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 -
Most people have a concept of propriety, and most people understand that words have contextual or connotative meanings beyond the literal, physical act which they denote. "Make love", "have sex", and "fuck" all refer to the same action in a broad sense, but they obviously have very different meanings when you come across them in the wild.
Likewise, "I would like to have a child with your daughter", "I would like to breed your daughter", and "I would like to creampie your daughter" may all indicate that the person would like to have vaginal sex with the daughter in a way that's open to the possibility of conception and pregnancy, but obviously the connotations are very different.
Lewis2 is correct here - 'creampie' specifically is pornographic slang. It's contextually inappropriate because it communicates disrespect. Botond173 made an edgy and offensive joke.
Maybe you like edgy jokes, and if so that's fine for you, but pretending that it's not clear why someone might object is silly.
I wasn't the one to make the 'joke'. Also, I think the grammatically correct phrase is 'breed with your daughter'.
More options
Context Copy link
I think the context here is "an Internet forum discussing cultural matters frankly" and not "at the dinner table".
If someone actually made that statement in the latter context, it would be offensive. Here it's practically descriptive.
I know my preference would be for the Motte to be at least a little more proper than 4chan...
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
And the worst one isn't even the last -- "I would like to breed your daughter" comes across as much more disrespectful to me than "I would like to creampie your daughter"; obviously I wouldn't like hearing it in that way, but it sounds more horny than disrespectful. "I would like to breed your daughter" sounds like she's going to be inseminated like an animal. Using "breed" in a human context comes across as wildly inappropriate, while saying 'creampie' in a human context is just horny. (And if you invert it, the pattern follows -- "I would like to breed your mare" sounds like a normal thing for a horse person to say, "I would like to creampie your mare" is followed by a call to the police.)
(And yes, I know "breeding kink" is a real term, but I think it's an insane people describe the natural urge to reproduce as a 'kink' and not, say, the normal outworkings of sexuality. It's like saying you have an 'orgasm kink.' Oh really? Are you demisexual too?)
In the current social reality it isn't insane. When the sexual act does take place, it normally does so not only without the intent to procreate but including the implicit intent to prevent procreation. This is the case even though it's a biological fact that the act of heterosexual coupling is usually more enjoyable for both parties where the normal outworking of sexuality does take place. In other words, yes, it's a kink, practically speaking.
More options
Context Copy link
I recognize that it is because "breed" is standing in for two different mental images but the conjunction of these two paragraphs is something.
On the one hand, describing the act of humans procreating with "breed" is very disrespectful. That's what animals do, or what we do to animals, not humans! On the other hand, the existence of the term "breeding kink" is insane because the human urge to breed is natural and not at all kinky.
What if someone gets off by being inseminated like an animal!
I wouldn't exactly say this, but also I'm trying to use the word 'kink' in the way I'm told the kinksters do. To whom I understand it means roughly, "oddly specific, typically inherently ungratifying thing I must do to get off."
My complaint is that having sex with gratification from the intent to reproduce isn't oddly specific -- it's just part of why people have sex. That's why I compared the concept to an orgasm kink and to demisexuality: it's not oddly specific, it doesn't need to be called out, we don't need to give it a specific name, it's genuinely just part of the constellation of common reasons people feel gratified by sex. "Ooh, I like having sex while thinking about making a baby." Yeah, and so does a huge chunk of women and a reasonably large chunk of men.
If you notice, I'm actually making a descriptive argument, not a proscriptive one: I'm saying the term is a misnomer that uses termomology reserved for unusual things to describe something usual. It harms our understanding of sexuality rather than helping it.
If this were what people meant by 'breeding kink,' I'd have to give it to them. But my understanding is that it's generally used to describe, essentially, vaginal sex to completion. Which is the most vanilla sex act known to man.
If it meant what you seem to suggest, I would argue it would meet the definition of a kink, because it would be inherently ungratifying. There are no records of mind-shattering female orgasms at fertility clinics when women receive intrauterine insemination. (It is also the least inherently gratifying possible sex act for a man that I can imagine -- if you can even call it a 'sex act.')
The other way animals are bred just involves a stallion going to town, which I'd argue is better described by other kink names, including, if relevant, petplay kinks.
I have now fulfilled my yearly mandate of unnecessary discussion of kink, with one day to spare.
Interesting. I guess what makes it breeding "kink" in my mind is that it's getting sexual arousal from the thought of becoming pregnant. It's less obvious to me how prevalent that is. Lots of people want to be pregnant and have sex with the goal of becoming pregnant but for what fraction is becoming pregnant sexually arousing?
My impression is that a breeding link is often coupled with (though not identical to) what is being described in this paragraph and often subsumed under the same name.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Oh, I'm with you entirely on finding it gross, and I think there has been a pornographic shift in the way we think about sexuality, desire, and human reproduction. There's probably an essay there to write one day, but I might save it up and do it in a top-level comment one day. The death of the concept of normality, or the concept of what is natural?
From what I've read on how people talked about sex "normally", outside of puritan societies and polite company, they were quite vulgar. They didn't have porn, true.
I suppose there's a case you could make that delicacy around sex is an affectation of the middle (and upper?) class(es?), and the lower classes/peasants/proles have always been quite vulgar? It's certainly the sort of thing that could be true, though I'd like a bit more of a survey before I conclude that it is.
The peasants are traditionally (and definitionally) vulgar, but it's the upper classes who used to seriously talk about "breeding" with respect to humans.
More options
Context Copy link
That's what "vulgar" means.
(You're saying that the lower classes/peasants/proles have always [acted in the character and spoken language in the manner of the lower classes/peasants/proles]).
Also, "they didn't have porn"? lol, lmao even; this shit was everywhere, a consequence of the printing press.
No, that's the etymological origin of 'vulgar'. The meaning of a word is not reducible to its etymology. That's called the etymological fallacy.
Have lower or peasant classes been consistently crude, blunt, or offensive in the way they talk about sex, relatively to middle or upper classes? It would not surprise me - if nothing else I think the lower class, almost definitionally, does not speak in the way the upper class considers polite - but it would be nice to have actual data to go on.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link