No matter who you are or what opinions you hold, if your views on dating and gender relations come from second-hand "online experiences", those opinions aren't worth much

HoboCalrissian · 2026-07-04T13:47:16+00:00

I regularly see people on here referencing other reddit posts as proof for their opinion. Especially if it's one of those top 1% posters. It's sad.

Outrageous-Floor-424 · 2026-07-04T12:30:48+00:00

Human experience and their intuitive conclusions is how we get every bad thoughtsystem ever.

Why don't marketers just ask people what they want anymore? Because we have ample evidence that what people say about their hypothetical future behaviour, and the way they actually behave, are very weakly correlated.

As with anything else of value, empiricism is the way to understanding.

aslfingerspell · 2026-07-04T22:00:23+00:00

I think online culture can be the tip of the iceberg for real life attitudes. A big part of internet social skills is being able to cross-reference social media, the real world, traditional media, and general logic/common sense to figure out which of the "terminally online" opinions are meaningful of something greater, and which ones are truly just random individuals online.

I know, and anyone can see this through their own Reddit engagement metrics, that dropoff in engagement is logarithmic. 1,000 people might see a comment, but maybe only dozens will up or downvote, and maybe 1 person will reply. Go to any YouTube video and compare views vs likes vs comments. Internet discussion and debate is like sports: there are dozens of players but thousands of spectators.

Likewise, you can reverse this. A lot of times 1 person on the internet is just 1 person, but there are also times where that 1 person who said something is representative of 100 people who didn't say anything but upvoted, and those 100 upvotes are representative of 1,000 people who saw it and silently agreed, and those 1,000 people represent a significant, real life opinion of people without reddit accounts.

As a more mainstream example, racism exists in real life, but real life racism might not reference a specific meme in an online forum. The online behavior is representative of real life, even if it's in a different form.

As a PPD-relevant example, a lot of the specific "shit tests" I see online are things I've never seen in real life i.e. the lemon test, "would you love me if I was a worm." No real life person I've met has done those exact things in those exact words. However, I did encounter a real life woman that I was getting along with. She asked me "What am I?" and I got confused by the question. She said "You're supposed to call me pretty. Don't worry, these things aren't hard." So yes, while a given "shit test" may just be a random TikTok trend of the terminally online, there are people in real life who do little mind games or compliance tests like that.

The infamous "man vs. bear" debate is another: I never heard anyone in real life reference it, but it's representative of the fact that yes, a lot of men are stereotyped as predators or worse, and a lot of women really do feel comfortable voicing blanket fear of a group of people with language that would be near-genocidally-hateful if directed at anyone else. There was a big debate in not just all the usual gender war places but mainstream media as well.

More broadly speaking, there's also the fact that "terminally online" or "elite" opinion can actually matter, because they are the conversation and what "normal" people will see or think about.

This is something that both right and left wingers agree on. Political scientists might call it "agenda setting." or "soft power projection." On the right you'll sometimes see it described as "politics is downstream from culture", while the left wing can see it in things like "manufacturing consent" or an "ideological vanguard."

No matter what ideology-specific term you use, the idea is still the same: news, entertainment, and social trends do have disproportionate power to how many people actually believe or care about them directly. There's a reason why some people report on the box office or review numbers of movies like they're casualties in a war. In a sense, it really does matter if "go woke, go broke" is validated by some random blockbuster, because that becomes a piece of ammunition for a broader network of media outlets.

Bitter_Emu6366 · 2026-07-04T11:50:36+00:00

Does this apply to peer reviewed academic research?

NotAllTheCake · 2026-07-04T13:04:37+00:00

The primary role of any human is to be a parent

Then why do men shirk as much childcare duties as possible? The only demographic that rated "having children" as the top life goal were conservative men. They are also the demographic that does the least amount of childcare.

AutoModerator · 2026-07-04T11:49:06+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2026-07-04T11:49:06+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

EKOzoro · 2026-07-05T14:52:02+00:00

Most people form opinions from real life shit. And most of the time it's not good.

Destinyciello · 2026-07-04T12:07:31+00:00

"A woman's primary role is to be a mother-" no one fucking asked dude.

I mean if you're a science guy how can you deny this?

The primary role of any human is to be a parent. Without that our species goes extinct. We have the most helpless babies in the mammalian kingdom. They require a tremendous amount of upkeep to bring to adulthood. Why do you think pretty much every society on planet earth regardless of religion or how rich they are obsesses about love, family and child rearing.

Independent-Mail-227 · 2026-07-04T18:15:57+00:00

My opinions in relatios to dating are based on the okCupid data that is currently the most reliable study about human mating and sexual attraction with each possible caveat covered and any counter argument awsnered by the same set of data.

My opinions about gender relations are based on current female behavior and extensive action of feminism (the dogma women follow in the west), their arguments and results.

So no, my "views" about dating and gender relations come from objective reality based on data, analysis of current system incentives and results.

Proudvow · 2026-07-05T22:58:42+00:00

Seems like ad hominem.

At the end of the day the accuracy of a statement doesn't change based on where it came from.

And nobody really cares if you personally take it seriously or not. You're one person.

Comments