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 are, indeed, either speaking in bad faith and thus escalate the demand for evidence as if none were provided yet and I'm just waxing lyrical about generalities (ironically validating me further), or so triggered by the sarcastic line about queens (don't you know it's a meme?) as to become unable to recognize the context of those claims.
The context of my claims about power imbalance is that the onus is consistently on men to change in all related topics where it is clear that something must be changed. E.g. when the topic is sexlessness, men must suck it up and adapt to «increased standards» in dating. When the topic is TFR, men must learn to contribute to housework, reduce their sexism (as documented by gorge) and so on.
Out of context, many of those suggestions are not terrible. In context, though, it is bad on a number of levels. Most importanly it is
a) unfair to consistently demand only one side in a democratic society to compromise, especially while presenting the other as devoid of agency and control;
b) plainly tyrannical to suppress explanations which are relatively less demeaning to men and less flattering to women, namely hypergamy with regard to dating and revealed disinterest in having a family or children; and
c) irrational to expect policies and recommendations based on models which are little more than self-serving gaslighting to actually work.
These deficiencies are exactly in line with the petty tyrant framework.
Female preference is taken as the implicit ground truth which must be acknowledged and adapted to; male preference, sometimes completely made-up (in cases where it is impossible to tie the object-level complaint to things men actually, systematically do), is presented as the root problem to be solved. The reason that such a discrepancy in discourse is possible is: shaming of pro-male voices that women collectively engage in, using rhetorics that amount to sneering, and feeling justified due to the aforementioned wishful thinking tendency where their wants and excuses are objective truths.
More options
Context Copy link