site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   35891 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 3, 2022

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.

24
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I feel like on dating apps there's a certain Strawmanization of political spectrum where 'Right = Super fascist' and 'Moderate/Apolitical/whatever = Hiding Super Fascist'.

Two analogies:

  1. My father always talked about interviewing guys for jobs, and he'd ask questions like "We start early on work days, do you think you can make it on time?" And some guys would respond "Eh, you know, normally, but sometimes I sleep in." My father's take on it was, not only was this a guy who might show up late (almost everyone shows up at 6:10 instead of 6:00 some days), he didn't even know the right answer to the question! He thought it was acceptable to say he was going to sleep in; at least a guy who lied and said he'd be there every day at 6:00 knew that he was supposed to show up on time.

  2. Dan Savage has talked in his advice column about how in high school it can seem like all the gay kids are flaming camp queens, because those are the only kids that are out in high school, because they have to be out. Their closet is made of glass, their mannerisms would give them away in a heartbeat if they tried to stay closeted. The "normal" masculine straight passing gay men can safely stay closeted at that point in their lives, but after graduation when things are safer come out.

So if listing your politics as "Right Wing" or even "Moderate" is the objectively wrong answer in online dating, then doing so means you probably fall under either 1) or 2). Either you don't even know the socially correct answer, so you're a maladroit chump, that's not an attractive look; or you're so right wing that you can't possibly stay in the closet about it, it would be too obvious, which regardless of your politics isn't a good look, and quite likely maps onto something like "superfascist" anyway.

Note that this does not require that the women making the judgment "actually" care about a man having right-wing politics, only that they know that right-wing politics are a socially unacceptable answer in an online dating context. Everything follows from that.

I think you're father is wrong in that he is selecting for men with a propensity to lie. Or just be super conformist.

"Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue." We all have vices, if we stop paying tribute that means we aren't even acknowledging virtue's sovereignty anymore.

Someone who answers that he always comes to work on time probably isn't lying, so much as setting a goal that he almost certainly won't meet. Consider a different scenario: if I ask a room full of fat people "Are you going to lose weight this year?"; some say "Yes, I'm definitely going to lose the weight, this is the diet/exercise plan that's going to do it" some say "Yes, I want to, so I will" and some say "Nope, I'm just fat, this is who I am." Probably not that many will really lose weight. But more people in group 1 will lose weight than in group 2, and nobody in group 3 will lose weight. They aren't even trying to be better.

If you're the type who is "honest" about being a shitty employee, that doesn't really indicate you're a good honest employee, it means you're definitely a shitty employee and nothing will fix you, because even if I sit over your shoulder and watch you you're still going to be a shitty employee and just say something like "Hey, I'm just being honest, I'm not gonna hide it, man."

I haven't been late in four years.

You're an extraordinary man, then.

you're so right wing that you can't possibly stay in the closet about it, it would be too obvious, which regardless of your politics isn't a good look, and quite likely maps onto something like "superfascist" anyway.

Agreed the more I think about it. Having enough social awareness to just tick 'Left' on the politics box and 'hide your power level' is a key stumbling block, and also confirms that you're less likely to be a complete pastiche of a raving QAnon-type or whatever overtly, regardless of what your true beliefs are.

This is definitely not the first time I've heard the "Republican is the new gay" theory, and I'm sure it won't be the last, either. The analogy works well, and comes with a extra-large side of layered irony.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats