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 remember reading Salon back in the early 2010s when it was Dan Savage talking about whatever degenerate sex act he wanted to do, and Marcottes style was at odds with the prevailing writing style: angry, hypocritical, and honestly just plain stupid. The columns were bitch sessions about why everything bad that happened to them was the fault of a direct male actor, or something vague that ultimately traced back to an ever-expanding-yet-contradictory definition of 'patriarchy'. More men being bosses of company was the patriarchy, while ISIS was something exotic to be pitied. I just checked and her column on ISIS brides had 7 mentions of 'christian', with a total of 3 for 'muslim' and 'islam' combined.
Sadly, Salon, just like Slate and Vice, ended up ditching edgelord degeneracy in favor of boring self-congratulatory emotional indulgences. Everything is the fault of White Man Patriarchy, and in response to the shittiness of White Man Patriarchy I shall document my self-loathing as I try out a Fitness Bootcamp/wilderness scream session, where I am upset the first friend I made in 10 years (a gay activist) tried to hit on me.
She and Valenti (thats the 'I am no longer hot', and 'I drink male tears' lady) are probably the worst examples of hypocritical, boring and frankly stupid feminists who don't even have the grace to be readable or amusing in their staid rants. I also find that their self-portraits are so far removed from how they look in reality that the hypocrisy is something more to level at them, but there is ample reason to despise them without having to launch snide remarks on their presentation.
Hey, maybe they'll launch an advice column of ridiculosity. It's not all bad.
Refinery29 is where you would go for deranged women advice columns. Its still pretty decent, but it used to be alot more amusing when trashy hot messes celebrated semiconsensual sex acts instead of modern situationship bemoaning.
edit: sorry not refinery29, which is basic bitch white girl stuff. reductress is the unhinged goblin woman site, which is about babylonbee level funny. that may be insulting the bee, but i find their top tier hits dont quite make up for their normal trash.
Uh, looking at their front page, are you sure it's not satire? Like Slate advice was and is given earnestly, even if a lot of the people writing in to it were/are almost certainly trolls.
oh, yeah reductress is pure satire. as far as ridiculous advice columns go I am not sure if you can thread the needle of 'sincere advice' and 'funny writing'. if anything some of the reductress goblins give better advice for women than the screeds of salon, but admittedly salon is the lowest bar possible.
Slate was, apparently, giving serious advice during its peak hilarity; think an SJW opening a Dear Abby style column which got flooded with trolls trying to see how awful the LGBT person has to be to make him side against them.
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