site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   30746 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 21, 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.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Definitely seems possible that it's a lie to troll or dodge hate crime charges. But it is interesting seeing people squirm in the hot seat on this question. If mere identification is sufficient, then how can you question this person? If you've previously held a standard that there was no legitimate gatekeeping, and that anything short of enthusiastic affirmation was transphobic bigotry, do you bite that bullet or flip-flop? If you flip, your enemies will use it against you forever. And if you bite the bullet, they'll use that against you forever too!

Very much a situation that highlights the contradictions.

I don't think this question is as squirm-inducing as you think. How would you respond to this?:

Obviously you're trying to catch me in a trap, you're not really asking me to be consistent here, you're just trying to score points against me!

"What is a woman?" is exactly the kind of thing that ought to make people squirm, and maybe it makes normies / clueless / true believers squirm, but I see a ton of, "that's just a political gotcha question, you're obviously a right wing troll to ask it!"

The response to the trap is "no, it's your opinions that let me score points, I'm just trying to expose them."

The response probably won't work since anyone who merits the response probably isn't logical. But it's the correct answer. Showing that someone's opinions lead to one of two things, both bad, isn't a "gotcha", it's reasoning.

That's still squirming. It's the crying soyjack with the smug mask on. It's like someone went "what are you, some sort of commie?" if you asked them what time it is.

Definitely seems possible that it's a lie to troll or dodge hate crime charges.

When facing 5 premeditated murder charges how much worse does it get with a hate crime charge?

Much worse to spend that sentence in a men's prison than in a women's prison, I assume.

But he's not claiming to be full-on trans.

Yet

i still think mere identification is sufficient. it’s more of a subjective disposition than anything, so if he says he’s nonbinary i’ll take him at his word. not like i have any way of corroborating it beyond that.

I've never known these people to actually think that way. Because there is no thinking occurring. So there is no contradiction to be noticed. You are not supposed to question how people identify when it's to their advantage to not have it questioned. And then it's "obvious" evil right wingers are faking it when it's to their advantage to believe that. You will see no one of any consequence or influence modify their perspective on the supremacy of self identification what so ever. They're already letting men into all you can rape buffets women's prison if they "self identify". To say nothing of all the lesser ways they've marginalized and disenfranchised women for the sake of the trans identity. Why would some trollish behavior from a mass shooter change any minds in how our society is being dismantled?

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