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 -
Geeeezus.
But gets to my point. If Ukraine wins, they've got a decades-long rebuilding project ahead of them, and their standards of living will be comparatively horrendous in the meantime. How do you convince people (esp. females) to return, stick around, and have babies when they could just retreat to a wealthier country and shack up with a local there?
And if you CAN'T convince them to return and have kids, then the country dies out in a couple generations anyway, despite rebuilding efforts.
That said, the thought has crossed my mind that if my dating life doesn't improve over the next few years, the idea of finding a displaced Ukrainian woman who would presumably be quite grateful to not be in an active warzone vs. the current elevated standards of American women has a certain appeal.
Honestly, if you’re a conservative American man like most motteizeans, finding a middle of the roader to moderate liberal by Ukrainian standards woman from a country poorer than Mexico(or for that matter some of the even worse shitholes south of it) is probably a lot easier than finding a local who shares your values.
I've noticed an appreciable number of my old acquaintances who have gotten married to and had kids with women who are first generation immigrants, including from Latin-American or Eastern Asian countries. And by all accounts they appear happy and stable.
Compare that to friends who married a woman they met in college, most have kids now, some don't, and a handful are divorced already.
But the real eye-opener is the female friends who didn't lock down a guy in college or shortly thereafter, a few of whom do have kids now, and they seemingly spend most of their time angry at the world/males for letting them down, and 90% of them are clearly letting their personal health slip, too. I'd be hard pressed to think of any who seem happily single AND seem appealing as a potential partner. Thems just the breaks.
To make my point explicit: It seems like near 100% of friends who married immigrants are still married and currently happy, 75-90% of those who married American women are still married and currently happy, and MAYBE 10% of the women who are still unmarried are currently happy.
The almost inescapable conclusion is that if you're an American guy who is entering his thirties and is single, if you limit your dating options to women who are in your peer group in terms of age, nationality, and education you'll find exceedingly slim pickings. The best partners will have been snagged early and those that remain will have high standards and shitty attitudes to go with it. So finding a woman who isn't a ticking divorce bomb almost certainly does require broadening the search.
Well said. This was the conclusion that I came to. You should re-post this next time we have a thread on relationships.
I think I've made similar statements before, but I certainly will add that thought next time I see a thread on it.
The dating market in the U.S. is far worse than it was even 15 years ago, and if you've been out of said market for a while you probably don't realize how the combination of women raising their standards to absurd levels while simultaneously having less to offer in a relationship... SIMULTANEOUS with (and related to) millennial white women becoming far more politically liberal than average has made it absolute hell for your average guy to navigate, and has likely killed many mens' hope of ever finding a suitable long-term partner. Not just creating incels, mind, but creating the type of guy who ends up in Andrew Tate et al.'s orbit because at least they offer a positive view of masculinity and some hope of getting laid.
And literally nobody seems to have any plans on how to improve the situation. Indeed, the not-so-subtle cultural zeitgeist instead tells women that they're doing everything perfectly and don't need to settle... ever, and telling men to suck it up and stop whining.
So my TOTALLY HYPOTHETICAL thought experiment: how might this dynamic shift a bit if we intentionally imported, say, a few hundred thousand attractive and eligible female Ukrainian 'refugees?'
Very slim personal anecdote but I recently got pulled into a major event for a Young Conservative group over here in Australia. Black tie affair, lots of young people etc.
I found it pretty shocking to notice that of say 50ish young (Under 25) male attendees they only had about 2 female partners between them, and it's not like this was a Breitbart gathering. Reasonably attractive, suit-wearing, university & private school-educated young men of decent breeding and yet being a conservative makes you so staggeringly unable to compete in domestic dating circles these days. The very tiny smattering of girls who were there as members seemed to be dating 10+ years older and for either career progression or tapping developed finances.
I've seen the impact myself of having a Hinge profile set Conservative v Liberal (legitimately 99% decline in matches by indicating rightward leanings), though I've been off the market for a few months now due to finding a foreign-born girl who's a sane, reasonably-conservative slender woman.
That's the other "fun" aspect of modern dating. Males are competing not just amongst direct peers, but with older males for the same pool of eligible women.
I won't go so far as to say that older men are actively trying to hamper younger men's dating lives, but imagine being a 25-30 year old of modest means and uncertain future and trying to find a partner, and noticing that many women your age are being taken by 35-50 year olds with more resources and 'experience', and are happy to occupy these women's romantic lives during their 'prime' years, even if there's no intention of a real long-term relationship. When I first started dating in earnest this factor was significant enough it was impossible to really ignore. Losing out on dates to an established guy who had 'more to offer' due to being wealthier is a blow to the ego.
For a younger guy, unless you won the genetic lottery you literally cannot compete with that on equal terms, since wealth and status usually take time to accrue.
Some serious demoralization given the already harsh environment. Older guys have no reason to stop doing this, either, since younger women will keep expressing interest and the plight of younger males doesn't really factor into their decision.
Another little bit of datum to add to the pile. Serious relationships seem to be a commodity Americans have to import, these days.
You need to be an extremely conscientious, hardworking, determined guy and have been busting your ass since at the latest your early teens. If you've been working very hard AND are fairly smart and charismatic AND were born into a middle-class household, you might be able to make $250k/year by the time you're 27.
In all honesty, this does not seem like a bad ideal to set for young men: you need to be exceptional in order to find a partner. Even those who fail will have worked hard and reaped the reward.
It think the issue is that this will be subject to a power law distribution, not a normal distribution.
It won't be the case where if a guy is at least moderately attractive/charismatic, puts in constant efforts and is reasonably intelligent he will on average land a six figure job by 27. It's going to be more like a 20% chance he lands a massively high paying job, another 20% he lands something paying high-five to low-six figs, and like a 60% chance he ends up in a standard job paying 'enough' but not extravagantly. (Figures are blatantly asspulled at this point, can look for actual figures later)
There's just so many pitfalls that can prevent a guy from breaking through to true wealth early on.
And of course consider that a guy who busts his ass to this extent in his early life might actually hamper his dating chances during that time because he won't be nearly as fun for women since he works all the time.
So what you're proposing sounds like it could be a recipe for creating the older, established guy who leverages his wealth in his late 30's to play around with the younger women he couldn't get when he was younger.
Now, I agree it's a good ideal to strive for, but I'm pretty sure that the only way there's actual change in norms is to reign in female behavior somehow.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link