site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 27, 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.

11
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

[Reason without restraint] Rates of risky sexual behaviors by race and sex in the United States

Reason without restraint is perhaps my new favorite HBD blog. While the topics that he writes about are nothing new (race & IQ, race & crime, etc.), he does a valuable service of marshaling all of the evidence in one place in an easy-to-consume format.

Here, he tackles the topic of racial differences in sexual behavior. He uses survey data taken of high school students where they report on various aspects of their sexual activity. The data starts in the year 1990 and extends to the present day. There are five sections to the article:

(1) Lifetime sexual intercourse (2) Sexual intercourse before 13 years of age (3) Sexual intercourse with 4 or more partners (4) Use of condoms (5) Use of birth control pills

Of the five sections, the first three are the most interesting. Based on the survey data, a couple things stick out:

The young people aren't having sex.

I am a bit, um, obsessed with the "sex recession": the dramatic decline in sexual activity in high school and college-aged people. Sex is perhaps the most human activity there is--the physical enactment of our Darwinian imperative, the raison d'etre of so many hormone-drenched adolescents. And yet: young people aren't having sex. Why?

Based on one of the graphs: in 1990, 65% of white 12th graders report having had sex. While in 2021 only 50% of white 12th graders report having had sex. This drop in sexual activity is not limited to white students, of course. It's a large drop across the board. Why?

Black people used to have a lot of sex but not anymore?

Look, I'm not stupid. At this point, I've had enough experience with the "stereotype literature" to know that, overwhelmingly, stereotypes tend to be true. But even I wasn't prepared for how much sex black teens were having in the 90s. I could cite a lot of different numbers, but just to choose one example: apparently, in 1990, more than 80% of black male 9th graders reported being non-virgins. Over 80%! And even if you rightfully suspect some exaggeration due to male ego, more than 65% of black female 9th graders report being non-virgins.

This is just incomprehensible to me. I'll admit that I grew up sheltered and nerdy, but still: none of my friends were having sex or really even close to having sex in middle school. Maybe the 90s were better after all?

What's interesting though is that there has been a rather dramatic decrease in black sexual activity. By 2021, only 30% of black male 9th graders report having ever had sex. And it's the same story for the other statistics as well: in 1990, black people were way more sexual active than Hispanics and Whites while by 2021, they have mostly converged, especially in the case of black females.

Asians don't have sex.

Not too much to say about this one. Pretty self-explanatory.

Condom usage seems... kinda low?

The survey reports that 60% of teenagers report using a condom during their last sexual encounter. Is that not kinda low given teenage pregnancy rates? I am a prude in real life who dislikes salacious talk, so I haven't talked about condom usage with my friends. So I don't really have a strong intuition here.

Overall, a fun article with lots of great graphs. What do I personally think explains the decline in sexual activity? I basically favor the consensus view as espoused by Jonathan Haidt and others: it's the phones (and social media). I think a lot of sex used to happen because people had nothing to do except each other.

This is just incomprehensible to me. I'll admit that I grew up sheltered and nerdy, but still: none of my friends were having sex or really even close to having sex in middle school. Maybe the 90s were better after all?

Maybe this is difference between Sweden and the US but when I grew up in the 90s in a completely white, affluent suburb my estimation was that some 20-25% had sex before the end of middle school, with women having slightly more sex (due to being able to find marginally older partners). Another 30-40% had sex some time during high school (weighted towards the end) and the remaining 40-50% during university.

The survey reports that 60% of teenagers report using a condom during their last sexual encounter. Is that not kinda low given teenage pregnancy rates? I am a prude in real life who dislikes salacious talk, so I haven't talked about condom usage with my friends. So I don't really have a strong intuition here.

Who the hell uses condoms for anything but one night stands? You might as well not have sex at that point.

one-night stands

I guess I was a high-risk sex haver but I had probably ~25 one-night stands with no condom and no adverse consequences and my only criteria “does she give off ho vibes,” which seemed to work pretty well. I mean I’ll definitely tell my son not to follow that strategy but I think ho-dar is pretty accurate.

My brother, having one-night stands with no condom is the ho vibe.

Who the hell uses condoms for anything but one night stands? You might as well not have sex at that point.

I will begrudgingly accept it as the cost of having sex if the woman is intractable on the matter. I wouldn't say it's quite as bad as getting back with Rosie Palm and her five sisters, but it certainly ruins much of the charm, as well as my hard-on.

As I've said down-thread, I'm circumcised, late enough in my childhood that I can remember my glans becoming de-sensitized after the procedure.

Who the hell uses condoms for anything but one night stands? You might as well not have sex at that point.

So when you're in a monogamous relationship, your assumption is that your partner will be on the pill? (I'm assuming you're a straight man.)

Or you just pull out on days where she’s fertile? My wife got pregnant exactly when we wanted her to and not a moment too soon following this time tested method.

I'm not sure if I have enough confidence in my pull-out game or my ability to track my missus's menstrual cycle.

Yes, or some other contraceptive or planning.

Wait, you guys are using condoms with one night stands? were_the_millers.jpg

I’m definitely team rawdog and second @Ioper’s remark on condomed sex as eating candy with the wrapper on, a saying of which I hadn’t heard before now.

If I feel like I need a condom with a chick, her slutiness to hotness ratio is too high and I shouldn’t be banging her in the first place.

You might as well not have sex at that point.

I would like to suggest that perhaps you are not quite doing it correctly.

Fucking with condoms is like eating candy with the wrapper on, only worth it if you're starving.

Perhaps it's different if you're circumcised and have somewhat limited sensitivity in the first place.

I honestly don't understand this perspective. What about the rest of the meal?

If I were a woman and a guy told me that, I would be insulted.

Edit: And some of the best sex I had did not end in an orgasm, at least not for me.

Good foreplay only makes it worse.

Also, regardless of whether the sex ends in orgasm or not, the sex is so much better without a condom. The goal is as intimate and pleasurable sex as possible, condoms are a major impediment to both, with or without orgasm.

But your initial claim was not merely that sex without a condom is better; rather it was that it was pointless: You said, "You might as well not have sex at that point." That was the claim that I was skeptical of.

That's not what I said and I don't see a contradiction.

I don't understand. I literally quoted you.

More comments

It's high-variance, but there are a subset of men (both straight and gay) who can't get very far with a condom on during penetration, sometimes up to the point of losing the ability to maintain a decent (or rarely, any) erection entirely. The exact causes cover wide ground, such as low-level skin sensitivity, mental overhead, performance anxiety, mumblemumbles-it's-not-just-soccons-afraid-of-jerking-it, or for... not entirely understood reasons (one fun hypothesis: American condom sizes are moronic).

This class of problem is less 'well, I guess I just have slightly reduced sensation and might just be edging with my partner today', 'it's time for a long oral session!' or even 'I'd rather bottom', and more 'this is going to be actively frustrating for everyone involved, and not even in a fun chastity cage sorta way'.

Contra some of the other posters, I don't think this is universal, or even disliking condoms is universal -- there are a surprisingly large number of people with condom-related kinks, for entirely unsurprising reasons. Some of these frustrations might even be solvable with practice and familiarity. But a lot of the mainstream model of the complaints is dismissive in unhealthy ways.

(one fun hypothesis: American condom sizes are moronic).

Please elaborate on this if you've a theory.

More comments

As a victim of MGM I have always found complaints about condoms to be wild, I can hardly tell the difference, so maybe you are onto something.

The sensitivity thing is also interesting as, to my mind, increased sensitivity would be strictly a bad thing as a man. If I could magically wish for more of it, I wouldn't. The physical pleasure from sex is pretty far from the top of the list of things I enjoy about sex. It seems to me that sensitivity would trade off directly with endurance. I really viscerally enjoy the sense of masculine prowess I get from absolutely destroying a woman for a prolonged session, but I am only really able to achieve that with mental and physical tricks to actively reduce my sensitivity.

As a victim of MGM I have always found complaints about condoms to be wild, I can hardly tell the difference, so maybe you are onto something.

I had the procedure done for (in hindsight, unnecessary) medical reasons, in early childhood but not so early I can't remember it, and I know for a fact that my glans became less sensitive, since for the first few weeks post-op the mere sensation of it rubbing against fabric was unbearable. I still can feel the superiority of not using a condom, even using the thinnest latex you can get here.

Oh well, at least it gets me more head, I've had a number of women tell me that it was a relief compared to the finely marinated stench of smegma.

Oh well, at least it gets me more head, I've had a number of women tell me that it was a relief compared to the finely marinated stench of smegma.

Whenever stuff like this comes up I'm left wondering, who the fuck doesn't wash his dick?

Quite a few men, sadly.

He lives in India, hygiene norms might be different there and a significant portion of the population doesn't have running water.

Datapoint of one, but I live in the US where my parents were of the "buy the kid books in lieu of having a puberty discussion", and the books definitely talked about needing to wash under your foreskin, so I'm assuming it's the default here for uncircumcised English-speakers.

I've heard similar complaints made by Western women about their men, not that I'm in a position to compare base-rates.

I don't recall ever being explicitly instructed to do that myself, though it would be a bit moot.

At any rate, these guys were certainly capable of accessing running water, I wasn't dating women from the ghetto. Men can be slobs, and unlike a stinky armpit, they can get away with it until..

He lives in India

I'm not sure about that.

More comments

I despise condoms and avoid them where I can, and I'm circumcised myself.

The only people I've heard offer apolagia for them (from a non-std prevention pov) are circumcised men, which leads me to believe that there is a connection.

I would think the "fuck condoms" attitude is only possible in places where most of the women are on birth control.

Am circumcised, condoms suck -- I think you need to do some more field research man.

I think you misunderstood me, perhaps I was unclear.

I'm not saying that everyone who's circumcised defend condoms, I'm saying that the ones that I've heard defend condoms are cricumcised.

Anyone who's saying condoms aren't that bad is an extreme outlier in some way -- to the point where I'd question their honesty.

More comments

I have yet to hear a man tell me, in person, that sex with a condom on is just as satisfying as going bareback. It's usually women insisting on it, and me protesting, but it might still be a necessary evil for the usual reasons.