site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   33253 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023

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.

15
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Men's marriage standards are "teenage virgin".

With DD boobs and who is a slut whore who will perform any sexual act he asks for, at the same time as being a teenage virgin. There are unrealistic expectations on both sides.

Those are preferences, not standards. Yes, obviously, every man would prefer a 10/10 supermodel with huge tits who will act like a lady in the streets and a whore in the sheets and never ask for commitment (or, better yet, two of them), but most are perfectly happy to marry the 6/10 girl next door as long as she is still young and virginal. Whereas women would rather be booty call #3 on Chad's phonebook than marry an average beta provider nice guy, and spend their teens and twenties doing just that.

From "The Archetypal Modern Woman" by Free Notherner:

So, in a nutshell, Tracy Clark-Flory is the the stereotypical, nay, archetypical, modern woman. She fucks uncountable alphas, ignoring the beta who likes her, throughout her years of youth and prettiness. She realizes how empty it all is, but only once the wall approaches and the good times are coming to an end, so she uses the last of her fading feminine charms to husband-up the barely tolerable beta.

And from The Dreaded Jim's Gab:

The reason women are marrying late is that as they lose their looks and their eggs dry up, they fall off the bottom of mister one in thirty’s booty call list, then they fall off the bottom of mister one in twenty’s booty call list, then they fall off the bottom of mister one in ten’s booty call list, then they will reluctantly marry mister average, and hate him for it.

Those are preferences, not standards. Yes, obviously, every man would prefer a 10/10 supermodel with huge tits who will act like a lady in the streets and a whore in the sheets and never ask for commitment (or, better yet, two of them), but most are perfectly happy to marry the 6/10 girl next door as long as she is still young and virginal.

This brings to mind something I heard from some podcast by 2 women a long time ago. I forget what podcast and who, but the women would sometimes judge men's fuckability/marriageability using a score system, with the scores being 1 or 0. This is in contrast to the near-universal score system of 1-10 that straight men tend to assign to women. Obviously no one knows for sure, but I was told by a woman that the 1/0 scoring system is much more in line with how women in general tend to judge men. The sense that I get is that this is broadly true, and if we were to try to convert one scale to the other, that the bar for reaching a "1" in the former scale would roughly correspond to 8.5-9 in the other scale.

Red Scare podcast?

I think that was the one.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats