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 -
The distinction you make in the two modes of homosexuality in your second paragraph is interesting. It seems to match to a pattern I've noticed among homosexuals myself, where more effeminate gay men tend to have monogamous partners serially, whereas more masculine passing gay men tend to operate in the first relationship style you describe with older/younger males (and also this tends to overlap with triad/poly relationships among gay men much more than the effeminate mode does.)
In my personal experience, growing up, the media I consumed tended to depict gay relationships in the former fem/monogamous mode, so I sort of believed I was meant to operate in that mode as well, but as I grew older I realized I was drawn to the second type of gay relationships much more, which also coincided with my personal behaviors shifting from effeminacy to more masculinity. Or rather my self perception that shifted from a more feminine self image to a more masculine one as I aged.
I think the two modes maybe derive from the psychological concept of self that a gay man can hold: He asks himself, Do I identify more with my effeminacy and need to sort of castrate a man to be in control sexually? Or am I secure enough in my masculinity that I can adopt this other mode of relationships where I am the bull/dad/dominant partner/alpha? This also stems from the fundamental nature of homosexuality making odd compromises necessary. Most gay couples I know with small age gaps tend to grate at each other over time because the fundamental power structure is unbalanced when they are too evenly matched physically, age gap relationships tend to be more stable and longer lasting. The monogamous/effeminate relationships can be interpreted to reflect feminine values (safety seeking, "soft power") and the prison/military sexuality reflects masculine values (pleasure seeking, "hard power"), both deriving from the uncertainty of the homosexual ego as to his particular optimal role in relationships.
There is also a class and culture component to this today, where I see more well to do gay men and men from cities in monogamous/feminine relationship mode and more working class/rural men in more of the older/younger masculine mode.
This also reflects an interesting distinction in Middle Eastern/Islamic culture where homosexuality has traditionally been an age gap relationship, which seems to be relatively tolerated, compared with the basically western/modern invention of the feminine mode of homosexuality coupled with LGBT identity which is seen as forbidden and not tolerated in Middle Eastern cultures.
More options
Context Copy link