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 -
Can you expand more on that? That is interesting. I've known a few openly bi (and practicing) women; there are some mental health issues there but a lot of them have their stuff together...most are either thin or overweight, some obese but none morbidly obese.
Roughly what region do you live in/are drawing your conclusions from?
East Coast American PMC. Drawing my conclusions from having loved mainly bisexual women for my entire adult life. Not for any particular reason, things just sorta happened that way. The last few times I run into another one, she'll be amazed that I am "fluent in queer girl."
Bi women are treated as experience dispensers by a lot of people. They're assumed to be constantly available and up for it, to be targeted for threesomes or for "experimentation" by otherwise straight women, while simultaneously being derided by Lesbians/WLW as crypto-straights who don't count when it comes time to hand out social standing in LGBTQWERTY spaces. Being openly bi is kind of a pure loser if you were happy to begin with, you get attention you probably didn't want/need, while also being derided. From a marketing perspective you're better off saying you're primarily a lesbian but make exceptions as desired, or that you're straight and just sleep with women when the opportunity comes up.
Which is why loudly bi women are so often unattractive, people who are most vocally part of any deviant sexual community are often those who are hoping that standing in the community will get them laid. I've seen the same thing in poly and in BDSM communities IRL, ugly people who are constantly going on about "the rules" and "the community" and resent the hell out of hot people who break those rules successfully. In the hope of enforcing rules that will force women to sleep with them.
That is interesting indeed. Bi men are assumed gay and women aren't all that attracted to them...while bi women get treated like experience dispensers. I suppose that might be why bi people have worse outcomes than gay and straight ones. I suppose that being openly bi might be an honest, expensive signal that you're able to withstand the slings and arrows.
Based on my personal experience - a lot of bi friends - I've seen a lot of attractive openly bi women. However, more than a few have significant mental-health issues, or had had them in the past but had overcome them. There's a disproportionate number of queer young people in local psych wards.
That, too, is interesting. There's more than a few fat, awkward, nerdy men in BDSM circles, although I would suspect that most of them have the sense to not openly talk about their involvement in BDSM. If you're unattractive enough, the fact that you're interested in sex or relationships at all is fundamentally transgressive, outside of perhaps certain niche communities. I guess that if you're just barely attractive enough to be allowed to be openly interested in sex and relationships, you might join a BDSM community or talk about being openly bi as an attention-grabbing strategy.
Isn't this sometimes seen as creepy, transgressive, or just bullshit? I suppose that women can get away with this a lot easier than men can...but even then, why isn't this kind of behavior just seen as sanctimonious and puritanical? Also more than a little bit gross: the 5'3" guy in the BDSM circle, or the 300lb woman, should damn well know that they are being allowed to both participate and express interest in people by their community. Generally speaking, I see publicly representing oneself as anything other than a celibate monk or nun who's dedicated their life to something prosocial as a privilege, not a right, granted by the community. Something like the flirting/sexual version of a driver's license...most people can get them, but a small percentage can't or shouldn't, and nobody's pitching a fit that blind or epileptic people can't drive.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link