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 not sure I’m understanding the mythology of the Gallup survey. It sounds like if you ID as some form of gay, you can choose multiple versions of gay, but if you’re heterosexual you can only choose heterosexual and nothing else. Depending on how they count the results, it seems like you could end up counting a person who IDs as a transsexual lesbian asexual three times (once as trans, once as lesbian, and once as asexual) which would obviously inflate the number of people IDing as some form of LGBT.
Sounds much more plausible to me that a purple teletubby wearing a handbag caused this.
Kidding aside I also think the Gallop survey is picking up a big uptick in women who don’t identity as “straight”, but have only dated men. For example girl makes out with another girl at a bar would previously be considered straight still but now she checks bi.
Skip that whole last sentence. The median woman we picture being bisexual is hot, practicing, able to get both men and women as she pleases and having done so regularly.
The modal woman who publicly flags as bisexual seems to be fat, an "unfuckable mess" (RIP Silvio) who isn't hooking up with anyone at all, and the median bisexual woman almost certainly hasn't had her tongue on a woman's mouth (let alone her clit) in the past year, and often never has and never will.
Bisexuality among women is the most faked identity, while also when genuine being one of the toughest to carry.
How many people here are "unfuckable messes" and would be comfortable being made a subject like this?
Well, if this is how Angela Merkel is spending her retirement I'd apologize to her because that seems a little personal and reminding her of what must have been a rough and frustrating moment.
Otherwise, it seems no more out of line or turning a person into a subject than referring to homosexuality as unhealthy, or to a religion as obviously false, or to various varieties of wokeness as, well, all the things that we refer to Wokeness as. And let's not even get started on HBD.
That said, if anyone actually approached me and said "I don't like you using terms like unfuckable because I'm unfuckable" I'd feel really bad for them. That's like saying "Don't use the term stupid, because I'm stupid." You have to be really down bad to instantly identify with generic negative comments that way. One should read that another person is ugly or stupid and think "yup, there are people like that, but I'm not one of them." That's a normal level of self esteem.
If one honestly feels that way about oneself, among my friends on the motte, I'd do whatever I could to help them see the most obvious methods of losing some weight and improving their body, their style and grooming. Being hot isn't in reach for everyone, but being an unfuckable mess is a lifestyle choice.
But then, I'm a romantic. I spent half a semester of undergrad trying to set up a female friend of mine with a smoking hot body but severe burn scars on her face, with a blind friend of mine. Match made in heaven.
mixing the personal and political
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