site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   33222 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 10, 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.

23
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My answer was that there are many types of social norms, and the term refers to a specific one

And my answer to that is that doesn't seem to bother us when talking about any other type of social norm, so why should it bother us when talking about social norms imposed on men and women? How is that "getting bent out of shape"?

Not sure what that has to do with misgendering.

I think the term "gender", rather than serving a clarifying role, conflates a whole bunch of things. For example "gender" is also supposed to be some sort of internal feeling, and "misgendering" is some sort of transgression related to that internal feeling. Maybe you don't think that's how the term should be used, but it is.

  1. therefore, we need a term to distinguish them from other classes of norms;

Why? We don't really have so many words for those other classes, why do we need one here?

There are indeed terms for those other classes of norms; they just are not in general discourse because they don't relate to current political issues.

As for whether gender is clarifying, "gender" is not used to refer to a sort of internal feeling. The term for that is "gender identity" (just as there are terms like "ethnic identity" and "sexual identity" )

There are indeed terms for those other classes of norms; they just are not in general discourse because they don't relate to current political issues.

Since the term "gender" doesn't even exist in a lot of languages, I'm a bit skeptical of all these terms for all these other classes existing. Do you have an example in mind?

As for whether gender is clarifying, "gender" is not used to refer to a sort of internal feeling. The term for that is "gender identity" (just as there are terms like "ethnic identity" and "sexual identity" )

Are you sure you're not sane-washing? I mentioned this in another comment, the whole thing reminds me of "neoliberal". Every time I point out that it's vague and conflates a bunch of things, someone shows up to assure me it just means free trade, deregulation, and privatization, all the academic articles using the word in a lot more expansive ways be damned.

Since the term "gender" doesn't even exist in a lot of languages, I'm a bit skeptical of all these terms for all these other classes existing. Do you have an example in mind?

I don't know what you mean when you say that the term "gender" doesn't exist in a lot of languages.

Are you sure you're not sane-washing?

Here is the definition of "gender" from the Open Education Sociology Dictionary:"

(noun) The attitudes, behaviors, norms, and roles that a society or culture associates with an individual’s sex, thus the social differences between female and male; the meanings attached to being feminine or masculine.

Here is that dictionary's definition of "gender identity":

(noun) An individual’s self-perception of their gender.

So, as i said, "'gender' is not used to refer to a sort of internal feeling. The term for that is 'gender identity'"

I don't know what you mean when you say that the term "gender" doesn't exist in a lot of languages.

I don't know how else describe it. There is no equivalent word, and people often resort to simply taking "gender" from English.

So, as i said, "'gender' is not used to refer to a sort of internal feeling. The term for that is 'gender identity'"

How does that prove this is not sane-washing? Are you saying I won't be able to find academic papers using "gender" in a more expansive way?

I don't get why that matters. The societies which use those languages presumably have norms, etc, re each sex. Why does it matter what word is used to describe that phenomenon. There are many loan words from English in other languages. Eg: "genocide."

I have no idea whether there is some idiot in the humanities who has used the term incorrectly. I am saying what the standard definitions are. See also those from the Human Rights Campaign and Planned Parenthood and the WHO and the Mayo Clinic and Merriam-Webster

Looking at the Mayo Clinic page,

Sex assigned at birth and gender identity are two separate things. Sex assigned at birth is typically made based on external genital anatomy. But gender identity is the internal sense of being male, female, or a gender along the spectrum between male and female. People communicate their gender to others through gender expression. This may be done through mannerisms, clothing and hairstyles.

Is this the answer to the "What is a woman?" problem that people have settled on? "A woman is someone who feels like a female." Merriam-Webster goes the same way. But what does it even mean to "feel like a female", if female is just the physical organs and woman is the gender identity? At first glance, this seems like an ugly desperate kludge; it pushed back the point where the incoherence can't be hidden, at the cost of essentially giving up on non-dysphoric trans.

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