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 -
Why does sex inherently contradict the former?
Seriously, I want to know, because it's very far from obvious to me; I tend to see the latter mostly as an extension of the former, but then again I don't get out much these days and my attraction heuristic has always been more "what body type predicts the former" than anything else.
I, too, consider Japanese sailor school uniforms unisex. Then again, I'm not really AGP either; the reason I don't do this more often is because most of the clothes don't fit/look bad. Girl clothing is generally softer and (to a point) warmer, so if you have the sensory-processing issues mentioned downthread, you're going to identify a bit more with them beyond mere sexual arousal (provided it fits, of course).
I take this one level higher: I think it's a bunch of wicked women (and men, but women have much more incentive to do this) who want to inflict sick perverts on the rest of us as an extension/entrenchment of the privileges they already enjoy. The wiser transpeople [the ones following the golden rule described in a sibling comment] are trying their best to minimize themselves/accommodate for other people (for the reasons below), and as such I don't have much problem with them. Most of the ex-women and ex-men I know are like this, but some of them are not.
I only want the wise ones to be capable of considering it (they're the only ones able to bear the costs, anyway). I want the answer to be "no, because you only want to do it to validate a certain obnoxiousness/only want to validate it just to shock the squares" for the wicked, and "no, because this isn't a productive or healthy option for you" for the simple.
Which is why you need a sensory processing disorder as a pre-requisite (usually from autism, but doesn't need to come from it, and autism tends to be used as an excuse to not fucking control oneself). I think it would be different if your body constantly reminded you that your dick exists, much as I find myself sensorily overloaded when I'm lying flat on my stomach for too long.
No, you just read what's presented to you rather than thinking about why it exists in the first place. It's the safe option. (At least Catholics bother to root it in "natural law".)
The main problem with accepting it (should you take seriously "who on earth thinks getting married and tying yourself to another person is the easiest way to indulge in some perverted sex act; come on" as seriously as you say) is the same as it is when you eat food sacrificed to idols- that it gives the wicked a #NotRealChristian division upon which they can prey, setting the wise (and wicked) against each other and driving off the simple. Which is obviously contrary to what should be one's objectives as a Christian.
More options
Context Copy link