your good finances, or your in-depth knowledge of the Punic Wars. If you don't think you have anything to offer, you're not ready to date. See a therapist or work on yourself until you've nurtured a bit of confidence. But otherwise, you should really reflect on your best qualities and ground your behaviour in the date on a strong sense of your own value. "I have a lot to offer as a romantic partner, and any woman who chooses to date me will be making a great choice," is a useful mantra, even if sometimes it takes a bit of effort to internalise it.
(4) Don't just be yourself. A huge amount of what we look for in a partner is good judgment, especially in social matters. There are a lot of people out there who are weird, awkward, and generally indifferent to the social cues of others, and a lot of early dating is about weeding these people out. If you're too up front, you can easily come across as someone who simply doesn't get it. There's nothing wrong, for example, with having wargaming, Magic The Gathering, and videogames as your main hobbies, but these are not high status activities, and if you lead with these you look like someone who simply doesn't notice what's high status and what's not. If you want to talk about hobbies, try to cultivate some that are high status: physical activities like climbing, running, and team sports are good, as are outdoor activities like scuba, skiing and even hiking. Travel, languages, and literature are solid, and food and cooking are easy and safe, if a bit pedestrian. Being able to talk about what's trendy in culture and your city is also helpful, e.g., "have you been watching Tiger King?" and "have you seen the fancy new restaurant that opened on main street?".
You don't need to invest too much time and effort into these interests and hobbies - just enough that you have something to say about them and can honestly report that they're something you're interested in. I'd also flag that talking about sex, kinks, and exes on a first date is generally a bad idea (unless you're meeting someone from Fetlife, of course). Again, it's about displaying good judgment and showing that you're not one of the creepy weirdos with no filter. A good general rule for most straight men is to follow women's lead on these issues, and to reveal personal information carefully and gradually. I imagine some people think this all sounds dismal: "I want a partner who accepts me for who I am, warts and all!" I think that's absolutely a realistic thing to aim for, but the process of opening up should be done gradually and in a way that's responsive to the growing intimacy between you and your partner.
(continued below)
I think you have some valid points in this paragraph, but I think one thing you are overlooking here is that many (myself included, though I'm happily married at this point) explicitly do not want someone who cares about status in the first place. Someone who rejects someone because their hobbies are "low status" is someone I want out of my pool ASAP, because I consider chasing status to be a serious character flaw. So depending on what you are looking for, this item you have listed as a negative is actually a potential positive.
Also I personally subscribe to the theory that you should get the most contentious things out of the way pretty quickly (not on the first date, but within the first few months or so). If something about you is a dealbreaker for someone, no amount of time is going to undo that - so you may as well get it over with and not waste time on a doomed-to-fail relationship. So in that sense I also think "be yourself" is very good advice, because it ensures you aren't faffing about dating someone who is never going to like you anyways.
IME people who complain about their hobbies being "uncool" are actually just bad at talking about them and might just be bad conversationalists in general. I think there's a right way and a wrong way to introduce "low status" hobbies:
vs.
In the first example, the speaker gradually established that the other person was interested, while in the second example the speaker just sort of spaghetti'd all over the place with no concern for whether the other person was interested. Just this past week I got into a conversation with a normies female coworker about anime over drinks and I ended up talking about some really niche shows. The conversation was light-hearted and bidirectional, and she seemed to come away with an impression of me as "funny and quirky" rather than "creepy and nerdy."
It's all about how you steer the conversation and about whether you can laugh at yourself and handle little shit tests. For example if in the above MTG example, she were to say something like
you could respond with
instead of getting flustered or embarrassed.
This sounds like a bot which has been
beaten into submissionRLHF'd into becoming so anodyne it's frustrating.This sounds like an actual human being with a brain (yes, playing control decks specifically is a sign your brain works at a middling level at least).
As a fellow male, I agree. But most girls aren't interested in hearing your nerd flexes, they're trying to figure out whether you have basic social skills and whether or not you're a weirdo/loser.
Not that many males are either, if they don't share that specific interest. Or at least that's my experience, of being on both sides of conversations like that.
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