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 -
I happen to believe in this theory:
Garbage IN, garbage OUT.
Consider the type of person who will willingly endure a relationship with someone they are disgusted by in order to lift their family of origin out of poverty. An admirable sacrifice, to be sure - but wouldn't you feel some resentment? BurdensomeCount: I'm assuming you're a straight dude. Imagine if your whole family got, say, AIDS or cancer or something. But there was some rich gay dude who would save 'em if you married the guy. He's ugly as hell and kind of smells bad, to boot. Would you take one for the team/your family? What kind of resentment would you have for him? How would you ultimately feel about the sacrifice - and it is a sacrifice - that you are making?
Hold up, you're significantly changing the situation by making it a homosexual relationship. I can have children by marrying a very ugly woman, I cannot have children by marrying an unpleasant man.
OK, assume he'll spring for surrogacy; he's rich, after all. Does that change anything?
Mildly, somewhat, eh. There's a pretty substantial step when you cross from someone who is the sex you're orientated towards into an entirely different sex that I think breaks the comparison. It should be plenty to get the point across that it's a particularly repulsive woman. Even just on the child rearing element it matters that the kid(s) would be biologically both of ours and raising them together creates a bond.
I propose a compromise of a trans man who is fully reproductively intact. And I think I wouldn't actually be resentful of this transman if they also took the relationship seriously. Even this version is kind of lacking because I think our perspective savior is likely to be willing to change some things about themselves at the savee's request which kind of interferes with the repulsiveness of a transman to your average man because the transman would at least make an effort to be more feminine to the preference of the savee.
That said I do find the whole mail order bride thing intuitively distasteful in a way I can't articulate well. Something about the transactional nature. Perhaps Disney has just too thoroughly colonized my mind.
Okay, they're a trans man. They're also 450 pounds with atrocious personal hygiene. And they're a trust fund baby.
I take issue with the bad personal hygiene and trust fund status. The usual complaintants are usually well funded through their own personal earnings and frankly the hygiene thing never did at all in my experience, high functioning people who question they're success aren't low hamging fruit like bathing. Seriously, the idea that this is someone earning well enough to sponsor a family coming over while also not having figured out that inoffensive smells factored in is a venn diagram containing only the severely autistic. It's nearly disqualifying that you actually unironically reference it.
I do accept them being 450 lbs and repulsive, but I think there is still room to feel love there. But I think merely very obese would be more fair.
Mmm...more like: how about this.
There isn't an exact one-to-one correspondence here. Women generally are more sensitive to disgust than guys are. I don't know about sex differences in habituation to disgust, but it's plausible that guys can get used to nasty shit easier, too. Sex is a hell of a lot riskier for women, so it makes sense that it'd be harder and more painful/difficult for women to have sex with guys they were disgusted by. It's a contrived and very unlikely hypothetical here - I'm aware of that. On the other hand, it could easily be argued that women find autism straight up disgusting, and for a number of relatively good reasons; other men aren't as grossed out by it. That's why I'm making our wealthy hero pretty goddamn gross.
This being said...you personally might be OK with this obese, smelly, gross trust-fund transman if they're saving your family of origin from crushing poverty or paying for your brother's lifesaving cancer treatment or something like that.
Huh, I have the opposite intuition. From what I can tell women are less sensitive to that kind of thing than men unless we're defining disgust very broadly. Partnering up with the highest status/propertied man with little regard to other factors has been a quite dominant female reproductive strategy for a long time.
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
More options
Context Copy link
Also I should add, non-Western women could be just as rich as Western women (and some of them, say from e.g. Saudi Arabia or Qatar, are) and assuming they had a good upbringing that taught them to value what is really important in the long term they would likely still be more attracted to you (assuming no cultural dealbreakers like you not being willing to convert) than their equivalent western counterparts.
It's about values fit, not about lifting people out of poverty.
The problem for women, then, is the men who expect to be able to bang hot chicks when they're 25, then when they're ready to settle down, get a woman who'll put up with a man not on his looks etc. but on other values, while the guy still expects he'll be able to marry an attractive woman.
If it's both parties accepting that "you take what you can get, and kissin' don't last but cookery do", then it works. When it's one partner expecting to eat his cake and have it, while the other partner isn't permitted to do so, then the resentment builds up and feminism is the logical outcome.
Feminism is nothing more than women taking on the role of the partner expecting to eat her cake and have it, while denying men the ability to. That similarly builds up resentment, leading to a never-ending cycle of hate.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The difference is that non-Western women have been socialised differently and will not feel disgusted by a man who isn't the best looker. The things that disgust them are very different from the things that disgust western women and I would say that their "disgust set" is a better fit for long term thriving than the standard western one (no different to how someone who is disgusted by blood and feces is more "fit" for thriving in the world than someone who is disgusted by fresh food and water).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link