site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11mo ago (text post)   27875 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 27, 2023

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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

80% of the difference is pornography in my opinion, and briefly: Dopamine/addiction effects mean they don't seek it out and perform badly when they get it; they get bad ideas from porn which affects their partners and these are sexual mores that used to be considered 'out there' such as choking/anal/facials/etc; masturbation aids being normalised for women mean they are often happier by themselves than with a partner and finally this all compounds because it causes women to raise their standards whilst many men fall through the floor.

You’re presenting this as asymmetric, but men and women mirror each other here. They all have more and more access to superior substitutes for sex, so their standards rise and their willingness to meet their partner’s standards diminishes. No further explanations necessary. People just need each other less nowadays.

I was visiting friends, and the heating in my room was on the fritz. I was about to have a sleep-tight jerk-off, but that night I really wished I had an energetically independent, whole lotta woman, instead.

But the substitutes pale in comparison to the real deal. I don’t get it.

Sex is a skill. [cw: spoilers are pretty tmi]

It's more obvious when bottoming, where depending on gender you're either going to simply struggle to take it, freeze up, and/or have something gross happen. But a top that doesn't know what they're doing has a lot of opportunities to have a Bad Time, ranging from the minor embarrassing stuff to just not doing what they need to really enjoy themselves to actual injury to themselves. And if you care about your partner(s)'s enjoyment, that gets even more complicated. Even the better sex toys pale in comparison to a good lay, but there's a lot of room for lackluster or even bad sex, and a lot of people start off with lackluster or bad partnered sex.

There's bad masturbation, too! As anyone who's tried using soap as a lubricant has discovered the unpleasant way. But those failure modes are uncommon and easy to avoid, and can be learned in mostly easy and solo ways.

The extent this matters clearly can't have been static across the years. I want to think there's some biochemical reason. The secular collapse of testosterone is a popular target, but it would mostly cover men. Some sex studies suggest it's more common among people who haven't had partnered sex before their mid-twenties, but it's hard to separate cause and effect, and it's very hard to come up with explanations why this would be a new issue now rather than the many periods in the past where access to sexual partners was much more difficult. The soccon emphasis tends to go the availability of porn, but neither communities where people abstain entirely and programs like No Nut November don't turn people into rutting beasts by the third week. And, as anecdote, abstaining for months hasn't gotten me into that mood where I just need to fuck/get fucked by someone.

It comes with a lot more social cachet, but revealed preferences tell another story. The substitute doesn’t need to be superior in every way to displace the original, it starts on the margins. And the margin is some costly, impractical, subpar sexual encounter versus a costless, unbounded, coolidge-effect boosted masturbation fantasy. But there will always be a niche for real sex purists, like the people who weave their own clothes.

Well I guess sexual satisfaction less cost to acquire could be greater in situation one v. situation 2 even if situation 2 has greater sexual satisfaction.

It seems like marriage solves the cost to acquire factor though…

It seems like marriage solves the cost to acquire factor though…

Ha! You must not be married.

For real though, dating is for having an easily accessible sexual partner. Marriage is for having a partner in life in general. And unless sex is the most important thing for one of the partners, that means it is going to take a lower priority than other things.

Been married for 8 years. Still have regular sex! Shouldn’t be something you give up. Honestly it makes the other stuff easier (eg free and intimate entertainment)

IIRC married couples are more sexually active with each other than dating couples in general.

I think there must be a high degree of variability between married couples.

The physical aspects of our marriage are very important. I don't know that we'd have been married if the sex wasn't there.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats