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 -
Even without legal sanction calling oneself a woman was merely (and literally) a box ticking exercise. Despite living in the relatively unpozzed east, LGBT being a woke thing means the western dating apps are filled with self identified women. My lesbian friend showed me her filters and her preference matches, and she still gets flooded with dicks on the apps. Its all feminine penis stuff for the pozzed, and shameless 'you lesbos just need a REAL dick to know your place and this app lets me superlike you without review.' I understand the Chinese gay app Blued is just pure degeneracy and transphobia, and all lesbian apps whether western or eastern have been infested.
Singapore has a unique case where identity and sex are actually distinct: you can freely change your gender at will on official documents, but sex is based only on birth certificates. Since there are no legal protections for gender save for medical requirements, self declaration has no practical value here. Penises are conscripted regardless of presentation, and declaring oneself trans gets you out of conscription only because it is classified as a mental illness. Being homosexual used to be an excuse to get out of conscription too, but the army realized that actual gays will be the ones bullied in the army so they did not pose a threat to the integrity of a unit.
In this thread: “I can’t believe systems accept government ID!”
Also in this thread: “I can’t believe systems accept self-ID!”
Obtaining legal sanction—as Tickle apparently did—is a strictly higher bar than checking a box on the app.
Giggle’s method is something like an insurance company which ignores marriage certificates in favor of requiring a hand photo with your ring. Maybe they should be allowed to do so, but it’s hard to be surprised that the government definitions favor government-issued documents.
Self identification and Government identification are both shams.
Identity is an intersubjective concept negotiated with the people you interact with on a case-by-case basis.
Indeed, the Giggle women do not believe Tickle to be one of them and Tickle has no power to change this. All Tickle can do is forbid them from acting according to their conscience by force of arms using the State.
It is perfectly fine to reject fiat coming either from an individual or from a government, and decide yourself how you choose to identify people. And I'll go as far as to say it's a natural right, which we either call "freedom of conscience", "freedom of speech" or "freedom of association" depending on how it manifests. A right that indeed is routinely trampled by Civil Rights law everywhere and its consequences.
More options
Context Copy link
How is checking a box on a form for a new government ID a higher bar to clear than checking a box on an app?
What's so hard to understand about "'man' and 'woman' are words describing material reality, and not someone internal sense of identity, and that's the definition the government should be using when applying their laws"?
Hey, I didn’t say a high bar.
In Victoria, it appears to require a “statutory declaration” plus a “supporting statement.” The latter means you need to convince at least one person you’re applying in good faith. There’s also a cooldown period, $140 fee, specific requirements for prisoners, and you have to return the previous document. That’s a good bit more commitment than downloading a new app.
It also attaches something resembling legal liability. Unlikely that you’d fall afoul of that, but it’s more than an app checkbox will do.
Oh, I think arguing against the government criteria is fine and coherent. I was thinking of IGI’s response blaming the very concept of government records. It was funny to see that alongside the more common, exact opposite concern. The duality of, uh, man!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link