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 glad you helped straighten that out for me.
She could choose not to have sex. That people believe a lack of sex is impossible to live with shows how obsessed with sex society has become. I'd also argue that if a woman does not have the emotional maturity to be firmly committed to accepting the consequences of her actions - whatever their probability - she shouldn't be engaged in whatever those actions are.
While I, of course, support adoption infinitely over abortion, we have to face facts and realize that foster systems and adoption have statistically significant higher rates of abuse etc. It takes a lot of love and effort to raise a child, it takes even more to raise someone else's child.
Just to be clear, "penalty" here is the life of a human infant, correct?
That's exactly what's been happening: the trend among young people is to have sex less. It's even possible that the political divergence between young men and women will contribute to this trend.
I agree that the ideal is for both parents to raise a wanted child. In case of an unwanted pregnancy, the best outcome is for it to somehow become wanted.
Healthy babies are in high demand for adoption, and don't last in the foster system. Normalizing the option of carrying the pregnancy to term and then giving the baby up for adoption not only would reduce numbers of abortion but would help satisfy this demand. I doubt that adopted healthy babies are more at risk of mistreatment than babies who stay with their mother, and a quick online check bears that out.
The other advantage of normalizing giving-baby-up-for-adoption option is that a woman goes through massive biological changes during pregnancy which increase the likelihood of her wanting to keep the baby after all. That's the unwanted-pregnancy-becomes-wanted-baby scenario.
More options
Context Copy link
The objective sex fulfills is emotional self actualisation. The biochemical serotonin and dopamine hit of an orgasm is the same whether it is organically or externally derived, and oxytocin release can be achieved by simply being a fucking human being and having close connections. The narcotic hit of the chemical rush obtained during a tinder hookup is fun, but the consequences are so manifestly bad that it can only be peer pressure (including social media) continually reinforcing toxic positivity about the joys of a hoe phase and situationships.
Re adoption, these remain incredibly popular but specifically for babies. Babies are awesome, and raising a baby is infinitely easier than undoing toddler behaviors that have not been managed, much less children or adolescents with deficient emotional regulatory abilities.
Having said that, despite my pro-infant rhetoric, I find abortion to be a hugely necessary component of modern failed society. Without communities and with perverse incentives, restricting abortion results in more children horn to unfit mothers and absent fathers. With social welfare systems present in multiple facets ,(calorie provision, shelter provision, even automatic school grade promotion in particularly crunchy lefty societies) the cost of bearing a child is borne not by the woman but by society. Forcing these women to carry a child to term will be more taxing on contributers, and so abortion is a necessary release valve.
There are preferred optimalities, such as better deployment of aid resources and education, but direct social shaping tends to fail in heterogenous societies with competing value systems/resource payouts.
By right the optimal solution should be a homogenous overculture with universally accepted standards for compliance and sanction, so a neighbour can castigate a deviant as freely as a mother, or total removal of the social ill. Sex is the most human of desires, so that is never going away. Instead I forcefully propose self terminating 12 year lifespan virtual companions for q3 year olds and state provided sex toys to let them bitch at and get off with, and they are only allowed to have IRL experiences before 25 if both virtual companions sign off on compatibility.
No one said my state provided waifu had to be a real woman.
I like it.
I assume this is supposed to be "13"
It brings up an interesting consideration. Would the ever increasing availability of porn, weed, online gambling, and now AI-waifu girlfriends be the minimal "cost" that hard pro-lifers must be willing to pay to reduce abortion? Hmm.
JD Vance wants to ban porn, so unfortunately he may be an enemy. Given his SV adjacency he may be open to customizable fuckbots, so lets see what Altman et al posit regarding future human relationships. We may all end up dating ScarJoAtHome. Not the worst option but this may be what finally breaks my F2P streak.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Adoption and the foster care system are very different things. Foster care is mostly for children who have been removed from their parent's home, or otherwise become wards of the state. It's dealing with a population that's selected for a bit more than bad luck and is usually selected into it at an older age, and it's also not typically intended to be a permanent placement. Foster kids can and do get moved, and ideally reunited with the parents(in practice, the parents usually don't get into fit shape to get their kids back, but that's the theoretical goal of the system).
Adoption, on the other hand, is a permanent placement with a new family. Adopted children are usually adopted as infants, or otherwise too young to remember, and domestic adoptions are basically selected for a birth mother in unlucky circumstances.
More options
Context Copy link
I'll step in and say this seems uncharitable and worded to gain internet points. Though I have been nodding in agreement with many of your earlier posts.
It may sound harsh and uncaring but sure, yes, an unplanned pregnancy taken to term can seem like a penalty, a life-changing penalty, particularly if the father has fucked himself right off, the woman's parents are judgmental or absent, and she is faced with raising the child essentially (or actually) alone. This shouldn't be so difficult to grasp, unless you simply don't like the wording.
This is partially for internet points, yes. I also think that waging a culture war on an anonymous forum is pretty low stakes, so I don't mind chucking grenades over the wall that I wouldn't in person. Perhaps that makes me an anonymous digital coward, so be it.
I understand what you're saying. I've seen it up close. Appalachian extended family. 15 and pregnant happened to a cousin. Dad was dead, Mom was in rehab. The extended family stepped in and ... it almost ruined like three families financially. So, I guess not only do I understand what you're saying, I can confirm it.
But my prior also happens to be that human life is sacred and priceless. I also wouldn't assume that every woman who gives birth in dire situations sees their life satisfaction plummet. I'll acknowledge again that a hard pro-life stance easily comes off as hard hearted. It's difficult for it to shake that.
Not a coward, but this place is not for explicitly waging the culture war. Please do not try to "score Internet points."
Most of your post was fine, but the parts that weren't (the "waging culture war" parts) are precisely what makes most abortion threads turn into shitty exchanges of bad-faith straw men. "You think a child is an inconvenience that should be casually disposed of!" "You just want to control women's bodies!" Usually both sides actually have a pretty good understanding of what the other side actually believes (and doesn't) , but "chucking grenades" is more satisfying.
Don't do that here.
More options
Context Copy link
Dude, I agree with you. But this isn't the place to wage the culture war. There are lots of incredibly relevant points you can make without waging the culture war, much less actively admitting you're violating the fundamental rule of the site.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link