[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /r/ - 889

File: 1492504040992.png (119.21 KB, 300x209, Aeneas'_Flight_from_Troy_by_Federico_Barocci.jpg)


Do you respect or care for tradition? I used to have a disdain for anything remotely associated with traditional, say, roles, religion, and marriage; culture in general really. In the past months though I've changed quite a bit and now am more conservative, socially and politically. I'd like to start a thread on tradition, this can be in computing, religion, culture, anything that has history.

To start with, I want to counter my generation's current view of sex roles being fluid. I seem to have fondness towards the idea of the man being the “breadwinner”, while the woman takes care of the house, cleans, does recreational activities and such. A reason for this could be a sense of pride in taking care of your partner and the responsibility that comes with it. Also, having your partner take care of most house work leaves that worry out of your mind so such isn't a focus at all, leaving work and hopefully intellectual (programming, math, reading, etc) musings abound, and of course a deeper respect towards your loved one.

Sex is something I've actually always have been traditional and old fashion with. I have quite a deep gross feeling towards those who've had a multitude of sexual partners, and especially encounters outside of a relationship as this seems to indicate a purely physical relationship to sex, which I oppose. Sex can be purely physical but that is one layer to it, and a trivial one at that.

I believe my feelings towards women in a traditional manner comes from the fact that I was raised primarily by women, having a lack of father roles in my life. Which I think was a horrible mistake on my mothers part. There's a huge amount of study showing the lack of one parent, or the separation of parents, severely affects children in a negative way.


Here's a great video featuring Camille Paglia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvrxQ4M3EOo

One tradition I think that's really missing from the modern family is a sense of deep respect for your family name and lineage. Your name nowadays is random and you have no respectable history. If I was to start a family, something I'd aim to instill in my children would be to give your family honor.



*tips fedora*
*tips whole stack of fedoras*
*gets sucked into his fedora which grows into a giant fedora UFO that shoots lighting bolts upon anyone not conceived inside holy matrimony*


It's always amusing to see the almost instinctive disrespect to anything which is not part of nihilist or postmodern thought.


I'm in a similar place as you, where I start to appreciate some traditions and customs. I still do not see any value in marriage for myself, however. A couple can raise their child without being married, but I see how social pressures and traditions would keep them from splitting up.
However, I vehemently disagree with your views on sex. There is an evolutionary instinct for men to favour women without prior sexual partners, which does not make much sense in the age of condoms and birth control.


I don't disrespect, but I just don't give a fuarrrk, since more of the traditions have religious basis and I have no faith.
Some of these traditions is about respect, though. I'm especially referring to some japanese traditions, which I find really beautiful, such as the respect for the nature, respect for the older, some festivals that has meaning beyond shintoism (such as the Sakura-matsuri, that is to remember the Mono no Aware - everything is impermanent). The "Mottainai" also.
The "Ubi sunt" on europe is also something respectable.

>about woman

You probably trying to protect your possible future child. It's the protectionism embedded on your heuristics.

>on computing

I don't really give much about computing traditions, but I think congresses like Chaos Communication Congress really cool. But not because of tradition, because of information.

Please, stop using the word "postmodern" that way. It's not correct.
Read about the postmodernism philosophy and you'll understand that it has nothing to do with time period. If you want to refer to our current period of time, them use "contemporary" would be more suitable.



Even though I agree with you somewhat on most of the points you made, there is no denying you are a fedora edgelord.
One clue is your admission of your recent adoption of these values. This implies an exaggerated reactionary shift from your previous maternally influenced liberal values, which often does lead to romanticising "traditional values" and viewing them with undue nostalgia. For example,

>muh family history and lineage

Imagine if your access to the internet was limited due to you being of poor stock, or your right to a good education and employability dependant on your bloodline or status rather than merit. Despite facing socioeconomic discrimination, elitism and over-zealous monitoring by nation-states, we still have more opportunities for social mobility compared to fifty or a hundred years ago.

On sex and women, there are plenty of "traditional" women from patriarchal cultures who would agree with your attitudes. However they also have their own prerequisites; good job, healthy, prestigious family, well educated, willing to put up with simple minded whims and the quirks of their patriarchal upbringing etc. Thus it is not liberal society that is an obstacle to getting these women, but the individual themselves.

Conservative values are all well and good, I am conservatively leaning myself, but don't confuse it with blind nostalgia for traditionalism, it is not a mark of being cultured and it is not intrinsically superior to trash SJW ideology which has equally misguided motives.


Was also intended to reply to


Marriage can be a useful legal structure, can benefit you with ownership and taxes. I myself don't really see anything in the social side either though.


>I just don't give a fuarrrk
Right, which is what I was criticizing when I said nihilism and postmodern thought, not that postmodernism is a time but a philosophy, obviously. I know how to reference my time period correctly.

It's not nostalgia in regards to family history and patriarchal women but more of a grounding in structure and something to take pride in, which I find attractive.

You seem to imply that women who'd align themselves with conservative thought are stupid; Heh.

These newly founded thoughts are certainly a reaction, and rightly so. May I be edgelord supreme.

I look at marriage in a symbolic way, that's all. If it is/was legally complicated, I wouldn't feel compelled to take part in it in that way but nonetheless I'd propose and such.


I have respect for tradition to some extent, but we shouldn't keep living in the past.

The whole sex roles thing is just silly. We're all individuals, and everyone should be who they want to be, instead of being forced into a role depending on whether they have a dick or a vagina.

Respect for family name and lineage also seems silly. Families cross all the time; that's how we don't go extinct as a species. Also, last names can be a real burden: a friend of mine is 7/8 parts Dutch, and 1/8th Indian. Too bad for him though, he has the Indian family name just because the male line up to him carried it, which always gets him comments and has actively hindered him getting a job. There are no merits to it, because don't think Indians will see him as Indian.

I think you've read a little too much nationalist propaganda recently, and you'd do well waking up from these delusions.


While I certainly won't stop someone for following tradition, I don't follow too many myself, nor do I plan on following many. The one thing I'm not a fan of is the often used expression, "X is how we've always done it." Any mutation of that really. It isn't really a reason to keep doing something, is it? That seems to be most people's defense for a lot of tradition, which I suppose is why it's tradition.


"fuarrrk where you're from, fuarrrk where you're going, it's all about where you're at"

I think the ultimate issue with people today isn't that sex is freely available, drug legalization, or even internet addiction. The root of human problems, at least in the west today, is that people can't deny pleasure. They can't struggle to get more rewarding pleasures, these seek empty pleasure. Look at the person flipping through IFunny or watching Youtube for hours. These people have always existed, weak humans who can't overcome their problems.

Nietzsche asked us to ask "Today - Is greatness possible?" It seems the time of the last man is here, where nihilism is our religion, tradition won't fix soykaf because tradition is just as bad. I can't provide you with a solution because it's far out of the scope of just my intelligence, but I think as a society we need to start fixing our institutions, education needs to head in a different direction to appeal to students who want fulfillment.

We live in a society that acts like we're fine with empty pleasure, because our institutions, jobs, etc don't fulfill us. It's why people become NEETs, it's easier and more pleasurable to just leave society than it is to learn how to play the game.

I'm hoping I'm making some sense, I've been thinking about it lately, but this is my first time articulating these thoughts.


File: 1492530594238.png (99.39 KB, 200x200, poop-munching grin.png)

>"comes from the fact that I was raised primarily by women"
>i had a lotta moms

>"having your partner take care of most house work"

>therefore i want my girlfriend to be my mom

>"was a horrible mistake on my mothers part"

>my mom fuarrrked me up instilling weird ideas in me

>"something I'd aim to instill in my children"

>so i want to have kids and mess with them too


File: 1492532975291.png (719.77 KB, 113x200, tips server.jpg)

>Also, having your partner take care of most house work leaves that worry out of your mind so such isn't a focus at all, leaving work and hopefully intellectual (programming, math, reading, etc) musings abound
Go hire a maid if you just want a housekeeper so that you have more free time.

>One tradition I think that's really missing from the modern family is a sense of deep respect for your family name and lineage. Your name nowadays is random and you have no respectable history

Why should someone be given respect for things that they didn't accomplish themselves and had no part in?



>accepts that his views are reactionary and have not had time to mature

>still carries an air of pomposity in his words

It seems like you are experiencing a sense of contrarian superiority because of your liberal surroundings/upbringing. I look forward to your conservative ideas developing beyond tired cliches designed to trigger liberals and advertise your new found identity.

Learn to read dummy, no implication was made on the intelligence of conservative women. A conservative girl has different requirements and expectations of a partner in comparison to a liberal girl, requirements that are inherently tied in to to their cultural upbringing.

On a more constructive note, tradition for the sake of tradition is assured loss of the values that are sought to be preserved and the sense of grounding that goes along with them. The answer lies not in juvenile chauvinism, but in establishing normative precepts that inform your moral choices and what you pass on to your children. Establishing values beyond traditionalist cliches is the real challenge for a young conservative and a lifelong pursuit at that. If you haven't already started, read as many works on philosophy and ethics as possible to inform the underlying values that form the real foundation and grounding in a personal belief system. Discussing which works to read is beyond the scope of this reply, but there should be infographics/starting guides floating around should you wish to search for them.

If conservativism is simply wanting to live a circa-1950's Mad Men lifestyle without any honest introspection then disregard the above.


I don't believe in blindly adhering to tradition, but I also don't believe in disregarding it. There is a solid middle ground to be found in modernizing tradition.
>gender roles
Well, yeah, there's a reason for these. It's somehow controversial to say so, but the minds of men and women are optimized for different tasks. This was necessary throughout time in order to ensure that a) there was always someone providing, and b) there was always someone nurturing. In modern times this is no longer strictly necessary, but there are still consequences for disregarding it. Masculinity and femininity are polar opposites. They compliment each other and provide structure within relationships and families. When you have spouses butting heads (trying to share the masculine role), you end up splitting off into two directions, which does not make for a cohesive family. When you have spouses waiting for the other to lead (trying to share the feminine role), you end up going absolutely nowhere. Women like leaders, and men like to be supported in their leading. Many people will deny this, but it's hard to deny the evolutionary cause.
This also has its basis in fact. Studies[1] have demonstrated that a greater number of sexual partners is associated with lower marital satisfaction. Sex establishes a bond, and there's no way to continually form and break bonds without losing a bit of the magic along the way. There's also the obvious: someone who enjoys having many sexual partners will be "giving something up" upon marrying, leading to worries of infidelity and dissatisfaction. And, of course, when a man knows his partner has had others before him, he may worry about performance, size, etc.
It's not so easy to back this one up with anything concrete. I guess this is more of an aesthetic thing than a rational one: it feels good to be proud of one's family, or to be proud of one's country/heritage. There's a sense of pride involved, and a person who is receptive to this feeling will likely feel some pressure to contribute to this "legacy." This is a very good thing, when you consider the number of people who are content to drift along, as >>927 said.
This is a trickier one. Abrahamic religions come with a host of difficulties (although I do feel very positively about the effect of Christianity on the west, especially protestant belief). These scriptures are in many ways outdated, and it can be difficult to apply their rulings to modern life, especially when interpretation is so divided (particularly among protestant/liberal sects of Christianity--and liberal Judaism is probably worse). This is where modernization comes into play. For me, the answer has been Christian Deism. Many others have found comfort in "modern spirituality," which is not my cup of tea, but involvement in spirituality is really all that matters; the particulars are not so important.

Tradition on its own carries a great deal of value. Gender roles, patriarchy, religion, marriage etc. are all just expressions of how humans have been able to operate best over the years. And yes, "this is how it's always been done" does not make for a very compelling argument by itself. But take some time to think about why these things have been done this way for so long and you may just find yourself falling into agreement.

[1] It seems the source for this is down. There are lots of secondary sources around, though.


You've got it all wrong. It's just a knee-jerk reaction to edgelords.


I'm not OP but I think you've given him some very good advice on how to become a better conservative.

In particular you've highlighted the main difference between the ideological left and the ideological right conservatism is about a set of deeply held absolute values expressed through traditions, this is a contrast to the modern political left which believes that morals are relative.

It sounds lame but I rediscovered the value of tradition when I started going to church again, I'm not a religious person by any means but I understand the value of religion in a society. After reading your last post it sounds like you've discovered the same thing. A few months ago I also started volunteering a few times a week, there's a real joy in civic duty and in helping those less fortunate than yourself, and I think it'll help your values mature if you spend a little bit of time volunteering.

Personally I don't share your views on sex, because I enjoy fuarrrking bitches and I've got a big ol' dick, there's a point where I wouldn't want to screw with a girl because she's been around too much though, this probably makes me a hypocrite but women are my favorite vice. But if that's what you believe there's plenty of women out there who would be happy to oblige you; growing up I got to spend some time with some adorable Christian girls who would only give it up if you put a ring on their finger.


I have a deep and abiding respect for tradition, always since I was a wee lad, but I recognize it's only useful if you were brought up a certain way and not damaged like you are with an absent father role. It's normal for people to become more conservative as they grow older. There is such a thing as a traditional conservative instinct as opposed to a liberal progressive instinct, and I believe maybe nature chose you to be part of the old guard. Somebody has to be the anchor that others rebel against. If you really aspire to establish yourself as an elitist, tradition may be for you. I wouldn't get married if I were you though unless you were really able to overcompensate because you probably will not be a great father. If you do marry, make sure you're actually best friends with your wife and not just lusty lovers. Pragmatically speaking traditional marriage is a container of value and the family is a vital social unit. Be careful though OP or you might just start praying soon and attending church. These are not popular ideas, but I like to say it how I see it even as a relativist.


>There is an evolutionary instinct for men to favour women without prior sexual partners
Why would there be? That sounds something you made up without actually thinking it through.


Not him, but birth control is a recent invention. The non-virgin woman of yore could be in the early stages of pregnancy, and a man would not want to risk expending his energy on the seed of others. This is part of why sexual purity came to be valued.


I appreciate tradition as a way of bringing people together, but not when it is used to unjustly restrict people.

An example of the positive: the UK is a monarchy.
It has been for some time. We have a lot of quirky traditions relating to that. These traditions, shared across an entire country, unify people in a sense of "britishness". It helps create a sense of national identity and pride, whilst not being restrictive or discriminatory.

An example of the negative: the rampant sexism in STEM fields.
Traditionally, intellectual pursuits have been a man's job. Today this results in a cultural bias meaning many girls are simply raised to not think of going into those fields (boys are given lego, girls are given dolls, etc). It also results in men demeaning women in those fields not because of anything they have said or done, but because they are a woman. Furthermore, it leads to discrimination against men to try to fix this problem at too high a level: there are grants and funding exclusively for women in STEM, but none exclusively for men; whereas the real way to solve the problem is to prevent the bias parents and peers instil in children in the first place!

>One tradition I think that's really missing from the modern family is a sense of deep respect for your family name and lineage. Your name nowadays is random and you have no respectable history.
Peasant have never had respect for family history. That is something for the nobles and aristocrats. I feel like this modern trend of respecting family history (and yes, it is definitely a modern trend in my opinion) is a knee-jerk reaction against increasingly rapid social change. Things are changing technologically and socially very rapidly, so we cling on to the old, and become more conservative, in order to feel more grounded.

>>896 has a good point. Unnecessary respect for lineage has only one logical conclusion, which has been repeated many times through history: "Oh, you're from XXX family? Sorry, we don't want your kind here."
Judging people based on their ancestors has both good and bad points. More bad than good, I feel; as the expectation becomes that people do have a respectable family history, and those who don't must be hiding something.

I recently came across the idea of a "tech sabbath": setting aside one time a week to be free of technology from one sunset to another, in order to help break this so-common internet and entertainment addiction. I'm thinking of giving it a try soon.


>I seem to have fondness towards the idea of the man being the “breadwinner”, while the woman takes care of the house

You're allowed to have a fondness of it. Personally, I have a fondness of it too. I don't plan on starting a family with a woman who also has a career. Events from my childhood have fostered this desire to start a family with a stay at home mom in me; however, I think it would be wrong to try to force a woman not to have a career, or tell a young girl she can't have a career or go to college, because she is to become a stay at home mom. I believe her future is hers to decide, and whether or not she'd like to perpetuate the traditional role of housewife is solely her decision.

>I have quite a deep gross feeling towards those who've had a multitude of sexual partners, and especially encounters outside of a relationship as this seems to indicate a purely physical relationship to sex, which I oppose.

For me, it's a lot less of a 'gross' feeling, and more of me just not respecting them as mature. I don't know, maybe that makes me a dick, but how I feel on this stems from my belief that sex is fairly important and spiritual, and I feel an act *I* respect is disrespected when peers just fuarrrk willy nilly.

>a sense of deep respect for your family name and lineage.

My family lineage is a boat and chains and my family name is the name of the man who decided to purchase my great grandmother's father. Any history or lineage we had beyond that is lost to the annals of time.

Funny enough though, my father since I was young used our family name as a thing to inspire me and my brothers and sisters; it's become something we all strongly identify with. And in light of this I challenge if where the name came from is anywhere near as important as what it means to us now.

>"You are a <name>, that means you compete in everything you do. That means you compete in academics, atheletics, and life, until you achieve. Because that's what <names> do, they compete, and they achieve."

I to this day try my best to live up to these silly propaganda-ish things because it feels like it gives me strength. I plan to repeat the same sentiment to any kids I might have of my own one day.


This theory completely ignores that most pre-civilization societies practised some form of group marriage...


Yes, and there was also a time when men would rape women and move onto the next without worrying about where their seed ended up. These instincts develop over time. We ended up embracing monogamy, and that should say enough.


I doubt that time ever existed.

Preferring purity is not an instinct, it's purely cultural. Culture changes much more rapidly than instincts. In our current age there's simply no reason to prefer """pure""" women to others.


>I doubt that time ever existed.
Ancient Greek and Roman military would rape women as a spoil of war, sometimes taking the women with them, but often leaving them. And it certainly wouldn't surprise me if indiscriminate rape occurred pre-civilization, given the lack of social penalty. Where there are urges, there are people acting on them.
>In our current age there's simply no reason to prefer """pure""" women to others.
Check the sex/promiscuity portion of >>939 . Maybe these aren't good enough reasons for you personally, but to say that there is "simply no reason" is a bit dishonest.


Edgelord Pompous Supreme OP here.

Blindly following anything, except perhaps in a first leap of faith, is never good. Tradition isn't exempt from that. Tradition is adhering to past principles and such based partly on the fact that they've been around for so long and have worked well. I think that's a pretty good basis to start our/my discovery of tradition.

>The root of human problems, at least in the west today, is that people can't deny pleasure.
Well, perhaps it's something even deeper than that. I haven't read Nietzsche but I remember Jordan Peterson describing his idea that the Christianity dogma was oppressive and because it held such a high ideal to truth, it eventually collapsed under itself, "God is dead". Nietzsche feared that either Nihilism or Authoritarian ideals would take place in compensation.

I hypothesize, because I certainly don't understand this in depth, that the fundamental human problem we face is the battle between nihilism and having a higher meaning which makes suffering bearable.

My mother and especially my grandmother certainly inspire my desire to have a loved one be in a traditional role, but I'd like to believe this out of respect.

>my mom fuarrrked me up instilling weird ideas in me

No, my mother made a mistake being a single mother, and that is all.

>Why should someone be given respect for things that they didn't accomplish themselves and had no part in?
I don't believe that someone should respect another simply for their name, that's not what I meant. I meant that a family member should have respect and be proud of their family history if their lineage has been meaningful and should aspire to continue the line of inspiring individuals and acts. It's simply another grounding which I think gives more meaning to your life.

> contrarian superiority
Another word to add to my title, much appreciated.

>read as many works on philosophy and ethics

I am starting on this front by reading Dostoevsky's works, right now with Crime and Punishment.

>If conservativism is simply wanting to live a circa-1950's Mad Men lifestyle without any honest introspection then disregard the above.

That's not the point. I'm not here to trigger god damn liberals either.

>Today this results in a cultural bias meaning many girls are simply raised to not think of going into those fields (boys are given lego, girls are given dolls, etc).
Why is this a problem? Men are masculine and rather play with legos, girls are feminine and act this out in playing with dolls. I remember there being a study showing women on average do better in school than man and have a higher aptitude for math but still end up choosing non-STEM related fields.


We were talking about evolutionary instincts, not your insecurities.



>starting with dostoevsky

Kids these days lol


Those insecurities are fairly universal, and I wrote more than just that. If you'd rather cherry-pick than discuss, just say so and I'll stop listening.


The very facade of some traditions is important. There has never been a time without weak men and unfaithful women, but believing in better than what we have makes us strive for better in many instances.

An advantage of traditions is the heuristic that they tend to be deserved; dietary traditions are a good example of this. I will not spend years of my life listening to new diet science and drinking soylent or avoiding eggs or other nonsense; I will eat what my ancestors ate.

The saying is that some are inclined towards tradition and others are inclined towards disregard tradition. Both groups have obvious uses: a traditionalist will provide a bedrock society that can probably survive ill effects of disregarding tradition; those disregarding tradition can advance society and create new traditions. Both groups can also be harmful, by restricting innovation or damning many to die preventable deaths. I by no means mean to imply that traditionalists are incapable of improving and innovating nor that those disregarding tradition are necessarily malicious or misled.

What many don't seem to realize is that, rather than a church or religion, many cling to whatever groups of scientists say as fact. It's very useful for those in power to have an organization that generates truths that one can be ridiculed or beaten for not believing. We see this most strongly with climate change propaganda.

I believe I may in between the traditionalists and not. I'm not religious, but I strive to see the value in history and see many of these people disregarding tradition as misled people purposefully attempting to destroy society. I only mean that latter bit in the extreme cases, such as convincing people that sex (gender doesn't exist) can be changed and so butchering otherwise good people in their early age, leading to suicides and unhappiness.

As for the roles of men and women, I merely point to history and what others have written here of it. I don't currently have much to add.

It's been pointed out that peasants tended to not fawn over lineage; this may very well be true in a general case; I've not researched this. What I'll write is that the habits of nobles tend to become the habits of normal individuals over time, due to technological advancements. Many of us are able to live in luxury compared to just one hundred years ago.

As for sexual relations, the disease and bonding arguments are both very good and I don't currently have much to add with this, either.

In closing, I find tradition to be important. I believe technologies such as computers offer a good way to innovate society without necessarily treading on traditions. People should attempt to leave the world in a state they want, but it's obvious that very few can ever achieve this. An important means to arrive at proper goals is rational thinking, something sorely lacking in politics today.

So, simply consider what you're doing before you beat your wife, have irreversible surgery to look like the opposite sex, or upload your mind to the Googlebookrosoft botnet. If you're not old enough to consider these things before doing them, you just might be.

In short, avoid irreversible actions until you know you truly desire them enough.


Traditionalism is very different from fedora tipping white knights, those usually are the ones that will say things like "I'll be the one on the kitchen"

Such is the new generation of cool sadboys that are so modern they even see humanism as fluid.


Tradition is a spook IMO.


Traditions are nothing but a weak substitute for time perception and actual critical thinking.
A functioning person does not need any of these.

Religious people and conservatives are degenerate scum that hold absolutely no merit, even living un-civilzed in the woods is a preferable alternative than among a society that favors those over critical thinking.
All progress was achived by questioning and rejecting the status quo, non of the actual positive aspects were done by any traditions.

I have seen too often how traditions and religion and nationality have brought up the worst, all their positive examples are nothing but farces they use to justify their narrow minded ignorance and their useless existence with which they drag down others too because they cannot bare the thought that someone else can not be degenerate scum.


>Traditionalism is very different from fedora tipping white knights
True, but it's still a term they toss about while having little concept of what it means. They feel small and insignificant and assume it must be because society turned against men like them during the 20th century, and long for some good ol' days that never existed. Those whiners would be even worse off in the 1950s or the middle ages or whatever era they personally idealize on an individual basis.

>those usually are the ones that will say things like "I'll be the one on the kitchen"

Totally opposite of what people mean by "fedoras". The term refers generally to MRAs and young men inspired by certain politicians who promise to give the world back to them (though they would have been losers no matter what decade they were born in).


That, it is. People should be the best they can be, regardless of whether it agrees or disagrees with what sandpeople wrote down two thousand years ago.