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 -
You’ve at least partially answered your own question. Height is a sexually dimorphic trait, with men being taller than women and women caring more about male height than men caring more about female height. Thus, mainstream blue-pill spaces (such as Reddit) are averse to discussions on male height, for they take away from gender egalitarianism (except when men can be framed as shitty and women as victims).
Meanwhile, despite supposed body-positivity, blue-pillers are quite fond of height-shaming or height-downgrading when it comes to men they don’t like. DAE lift-wearing DeSantis is 5’8” and peak Trump was barely 6’0” at most?
Women further detest discussions on male height because reminders that women prefer male dominance traits like height (or strength, power, ability to inflict violence, etc.) make them feel more superficial, submissive, meme-like and less like the Wonderful, strong independent #GirlBosses that they of course are. Or discussions that feature men optimizing their way toward garnering more female attraction. Such discussions compromise the blue-pill, Disneyian notion that attraction is some magical, unpredictable, unquantifiable phenomenon that Just Happens.
Sometimes blue-pill women will begrudgingly concede the female preference for male height with enough studies or anecdotal, social-proofed evidence such as TikTok video after video of young women dunking on short men. Yet, they’ll still look to blame societal Conditioning and/or take the Harvard-on-Asians route in saying that in their Lived Experience, short men are ick-inducing not for their shortness—but rather the personalities of short men—the toxicity and insecurities of short men in being short.
Women don’t care about male height. If they do, the preference isn’t that widespread. If it is, it isn’t that drastic. And if it is, it’s not a big deal. Even if it is, it’s only due to Socialization, toxic masculinity, and male insecurities. And even if it isn’t, all you incels and manlets deserve it and should stop talking about it.
Women are often low-key (and sometimes high-key) hostile against male self-improvement, especially with regard to sexual market value (a concept of which is gross and icky in their eyes, and shouldn't exist). Part of it may be it’s a reminder of their own hypoagency and lack of accountability (see, for example, Ryan Long on Girl vs. Guy Motivation). Weight is a dimension by which many Western women could improve their lot, yet they loathe to admit as such much less do so.
Another part may be envy, as much of what makes women more attractive or unattractive for relationships involve cannot-put-the-toothpaste-back-in-the-tube situations like age, tattoos, past promiscuity, single motherhood. In contrast, thanks to preselection and female mate-choice copying, male promiscuity and out-of-wedlock children can make men more attractive.
A third component may be that women want naturals, not imposters who somehow cheated their rightfully deserved fate. Women are generally quite hostile against men doing things such as steroids, working out “too much”, social media optimization, wearing lifts, getting limb-lengthening surgeries, grinding approaches for experience and/or to play the numbers game. In this realm, men are generally quite supportive of other men, despite nominally increasing the competition.
I wonder what proportion of those in favor of gender affirmation therapies and surgeries for children and teenagers to transition would be in favor of dispensing HGH for boys and/or young men to grow taller. After all, what could be more gender-affirming for the average boy or young man than to be taller?
Re: Self improvement
My experience was that women in my social groups were supportive of male self improvement. They responded positively to guys trying to work out, dress better, have more girl friendly hobbies, learn2cook etc. Chicks see that as value they can capture in a relationship. They look more dimly on PUA stuff, even though it works on them. From their perspective, it's a form of trickery via false advertising.
Re: Limb lengthening:
I think that's directly analogous to facial plastic surgery on a chick. Even when reproduction isn't the conscious goal, that's what people are thinking of at a subconscious level. Your kids won't get that height or that nose.
More options
Context Copy link
Interesting thoughts, thanks for the response. To your last point, ironically, it was on gender affirmation subreddits that I found the most accurate information on possible ways to boost height, including mentions that growth plates don't generally close until the early 20s, and that it's partially from lower HGH levels that people don't grow much in their early 20s, or that sometimes postural and hormonal changes can indeed increase height a bit through cartilaginous growth, etc. And even discussion on future possibilities of growth plate implantation/restoration. It was only in those subreddits that the discussion was taken seriously and practical advice given.
More options
Context Copy link
This comment fails the gender turing test.
Not in the broader point- your main thrust is at least defensible. But everything about the psychoanalysis and framing is just bitter ranting akin to 'hurr durr conservatives are pro-life to have more white babies'.
More options
Context Copy link
Nah. This kind of thinking about a globally-consistent view of how one is oriented towards the world is a prototypically male thing.
I know plenty of girlboss (and even feminist) types that embraced submissiveness (sometimes extremely), leaning into whichever role they wanted to pay in a given interaction. The ability to switch between those modes without feeling like either contradicts or diminishes the other is probably a female power that's worth more analysis here.
Interesting point, I've noticed this and would like to read/think more about why some women are better able to handle such seeming contradictions. I can't help thinking one style of thinking has got something mixed up and I'm not at all sure it's the female style.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link