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 -
Although I agree with several commenters below that I think the cops dramatically overreacted to a perceived threat which was, in the scheme of things, rather minor, and won't be losing any sleep if they're indicted for murder, I will say one thing in criticism of Massey: even if intended in jest, saying something like "I rebuke you in the name of Jesus Christ" while holding a pot of scalding water is a very foolish thing to say to two police officers who know essentially nothing about you.
Foolish in the sense that a motorcyclist who doesn't anticipate a car cutting him off is foolish, sure.
Foolish in the sense that anyone who doesn't treat an American cop with kid gloves on the possibility that they are a power-tripping halfwit with a nasty temper on a hair trigger is taking their lives in their hands, because the system seems incapable of weeding these people out.
If anyone ever finds themselves in a confrontation with cops, the best advice is: move as little as possible, speak when spoken to, use small words. Treat them like an easily spooked animal.
Well, no. If I was walking down the street and a weird guy approached me and said "I rebuke you in the name of Jesus Christ", that absolutely would be a red flag to me, and I would make moves to get away from him as soon as possible. It's a weird thing to say which absolutely could sound like a prelude to violence if you don't know the speaker. The difference in this case is that the cops were holding all the cards: they're armed, she's in a nightie; they're big and beefy, she's a tiny woman.
This is very sensible advice in the US. I would greatly prefer if following this advice was unnecessary (and am very grateful to live in a country in which it is not), but that's the way it goes.
... and that in the scenario of you walking down the street, it's very unlikely that the person rebuking you had a pot of boiling water.
What does “rebuking” mean here?
Same thing it meant above.
I guess we just disagree. I don’t read “rebuking” as a threat, and certainly not one that warrants pointing a loaded gun at somebody.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Oh yeah, absolutely. That person did a foolish thing by acting weird to you on the assumption that you would not flip out and shoot him dead. Massey did something similarly foolish - she said something weird (though not as weird as it would be if said to a random stranger unprompted) to the cops on the assumption that they would not murder her for it. And she paid for that assumption with her life. I think that's similar to not riding defensively - you may be in the right, but it'll be cold comfort to your family when they chisel 'had the right of way' on your gravestone.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you again. Saying something sufficiently ambiguous that it could reasonably be interpreted as a veiled threat or a prelude to immediate violence is an unforced error, which cannot be chalked up to mere carelessness (failing to drive defensively when not doing so has resulted in perfectly safe outcomes 99% of the time) or muscle memory (Daniel Shaver reflexively moving to pull up his trousers at exactly the wrong moment). The police officers shouldn't have shot Massey and I won't lose any sleep if they're indicted or go to prison for a long stretch, but I'm not going to pretend that Massey's bizarre decision to make a weird and ambiguous comment like that wasn't a contributing factor to her getting shot, albeit a minor one.
In this case, it is the ramblings of a crazy woman, and it looks like the cops knew this. On balance, that probably makes the shooting non-criminal (a crazy person with a potentially deadly object making threatening noises is a legitimate threat) but getting to this point was culpably bad policing.
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, in context it clearly wasn't either of those things, and I don't think it was reasonable to interpret it as such. It was a dumb joke about holy water or something. It's not like she said "I've got a suicide vest under my dressing gown haha"
This might just be one of those 'agree to disagree' things.
Telling stupid mildly offensive jokes has perfectly safe outcomes 99% of the time
Yeah I think so.
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
Interestingly to me (and you may already know what I'm about to thumb type) that phrase "I rebuke you in the name of Jesus" is at least a decades-old set phrase (almost a spell) among evangelical-types (among whom one of these officers may have counted himself) and is presumably the most strict condemnation of evil, and ostensibly has the power to stop demons, etc. in their proverbial tracks. It always seemed odd to me to have such faith in the phrase while simultaneously knowing of the existence of historical martyrs who died for the faith, to whom this phrase would have also presumably been readily available in whatever equivalent language. My answer was that maybe it's more of a spiritual invocation.
Actually this was the first time I'd ever heard the phrase used before.
I grew up in the deep South. My grandmother attended a Nazarene church where they spoke in tongues.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If I were a religious man, I might suggest that responding to such an utterance with, "I'll shoot you in the face" and then doing so moments later suggests that she was aware that the man she was dealing with was possessed by demons. I am not a religious man though, so I think these are just two violent people meeting the ends of their free lives.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link