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 -
And I strongly encourage parents to keep their tweens off Wattpad for exactly that reason.
Did you listen to the readings? One is about a girl crying and saying "no", and being ignored and shut up with a cock in her mouth.
In the real world, women do consistently go to jail for raping their male students, even if they get lesser sentences than their male peers.
So the absolute spiciest part of the book they could find was... pretty lame, minimal, and not particularly played in a dramatized, titillating, or positive way. As such, I'm not concerned. (Maximum charity says "book left over from a time the school had way more of a grade range".) I find it interesting that it's about as spicy as another book I was forced to read in school (in pre-woke times, no less), and while it was pretty clearly intended to establish the morality-pet and villain status of 2 of the characters it was also similarly not played up (it took... 3? sentences to describe, I believe). Even 1984 was spicier than that.
Of course, my contrast is that one other book I got shown by a classmate around that time which took about 5 pages to describe in precise detail... a teenage boy masturbating in a pool and dying gruesomely (I cannot find the name of the book that was in, something something pearl diving). Granted, I'm pretty sure that one wasn't in the school library.
But then again, I believe there is a qualitative difference between "matter-of-fact description [in text]", "a full page of describing organs coming out his ass [in text]", and "basically Emergence/'177013' [graphic in the novel sense])"... and I suspect you do, too.
Specifically, there's no distaff heterosexual counterpart for "Flamer" (and any of the picture books like it). If there was, it would be the (maximally inflammatory) example instead; absence of evidence is evidence of absence in this case.
Sure it wasn't "Guts" by Chuck Palahniuk?
Yep, that's the one. It's rare to encounter something that not even the more motivated kinds of 4chan greentexts manage to top in terms of... detail.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link