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 -
Again, hold up.
You and @iprayiam3 are specifically discussing the reactions of women supposedly used and abused by Danny Masterson and Russell Brand and, I presume, similar male celebrities and lotharios, i.e. the top 5% of men, not by average young man their age. You're claiming this is the understandable and sincere female reaction to the undesired consequences of the sexual revolution.
In your comment above, you seem to be implying that a modern Western woman putting out in the framework of a long-term relationship on the path to marriage is somehow also an example of promiscuity. I think even on this forum most people would find that interpretation highly dubious.
The way I understand 2rafa's argument is that a woman that craves "normal" and traditional monogamous relationship is in a trap. In the modern environment she has to go out and risk getting burned by some sexual predator who will take advantage of her. A logical thing to do in such an environment may be to lash out utilizing available tools such as #MeeToo.
Some time ago there was an article here on The Mote by someone who pointed out to exactly this phenomenon using some Indian word. The phenomenon being demonstrated by an image of car cut in half used as a horse carriage complete with rubber wheels. It was too heavy and not suitable as a horse cart, but the new technology of car was successful enough to completely wipe out institutional knowledge of how to build a good horse carriage. So when a crisis came and fuel became too expensive so cars were not viable anymore, people used the tools available to them to put something together which was subpar to what was there before.
The example here is sexual behaviour where 2023, one such example is infamous sex consent app where people will be required to agree to a contract prior to having sex. If only there was an institutions where two people swore before witnesses that they are now in a relationship - including sexual one - voluntary and in full knowledge of consequences. So we will solve the situation surrounding sex and relationships with an app, because this is year 2023 and old things like marriage is no longer viable social technology anymore.
Nuance is warranted either way. The notion that the options of the modern Western single woman are a) have monkey sex with the likes of Russell Brand b) demand abstinence before marriage is preposterous. After all, we know that the average woman is capable of eliciting long-term commitment from men, because this has been happening since the dawn of time, in all societies.
Please read my comment again, I did not say anything about any binary choice, I said about risk, which means that these things will happen to more and more women on the margin to borrow econospeak. Also the "since the dawn of time" is just simple naturalistic fallacy, I am not even sure what to do with it so I won't respond.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Jugaad Ethics is the article you're referring to.
That's the one, thanks.
While I don't disagree with the main argument of the article, it seems its entire narrative hinges on a parallel derived from a misunderstanding. As the photo of the carriage in the article shows a car of East German manufacture, the Trabant 601, and there are pinetrees in the background, it seems obvious to me that the photo was taken in former Yugoslavia, or in a post-Soviet country, probably Romania or Bulgaria. The reason many Trabants were turned into such carriages is because socialist economic policies ended, trade was liberalized, people could buy used Western cars, and maintaining those crappy Trabants became pointless, but many rural people still needed carriages. It isn't that the infrastructure for car use collapsed, or that people forgot how to build cars.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Stop with the consensus building.
I think the point you're missing here is that 2rafa isn't arguing this is a rational, logical, well thought out strategy by these young women. She's trying to give you an idea of why, from a hidden incentives standpoint, young western women are pushed to act in these ways.
The idea that a young woman who has premarital sex in the context of a long-term monogamous relationship is promiscuous and thus participates in the sexual revolution is, I think, something only hardliner religious fundamentalists believe; certainly not the majority in any Western society, or on this board. I'd say that's just a fairly credible observation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link