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 -
Plate-spinning + soft harems = promiscuity, as preferred by promiscuous men
Serial monogamy = promiscuity, as preferred by promiscuous women
Society generally considers the former promiscuity but not the latter. It's important in cases such as this to keep this in mind.
Society (not some extreme progressive niche) definitely considers the latter promiscuity.
No, it doesn't. Society thinks of relationships like jobs; it is perfectly acceptable to hop around looking for a better deal as long as you give two weeks notice before you actually start. Even marriages work like this now, though the divorce might take a little longer than two weeks.
Doesn't matter how long you were with your old partner and how much you promised to love them forever, you can just wake up one morning and say "I just don't feel that way anymore" and as long as you wait a whole week out of respect for the heartbroken it is totally kosher to start a sexual relationship with someone else.
It is now totally normal for a girl to have a high school boyfriend who she breaks up with when she goes to college, a college boyfriend or two who she breaks up with when she graduates and relocates for work, and another boyfriend or three before she is ready to settle down in her late twenties to early thirties. Toss in a handful of hookups and you are expected to be OK with a woman having half a dozen sexual partners before you marry her.
I hate it.
What experience do you base this on? Because it's certainly not true in any bubble I've ever been in
There is no source I can cite for something like this; all I can do is report what I see with my own eyes.
Well, if you say everyone you know has relationships like that, I guess I'll believe you, but that sounds sad and tragic to me. Maybe you are not surrounding yourself with the best examples. I mean, certainly breakups happen and some of them are shitty and people can be heartless, but it is not my experience that most people are that casual and callous. (Except the part about sexual histories. Having to accept that you probably won't be marrying a virgin - yeah, that part is true. Live with it or take the shahada, I guess.)
I have seriously considered doing this, but the fact that Islam is polygamous plus the fact that I would be starting out as a random outsider with no social capital to speak of gives me pause. I would probably just end up as one of those surplus males that are forced to fuck dancing boys for lack of women, which is not what I want.
Rather, I want white sharia.
You can join one of many existing fundamentalist Christian groups. Almost all of them have a better gender ratio than the motte and accept converts. If you live in a major city in the US, there’s almost certainly several to choose from within driving distance.
But I’m guessing you don’t want to do this, because in practice you don’t actually like the society you desire. You might not like the actual gender role of a patriarchal man(which comes with responsibilities). You probably don’t want the policing of young men. These things are loadbearing for the social model.
More options
Context Copy link
What would that look like, exactly? I know it's Dread Jim's obsession, but that sort of social control is unlikely to happen without an onerous religious regime that would place additional restrictions on you that you probably wouldn't like; it won't just be "You get to choose a young hottie wife who isn't allowed to say no to you."
I’ll notice that these people advocating for trad sexual mores don’t seem to join the many existing Christian fundamentalist groups out there. Few are hostile to converts and a they invariably have better gender balance than secular right wing circles(low bar to clear, I know).
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
Yeah, I mean the sexual revolution has significant downsides and was probably a bad idea. Both men and women now have more sexual partners over the course of a lifetime than they did a hundred years ago; it is entirely reasonable to consider this socially deleterious - I do! But it’s also not some special treatment for women, promiscuity is now more accepted for both sexes than it was back then and the architects of the sexual revolution (and most of its biggest fans) were all men, so take it up with them.
Eh, men in 1900 who visited brothels or rode the town bike(so to speak) were often not stigmatized for it in mainstream society, although deflowering a virgin was.
They certainly were stigmatized for it as a vice, opposition to it was a huge thing in Victorian England. Small-l liberal instincts merely meant (and still mean) it wasn’t a crime.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Except that men's form of promiscuity is different from women's form of promiscuity.
The male form of promiscuity is the harem, where a man has sex with multiple girls at the same time and they don't have sex with anyone else. Even trying to propose this to your girlfriend would get you derided as having a One Penis Policy.
More likely, a man would have to cheat on his girlfriend to practice promiscuity, something which is universally condemned for it's dishonesty. By contrast, a woman can be completely honest about her dealings and still end up promiscuous by simply having those feelings change, and have society back her up. A man can't.
Women now have more sexual partners over the course of a lifetime than they did a hundred years ago; men have bifurcated into incels who have zero sexual partners and Chads who have tons of sexual partners. Focusing on the Chads is classic apex fallacy.
Uh, what? In practice men cheat more often and are forgiven by their girlfriends/wives more often when they cheat.
No one talks like this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
How true is this actually though? Is it average amount of sex partners? Because i can definetlry think of some sub-cultures 100 years ago who probably have orders of magnitude more sex partners than people today.
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