4 ms·
> There's no need for convoluted explanations. I don't see how it's at all convoluted. If anything, it's too reductive. Taboos, traditions, etc., don't need
by ravenstine 4y ago
> There's no need for convoluted explanations.
I don't see how it's at all convoluted. If anything, it's too reductive.
Taboos, traditions, etc., don't need to exist because of a reason that's explicit. Sometimes, they do, but that doesn't explain the taboos that don't make obvious sense. A taboo can be more or less a form of "cultural neuron" that doesn't have an explicit purpose but incidentally changes the balance of the system towards something that society at a given time may benefit from without even knowing it. A religion featuring more ornate hats than others may have more true believers, or perhaps the other way around for all we know. If that's at least plausible, if not true, that wouldn't necessarily mean a reverend at one point decided to declare a certain kind of hat wearing because of the "good of the church."
The inverse can also be true. Take for instance the taboo of sexism. Makes sense, right? Given modern western principles, why should culture allow for discrimination based on sex? On the other hand, there's evidence that many women, regardless of their political positions, actually appreciate men who are "benevolently sexist." It's a phenomenon compelling enough that even Psychology Today, a publication heavily biased against anything unflattering to women, has reported on it more than once. By making sexism a taboo, and far more taboo as of late, society has raised the bar for just how confident a man has to be to attract a woman. We really don't need a study to demonstrate that, on average, women are attracted to confidence. An effect of making sexism taboo is it changes the signal to noise ratio, allowing women to better identify which men they'll actually be attracted to. Maybe there were some people arguing against sexism with this in mind, but I imagine they are an extreme minority. Most anti-sexists probably weren't thinking along those lines.
At least that taboo makes some reasonable sense in isolation, and even the fashion of religious garb can be made sense of, but what about a taboo that makes no sense? What about merely making a mouth-noise that comes out sounding like "shit?"
It makes little explicit sense that saying the word "shit" be a faux pas. You can say poop, doodie, scat, dung, and even crap, but shit is considered a curse word. It's really pretty stupid.
Except I would argue that having any form of taboo can have a positive effect, even if it barely makes sense. By having cultural limits of any kind, it puts the society on the same page and creates a mindset where individuals try to at least maintain some level of basic class as a mindset. Personally, I like saying the word shit, but adding virtually any variable to a chaotic system can have effects that weren't explicitly predicted.
- pdntspa 4y agoHow exactly does sexism (or lack thereof) signal confidence? And on the word shit, there is a long tradition in various world cultures of curse words being named on bodily functions. But you are missing the obvious in that "curse" words are such because they were originally thought to bring a curse on the speaker or recipients from whatever god-entity they believe in. I suspect this is a manifestation of (ancient?) society's methods of trying to control the fuck out of everyone and it is a meme burned in our consciousness quite deeply at this point. But all that makes the entire notion of curse-words invalid; if their meaning is that which we attribute to them then they are meaningless and therefore harmless. But with morality unable to escape the shadow of primitive, ignorant times, they continue to be "taboo"
- Super_Jambo 4y ago>How exactly does sexism (or lack thereof) signal confidence? I think the argument they're making is that in a sexist culture all men will present with more confidence due to the belief that women are lesser. So the average woman will find the average guy more attractive... I can't say I'm convinced.
- ravenstine 4y agoNot sure how you came away with that conclusion. It's the exact opposite. In a culture where sexism is more common, casual sexism will not stand out at all. The average guy will not appear more attractive. In a culture where sexism is largely frowned upon, being sexist but not too sexist is an act that stands out. A man who is either not sufficiently sexist or is silently sexist (for fear of repercussion) will appear average, because that category describes the average man. The man who is only slightly sexist and is just charming and good looking enough will win out because being sexist in front of a woman is the polar opposite of lacking confidence or placing the woman on a pedestal. They reside in a cozy region between the silent/supplicant majority of men and the ones who are either disgustingly sexist or are too physically unattractive to make up for saying something sexist. No one's saying you or anyone have to like sexism. Being offensive in spite of blowback is a confidence move whether any individual finds it toxic or not.