site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 11, 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.

6
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Instead I think there's an experiential gap. Gay male culture is simply accepting of things within itself(very public displays of sexuality, harassment-ish behavior, teen sex, extreme promiscuity, etc) which are controversial to verboten among straight people.

I think that's part of the story -- there are very few equivalents as extreme as the Folsom Street Fair in het worlds, and those that exist aren't as well-known.

On top of that there's further complications because a lot of gay-specific interests are different than het-specific ones. I'm hoping the gay male interest in exhibitionism is at least partly an artifact of having to hide more modest and SFW sexuality, but it's absolutely more common as a gay male interest. While exhibitionism might be unusually vulnerable to causing undesirable results for passerbies due to its own nature, a good number of others are just weird. Pup play ends up in a similar boat. They're weirder because they're things that are less common (or nearly unheard of, for pup play) in het circles. But there are kinks that go the other direction.

On the gripping hand, I'm not convinced that in a world where camera phones were invented a decade earlier, we would have avoided sex tapes of Bill Clinton ruining a cigar. A lot of the late-80s early-90s Civil Rights Act feminism, for all I complain about its more recent excesses, was in response to employers forcing employees into (het) sex and other sexual behaviors in public. For a less disquieting example, simulated sex in public actually does show up in a lot of adjacent straight contexts -- Mardi Gras may have less literal fucking in the streets than the Folsom Street Fair, but it still has a lot of public grinding, as do certain dance clubs. That exhibitionism is a more common kink among gay men doesn't make it nearly-unheard of among straights or women.

A lot of the late-80s early-90s Civil Rights Act feminism, for all I complain about its more recent excesses, was in response to employers forcing employees into (het) sex and other sexual behaviors in public.


Additionally, she testified that Taylor had touched her in public, exposed himself to her, and forcibly raped her multiple times. She argued such harassment created a '"hostile working environment'" and a form of unlawful discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

That’s like saying a demented walmart manager chopping my arms off with a chainsaw constitutes discrimination and a hostile shopping environment. The intention behind this bizarre categorization is to paint the benign and mundane with the same brush as the criminal and abhorrent, requiring ever increasing state monitoring and control.

Additionally, this case ruled that the sexual conduct between Taylor and Vinson could not be deemed voluntary due to the hierarchical relationship between supervisor and subordinates in the workplace.

They should never have accepted that argument from a sex-neg rad-fem who refuses to distinguish between rape and intercourse.

Catharine A. MacKinnon, author of Towards a Feminist Theory of the State, was co-counsel for the respondent and wrote the respondent's brief.

”Perhaps the wrong of rape has proven so difficult to articulate because the unquestionable starting point has been that rape is definable as distinct from intercourse, when for women it is difficult to distinguish them under conditions of male dominance.” in Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: An Agenda for Theory (1982)

This is the real ‘cultural marxism’ conspiracy to destroy normal human interaction. A "feminist theory of the state"? They should be more subtle next time.