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 -
Have you ever dated, seriously, a woman who you felt was objectively smarter than you were? Like, one who would have scored a noticeable margin better than you on the SATs/IQ test or who had an objectively more cognitively demanding and higher prestige job?
This is normally cope, most of the women who say that are 100iq types working no-skill service industry jobs not HYS trained lawyers or C suite executives.
But to pretend the whole idea doesn't have a basis in real relationship dynamics is coming in a little hot.
I once dated a woman meeting that description. I thought she was smarter than me even in spite of the fact that she was into astrology. Like really into it.
Now that I think of it, I also went on two dates with a doctor who I thought was more intelligent than me.
More options
Context Copy link
I dated my linear algebra tutor in college. She was a Czech math major who very clearly thought my courses were cute play-acting from sociologists pretending to do math.
Didn't cause any problems, maybe because I didn't take my major very seriously either. And unlike a lot of women she had the breadth of interests for us to find things we had in common at the same level (cello and violin, swimming)
I never learned much linear algebra though.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, my first girlfriend, who I met in my final year of highschool, was a lawyer who scored in the 99.75th percentile on standardised testing. I wasn't bothered by her being smarter than me at all. The main problem was her addiction to having arguments and IRL trolling more than anything else.
Wait, am I reading this wrong or were you a senior in high school while she was a fully barred lawyer implying that she was at least 23 or 24?
My fuckin' man out here.
She became fully barred when we were dating, but she had already graduated with her degree and was working in the field when we met (on 4chan).
You met a woman on 4chan? I’m curious as to how y’all navigated the tits or gtfo phase of the relationship.
More options
Context Copy link
On the one hand, to paraphrase Larry David talking about Asia Argento, they should name the high school after you.
On the other, this is so profoundly unusual that it didn't tell us much about much.
This place should be renamed to The FirmWeird.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
interestingly, there appears to be no age limit for the bar exam. So there could be a doogie howser situation where a teenager becomes a lawyer.
...but I assume he just meant that she became a lawyer later.
More options
Context Copy link
I assume the meeting happened first and the lawyering happened later?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I scored in the top fraction of 1% on the SATs, so I don't think I've ever met a woman who "scored a noticeable margin better" than me, but I have dated several women I consider my intellectual equals, and I am currently married to one of them (a successful lawyer who went to one of the best law schools in the US). I have broken up with women who I felt weren't able to keep up with me intellectually because I found them boring.
But you raise an interesting alternative hypothesis, which is that maybe women are the ones selecting "intellectually superior" men to date, and that's why they perceive all the men they date as "needing to feel intellectually superior," because they actually are.
@ArjinFerman
What I was getting at is more this, that for the average Mottizen there barely exists a dating pool of women smarter than him. Seriously, I feel like I'm about average in horsepower around here, and I've only met maybe a dozen women who obviously verbally intellectually outclassed me. So we're not ever likely to experience that kind of dynamic.
But there exist plenty of women who are substantially smarter than most men, and I've rarely seen that kind of relationship work well. My law school was located very close to another, less prestigious school. The boys who dated "down the hill" were mostly pretty happy with the results. The girls who dated townie guys mostly had these awful dysfunctions around it, where he didn't like to be made to feel inferior, and so would make fun of her for being an egghead and belittle her, and it would go downhill from there. The standard heterosexual dynamic is for the man to be in charge, that falls apart immediately if she is obviously much smarter. Women rarely find being smarter than their man sexy, men perceive this and lash out belittling her achievements, so on and so forth.
That said, I'll repeat that for the people saying this, it is generally cope. I'd expect the average woman to claim to be on the shelf because of her intelligence to lack above average intelligence, in the same way that I expect the average teenager who whines that his classmates don't understand him because he's smarter than they are to actually not be all that extraordinary. Non-measurable things used as self-justification are generally cope. I'm not that interested unless you have receipts for it.
More options
Context Copy link
This seems to be another version of a fairly common trope about the dating market, which is that most women tend to date men that most other women tend to date, and those men tend to have qualities that most women find attractive, which are qualities that also either tend to be or correlate with qualities that they say out loud that men shouldn't take on. The "men don't want to get married" cliche largely seems to stem from this, from my view; where I look, there's no shortage of single men who are eager to settle down and get married, but there's a dearth of women who would even give them a chance on a date. On the other hand, the men that are getting dates from women tend to be men who, whether intrinsically or due to the female attention they've gotten, are pushed towards deciding that playing the field would be more beneficial to their lives than settling down.
It's even simpler than that (and applies to both men and women). Dating preferences are heavily correlated. If you find a single person who matches all the desirable dating preferences, they likely have other factors that make them unsuitable for a long-term relationship; otherwise, they'd have landed and stayed in one. The old saw "all the good ones are taken" is true.
This is why widows/widowers tend to be really good potential partners, despite the baggage of their partner's death. They became single through no choice of their own, but still have all the traits that make them a good partner.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, it takes two to tango. I'm guilty of never dating one, but the few I met gave off the impression they'd call in an airstrike if I even thought of approaching them this way. Maybe it's just me though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link