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 -
"It's the fact that we don't approach it with a clear and widespread understanding that it is in fact transhumanist to do."
Who's this "we" here? I assume you're talking about the United States, a country of crypto grifters, tradthot inflooencers, transgender mixed martial artists, strip club owners, obese Alex Jones fans, feminists horrified by male sexuality, white nationalists with Asian wives, bible thumpers predicting the return of Jesus that never happens and elderly Jews still mad they got blackballed from the country club in 1972. Are "we" supposed to come together and have some reasonable, rational "conversation?"
If you don't think kids should be raised by two male homosexuals, you don't need "bioethics" for that. You could have gotten that from an illiterate peasant in Guatemala. "Bioethics" has not done a single good thing since it was thought up and belongs on the railroad tracks.
And what about the other 90% of the population? The existence of fringes doesn't undo the centre. Also this is a great argument against all democratic/discussion everywhere, including on this forum.
Bioethics is generally done badly but it's not inherently a bad idea. We could have bioethics where good, decent research is permitted and 'let me make some lethal bioweapons for no reason' research is restricted. Who wants complete laissez faire in this area? I am confident that you have a bioethics stance, just that it is in conflict with the bioethics community. You, I and many here are likely heretical bioethicists.
More options
Context Copy link
I am very amused by this collection of Transmetropolitan-influenced caricatures.
Please, do go on.
Wow that was my thought exactly. Is that a well-known comic book in the US?
Sort of? Back in the late 00's I went on a torrenting binge of some of the big series: Transmet, Preacher, and Cerebus. Already read Sandman in the early 00s, and wanted more DC/Vertigo-themed stuff. They were some of the big ones talked about back then.
Are they still recommended? No idea, not my scene any more.
More options
Context Copy link
In the comics scene for sure, but in a "here's the 6 classic graphic novels you have to read" sense where most people have maybe read the first issue for the cred then nothing else. Although Ellis got cancelled a few years back, so he has been downplayed in normie spaces.
I read all of it, but I always thought it was a niche (not a comic book guy, it was recommended to me by one). Also I missed his cancellation, what did he do?
The short version is that he is/was attracted to a certain sort of woman highly represented by his fan base, is famous enough to take advantage of it, and managed this lifestyle poorly. His status in the comics/nerdy interest world was sufficient to allow him to form a sort of rolling soft harem of young (younger than him anyway) women around the English-speaking world. His particular approach (game?) seems to have been to make these women feel special and unique, and that they had a special and unique relationship with him.
Based on the hit-site (https://somanyofus.com/) that his "victims" made, he seems to have made at least 60 or so young women feel that they had a special, unique relationship with him, many simultaneously. The Pick Up people call this “spinning plates”, keeping multiple, limited commitment, relationships all going at once. His particular approach seems to have really made these damaged women think that there was more of a future to the relationship than there really was, and he seemed prone to ‘ghosting’ them without warning. Some famous men are able to manage something not unlike this, but they usually do so through honesty about the limited future of the relationship, where these women seem to genuinely feel to have been strung along then unceremoniously dropped without notice.
Reading some of the statements in the above website, it also gives a bit of a soft cult leader vibe too. He had a rather large online presence in the 00s and interacted with his fan groups a lot, more than I’ve seen with a lot of popular artists who tend to keep a more distant approach through an agent or assistant etc. He seemed to be personally running the Warren Ellis fan forums and appointing admins/mods etc. I was very active online then, but was never much of a comics reader, though many of my friends were. I don’t remember any other artists/authors being this directly involved in their own fandoms. He paid a lot of attention to his forums, fan groups, and the events they held, always keeping an eye out for one of his "type" of woman, who he would then begin to directly message.
The hit-site is worth reading, I think, at least for young (and maybe not so young) men. Particularly the “Testimonials” (https://somanyofus.com/testimonials)
It’s an incredible collection of the wide variety of red flags they may encounter interacting with modern, western women, and object lessons on the dangers of mishandling your interactions with the same.
Thanks for the exhaustive reply. What's the type of woman you're referring to, though? Should I be able to infer that from context? (Aside from "young, attractive") Sorry if that's on the website you linked, I haven't read it yet
More options
Context Copy link
How many others just saw this post in the comments feed and went "Wait, why would Neil Gaiman be moderating Warren Ellis fan forums?" before clicking it?
You got me, it appears Neil used Ellis's playbook too.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It appeared to me to be the typical 'guy who likes kinky things who got consent before engaging but isn't handsome enough to retain consent in the face of metoo' thing, but he apologised for it and who, aside from The Shadow, knows what lurks in the hearts of men?
What did you think of transmetropolitan? I might be disappointed in him, but that doesn't affect his work and Ellis is one of my favourite modern authors. Transmetropolitan was the last work of his I read though (it was basically impossible to get here for a long time) and I found it a bit of a slog. His later works are a lot more editor friendly.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Wrote a whole post on it:
https://alexanderturok.substack.com/p/somewhere-in-america-2
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Agreed that we don't need bioethics to answer generally applicable questions like 'Should a pair of sodomites buy a child from a desperate woman to raise themselves?'. But in specific cases like priority for organ transplants it still has a use.
More options
Context Copy link
But what if I don’t pull the lever?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link