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 -
I agree it seems strange, but not nearly as odd as BLM blowing up in countries with basically no black people.
This is not the first case of weird leftist obsessions crossing country boundaries in random ways.
I repeat myself, but yes, seeing BLM in a German context was baffling indeed. We didn't ship them here as slaves, they came on their own!
More options
Context Copy link
In the Australian context, BLM was fascinating because we had copycat BLM marches... about a completely different issue.
BLM in the original context means 'African-American lives matter'. BLM marches in Australia were reinterpreted as 'Aboriginal lives matter', even though Australian Aboriginals have nothing whatsoever to do with African-Americans, and even by analogy, are much closer to Native Americans than they are to African-Americans. The relevant similarities are that some Aboriginals have dark skin, and that there's a perception of disproportionate police violence against them. That's it. It was strange to see the branding appropriated in real-time like that.
More options
Context Copy link
Very hard to call it random when it's so consistent.
Trans hasn’t.
It very much has where I live in Scandinavia. It's barely even registers as a culture war issue. There's just 100% acceptance at every level. We even have smoother and more competent political navigators that have learned from the fires in the US with youth hormones, bathrooms, sports and such, solving those issues, to a degree, before they ever become a media thing.
It's almost embarrassing for the 'against' side, as they simply have no avenue to attack or resist. The imported 'against' narratives from America simply do not apply.
Wait, how’d they resolve those issues?
I dislike how much importance is afforded to that CW battlefront back here in the states. If there’s policy which skips over all the difficult bits, I want to know about it. We could defuse the whole awkward subject.
There's not really a resolution, just more media savviness, conflict aversion and less crazy people.
Everything is more behind the scenes. On the medical end everything is private. It's simply not made into a matter that the state is paying for breast augmentations for trans people. Most anti-trans activists can't even tell you how young the youngest person receiving HRT is.
Schools have genderless bathrooms and many public areas like pools are adding a third changing room.
At the same time there is a central LGBT organization that has a long history of 'fighting' for gay rights. So when there is a storm brewing they are very quick to get into action and quiet everything down if things don't look good for their side.
Basically, there is no big public battle. Everything that needs to happen happens behind the scenes. Everything that makes the rural townsfolk reach for their pitchforks is smothered down. That involves taking some L's, but in the long run it leaves the anti-trans side with nothing to fight against or rally around.
Yes, your(royal) solution to most of these problems was to stop looking, like explicitly not recording crime and rape stats by ethnicity, I wouldn't be surprised if gender affirmative care is not tracked/tabulated/stated up by age on purpose.
I don't know why you're blaming me. I didn't come up with this.
If you want to breach a persons medical privacy you are welcome to be the one to do that here and face the relevant legal consequences.
If you want to rail against genderless bathrooms you will just look like a lunatic. Don't want to share a changing room with a trans person? Well, we are spending money on fixing that problem for you by building a third one so you and your penis or vagina can be safe.
If you want to pick a fight with an organization of trained media handlers who have been arguing the opposition into the dirt for half a century or more, go right ahead.
I'm waiting for a real solution from America, given they brought most of this stuff over. It was American academia that pushed this forward. American media that picked it up. American public that made it into some cultural battleground where the 'against' side does nothing but lose.
I mean, in what world does the collection of crime stats matter in the US? The existence of said information seems to have no bearing at all on policy.
Second person plural ‘you’. The equivalent of ‘vous’ in French. In this case meaning ‘the people of Sweden’. Best used cautiously for exactly this reason, it risks offending.
It’s not royal, incidentally. The royal ‘we’ refers to using an explicitly plural pronoun to refer to a singular person (the king or queen), presumably on the basis that as King they embody all the people of their nation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What do you mean? I'm pretty sure it has, unless you're talking about Asia, Africa or the Middle East.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link