site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   32892 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 5, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yes, I am aware it is a rude gesture (dating back to the time just after Agincourt when the English archers stuck up their two fingers at the French to show they would continue to shoot at them; likely the person who made this gesture wouldn't know this, I'd be surprised if they could name even the war in which Agincourt happened), however that doesn't mean it's any less stupid to do this when there is an alternative reasonable interpretation that makes you look very stupid.

  • -34

You may be missing some uniquely UK context here, being a late arrival to our fair shores and having no familial history of time we last stood alone in WW2.

It's not actually anything to do with Agincourt, it's from much later (possibly related to a cuckold's horns - calling your opponent a cuckold is an old sport - there's a brilliant banner from our civil war on the topic) but no one appears to have a definitive answer to its real origins other than the earliest photograph is from 1901 (it doesn't even appear in cartoons or drawings before). It was used a lot during WW2 as a more mocking form of the V for victory when we were standing alone against invasion, playing on Churchil's use of the symbol, and can be summarized as "Up yours".

It always signals disrepect, defiance (typically of authority) and a general "fuck off". It's not a number or related to archery, and it seems a bit... uncharitable to assume others are stupid here especially if you yourself are running off an urban legend yourself. The meaning is clear.

Interesting. I did not know the Agincourt origins were an urban legend. You learn stuff every day. I freely admit that I was misinformed and thank you for helping me improve my model of the world.

It always signals disrepect

Now this is a bit too strong a statement. For one the two fingers sign also symbolizes bunny ears so it doesn't always mean disrespect. I have fond memories of pranking friends with think back in my carefree youthful days.

It's not a number

This I also disagree with. Holding the index and middle finger up is the British sign language method of indicating two.

Churchill

Extremely overrated Prime Minister of the UK. I have no idea why he commonly comes near the top of the UK's list of PMs. Sure he got the country through WWII but there was nothing exceptional about him personally that led to this. He provided competent governance in difficult times and little more (see what happened the second time he became PM). It was the times he lived through that made him notable rather than the reverse. Had WWII not happened he'd be almost as forgettable as Henry Campbell-Bannerman. Even the Marquess of Salisbury was a tier above Churchill.

For one the two fingers sign also symbolizes bunny ears so it doesn't always mean disrespect. I have fond memories of pranking friends with think back in my carefree youthful days.

Bunny ears (at least in the UK) would be with a pronated hand position i.e. palm facing away. The gesture of disrespect is with the palm facing inwards.

This I also disagree with. Holding the index and middle finger up is the British sign language method of indicating two.

I've never seen someone indicate two with the palm facing inwards.

I (American) remember ordering two beers at an English pub, holding up two fngers, palm-inward, and being told by the bartender something to the effect of "Mate, never do that. Palm facing me."

I've never seen someone indicate two with the palm facing inwards.

That's literally the sign for two in BSL, see the linked page which has a photo of a person making the sign.

And I'm saying I've never seen that gesture used that way. And I've seen plenty of people using two fingers to indicate two.

I don't know BSL and if that's the official sign then that's the official sign, I guess. Although I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the person responsible for that website just googled "person displaying two fingers" and used the first image that came up.

They've got photos for all the BSL symbols in the same artistic style so it's not just random internet photos but rather images specifically made for the page. For instance here's the page for cat: https://www.british-sign.co.uk/british-sign-language/how-to-sign/cat/

I think it's pretty clear two fingers palm inward is indeed the BSL sign for the number 2.

however that doesn't mean it's any less stupid to do this when there is an alternative reasonable interpretation that makes you look very stupid.

Your alternative interpretation is not, in fact, reasonable. Neither the recorder nor his audience nor you nor I are at all confused about the meaning of the gesture. Pretending otherwise is just another example of waging the culture war.

Wow, you're really smart, mister.

This adds nothing. Don't do this.

@BurdensomeCount's comment can be boiled down to "please allow me an additional paragraph to sneer at the proles." What better response is there than to sneer back? It's certainly not a ban-worthy comment but is genuinely deserving of some mockery. I considered writing up a sincere rebuttal (honestly, the alternative reasonable interpretation probably makes it a better rude gesture) before deciding that this conversation probably is not the place for sincerity.

Comment length can be an okay proxy for comment quality but they are not the same thing, and my comment was less snide and spiteful than the one I was responding to.

Yah well he might be banned for his sneering, so do you want the same treatment that he gets?

He won't be banned for the comment I responded to nor should he be, and my response to that comment was still less banworthy. Failing a ban, social censure is the next best response.

He won't be banned for the comment I responded to

Disagree

nor should he be

Disagree

my response to that comment was still less banworthy.

Agree

Failing a ban, social censure is the next best response.

Agree, which is why I'm saying it was bad.

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