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 -
Obnoxious, antagonistic, boo outgrouping, and whether meant ironically or not, clearly not the kind of argument we want to see made here. No, not because you used no-no words, but because you used them in a way calculated to be antagonistic.
I'm feeling mellow today, so 1-day ban. You really seem determined to once again see how many infractions you can accumulate before you get permabanned. Frankly, you only haven't been permabanned because as polarizing a figure as you are, a lot of people like you and you rack up a lot of AAQCs along with your shitposting. But the forbearance is not going to last forever. If your goal is just to push us to a final ban so you can go back to DSL or wherever to crow about how you finally "proved" something (whatever it is you think you're trying to prove) then just do your big flaming swan song and get it over with (and please make it worthy). Otherwise, knock this shit off - for someone who talks so much about discipline and being a grizzled NCO who's seen the world and survived some shit and knows what for, you do not get to pretend you can't help yourself or don't know what you're doing.
Is it not though?
I'll grant that my specific choice of words could be interpreted as uncharitable but at the same time I was specifically echoing the rhetoric used by others in this thread an elsewhere. @Hoffmeister25 is correct, and yes, a significant part of my motivation here is to highlight the contradiction.
The sort of rhetoric that you casually dismiss when aimed at the outgroup doesn't feel so good when it's aimed back towards the ingroup does it?
What rhetoric directed at the outgroup are you claiming I failed to mod?
Are you really claiming that I modded you because you attacked "my" ingroup?
Is that really what you're claiming?
Not you in particular so much as the community in general. To be blunt causal dehumanization and eliminationist rhetoric are pretty common here.
Someone here goes on a tear about how much normies suck, republicans are retarded, and the Jews deserved it, they're as liable to get two-dozen up votes and an AAQC because that's the outgroup.
Meanwhile if someone comes out against the race essentialist prog consensus or refers to a queer theater kid by anything other than xer preferred pronouns and suddenly the down votes and the mod-hats come out.
That dichotomy and very clear double standard is what I'm referring to when I talk about "heightening the contradiction."
The Funny thing that I don't really think that Zorba or Trace ever properly grasped is that I sincerely believe in the sub's foundation, and I believe that Rome is worth a man's life.
Yes, I'm aware. But upvotes don't prevent someone from being modded.
I'm disgusted that you would say this and either believe it or try to make me believe you believe it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Honest question: is there an example of anyone using similar no-no words that isn't judged as being "calculated to be antagonistic"?
Use-mention distinction.
If you are referring to other people as faggots or trannies or niggers or whatever, it would be hard to convince me that your intent was anything other than to be insulting and inflammatory.
So when you started the phrase with:
You meant, "Not because you mentioned no-no words, but because you used them," and the following clause was superfluous?
I meant what I wrote. If you have any specific questions, and specifically if you would like to use words like "tranny"and "faggot" and are not sure whether your post would be considered antagonistic, feel free to run it past any of the mods and we will be happy to help you out. Have a good day.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Real world grim and stupid politics snipped, let us move to our favorite fantasy world (for the same thing, but WITH DRAGONS!)
Obssessive political crap is over, obssessive nerd crap starts now!
Can there be such thing?
Of course!
Ed Greenwood's fantasy kitchen sink world is place for everything and everyone, and place of pseudo-Hindu fantasy copycat culture are the Shining Lands.
Var, Durpar and Estagund are lands following the Adama faith, religion based on reincarnation, oneness of all things and strict caste boundaries.
And since Shining Lands are properly free of racism and speciesism (as it should be in these types of fantasy world to prevent them from being even bigger Grand Guignol charnel houses that they are)
yes, when Baldur Gate 4 comes out, you can legitimately and canonically play elf brahmin.
Yes, even DARK ELF BRAHMIN! Here comes Nivray the Rotspider, ready to save the world with his wise and brilliant advice!
edit: yes, the links work now
Finally some Tamil-Brahmin representation that isn't in theoretical mathematics 🙏
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don't know what he means by "elf"(I don't think it makes any sense as a slur for Williams syndrome in context) but it is literally factually true that the gays and trans have extremely low TFR and disproportionately come from not-poor backgrounds.
He’s making a reference to Curtis Yarvin’s “dark elves and hobbits” essay.
In that case it's just false; blue tribe conservatives seem like they have very similar TFR to the core red tribe.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link