site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 13, 2024

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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I have seen plenty of instances of this happening with badminton and to a lesser degree frisbee, and that's probably not a modern aberration.

The most obvious explanation is that, due to widely discussed gender differences in attitudes to open competition, sports that are essentially about putting a number on your relative skill level - counting goals etc. - are the ones that are less popular with women. Badminton certainly stands apart from sports like football in that play without explicit scoring is quite normalised (and implicit scoring like subtle social censure for those who disproportionately interrupt the flow of play is more in lines with covert competition preferences).

In that sense, I think "sports" is a misleading descriptor for what it is that there is a gendered difference in preferences for; and at least some of the cognitive dissonance surrounding this problem domain must be attributed to the core demographic of male sports players. Reality looks something like men play certain sports because they have a biological need to quantify their exact rank relative to other men, and women don't because that's not how they organise their status hierarchy and have nothing to gain from trying to insert themselves directly into the men's ranking. The social fiction instead says that men play those sports because something to do with sportsmanship, camraderie and cultivating the beauty and strength the human body is capable of, while women are turned away because men gatekeep these universally good things from them. If you rewrite the last fragment to say something that amounts to "out of their own lack of interest in these things, because there is actually no sexist gatekeeping", you have to conclude that women are moral mutants who do not care for sportsmanship, camraderie, cultivation and beauty, but this is only because you left the other half of the lie unchallenged.