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 am generally in favour of race-blind casting. I'd prefer characters that are genetically related to look related, as following the plot can get a little confusing when for example, three full-blooded sisters are portrayed by one white, one black and one asian actress, but it's no big deal. I dislike racial hyper-awareness around casting, eg the backlash against Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra.
Regarding Foundation, I accepted all the characters being turned into women - it's Current Year, whatever. But what I strongly disliked was pacifists being turned into violent killers.
Salvor "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" Hardin, skilled diplomat, is turned into a gun-toting warrior woman who shoots first and asks questions never. Her father recites the famous line instead, and is belittled for his pacifism.
Eto Demerzel, wyrmtounge-esque political manipulator, is now a neck-snapping killer fembot. Not all the robots in Foundation series are bound by "A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm" - but Eto Demerzel sure was! (Yes yes, zeroth law, but that doesn't get a mention).
I realise the series as a whole was an almost entirely unrelated to Foundation aside from some character and place names, but taking the names of two devout pacifists and sticking them on a warmonger and an assassin droid was frankly offensive. It seems part of a wider trend of advocating violence for solving problems, and pooh-poohing diplomatic solutions.
I wish I had more than one upvote to give. I went from "trying to avoid spoilers for the new plot padding before I watch" to "refusing to watch after hearing spoilers about Raych and not caring to learn more" so abruptly that I never even got the chance to find out they'd screwed with Demerzel and Hardin's principles so badly. Personally I'm not a pacifist, I think the obvious "competent people employ violence sooner" retort is obvious, but that doesn't mean I want characters I disagree with to be remolded in my image.
(random aside: I can't seem to find who actually came up with that retort. It's usually attributed to Jerry Pournelle, in various wordings, but he only vaguely remembered swiping it hmiself, possibly from H. Beam Piper, in the quite different form of "Yes, it is, because by then it's too late.")
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link