site banner
ZorbaTHut  2yr ago (text post)   45549 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 5, 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.

106
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Since the thread only loads five comments at a time (Zorbaaaaaa!) I will do a small, top level update on the BYU-Duke volleyball saga. You can find previous discussion in the thread below. In short, a black college volleyball athlete claims she repeatedly heard bad words during a game with thousands of fans in attendance. Said athlete has some family that amplifies her grievance, specifies the claims, and off it goes to become a thing.

Today, BYU released a statement on the conclusion of their investigation. BYU found no evidence bad words were used, nor could they corroborate bad word usage from witness testimony. BYU formally apologized to the poor chap who was banned from the game.

We also reached out to more than 50 individuals who attended the event: Duke athletic department personnel and student-athletes, BYU athletic department personnel and student-athletes, event security and management and fans who were in the arena that evening, including many of the fans in the on-court student section.

Duke's athletic director also released a short statement:

The 18 members of the Duke University volleyball team are exceptionally strong women who represent themselves, their families, and Duke University with the utmost integrity. We unequivocally stand with and champion them, especially when their character is called into question. Duke Athletics believes in respect, equality and inclusiveness, and we do not tolerate hate and bias.

Which is about as close as you get to "we will not contest the conclusion of the investigation" in a PR statement while making sure people know you hate racism, still support your athletes, etc. This is a case we've seen before. It did not garner quite as much attention as the Covington case or Smollett case, but follows the same path as them. I do not have much to add, because I'm not sure there's a lot of light here. If there is a way to cool off the culture wars it might start with interrupting the racism-to-national-story pipeline.

One interesting thing. I do not believe we saw the alleged perpetrator's name get released on the internet. BYU immediately put security in the relevant section after Richardson's claim. Eventually security targeted a UVU student and removed him, but BYU has since apologized to him. Perhaps this is evidence we are learning? The crowd may have helped in preventing his identification online or his purported disabilities protected him to an extent. Maybe all it took is one reasonable person in the chain to decide to keep his name under wraps until things had been confirmed. If so, kudos to him or her, because there's an alternate time line where some poor kid with a mental disability gets publicly shamed by Twitter mercenaries.

This aspect may have been the product of the media seemingly being disinterested in investigating this story. Alternatively, the media may be past all that jazz in these types of cases. If I were an editor Nick Sandmann's lawsuits would have some impact on how I treat these stories. Perhaps they realize the juicy headline is enough rather than the public shaming process. Hey, that'd be something. These types of cases are pure culture war all the way down. An army of online I Told Ya So's will continue to clash with the Of Course They Said Nothing Happened vanguard and Racism Is Still A Big Problem Anyway main line of infantry. So it goes.

This is... rather a lot more attention than I have paid to collegiate sports in, well, ever, but it just continues to boggle! The USC coach who canceled games with BYU now has this to say

“I continue to stand by my position. After my personal research, I made a decision for the well-being of my team. I regret that my university, my athletics director Ray Tanner and others got drawn into the criticism of a choice that I made.”

Like... really? We're on to "personal research" now? That is one hell of a way to double down.

Certainly the findings of the personal research can be shared. Were they?

If not that's a decent signal that the "personal research" was more "personally hopping on the bandwagon without having conducted any research."

Were they?

No, no--I posted her entire response verbatim.

If not that's a decent signal that the "personal research" was more "personally hopping on the bandwagon without having conducted any research."

Yeah, in my experience people use "personal research" as a stand-in for "I'm not going to make any further attempt to justify my beliefs to you." Like taking a "personal day" or leaving a job for "personal reasons."

Just to reiterate what I posted on the subreddit prior to Exodus 3:

1: There are two allegations here, one that someone in the student section shouted racial slurs, and one that Richardson was accosted by a white man who told her to "watch her back".

2: The second allegation was the UVU student, but it's unclear what exactly he said. Reports seem to indicate some sort of mental impairment, though apparently not enough to bar him from college. My read is that a weird kid said something weird and this got connected in Richardson's head to the (possibly imaginary) racism of BYU fans.

3: I had to watch women's volleyball for this, so I'm riding it as far as I can. The slur allegation was that someone (or multiple someones) in the freshman section was shouting the slur "every time she [richardson] served". She served once in the second set and twice in the fourth, so "every time" was three instances, specifically. Doesn't really impact whether the allegation is true, but some of the reporting made it sound like the crowd just chanted it for two whole sets. Which would, of course, be difficult to hide on footage.

4: I must say, I am heartened by BYU's second response. Their first was exactly as craven and shitty as we've come to expect, but apparently cooler heads prevailed.

5: Public service reminder that fake "hate incidents" are real hate incidents, just with the valence reversed. Jussie Smollett concocted a hateful and racialized plot to play the victim and thereby victimize white people, Republicans, and Trump fans specifically. To the degree that we believe a racial accusation to be false, I think it is a mistake to classify it as a "hoax". It isn't, it's a false flag intended to harm people. This isn't about sympathy or clout, it's about hurting a race of people based on their race, by making false accusations. In other words, it's the same shitty mob behavior that lead to lynchings in the past. We would not describe a false rape accusation of a black man in the Jim Crow South as a "hoax", but as an act of racism and incitement to violence.

Good additions. I believe the "watch your back" quote comes from the godmother once again and the full statement was, "a white male that told her to watch her back going to the team bus."

I had to watch women's volleyball for this, so I'm riding it as far as I can

There are worse women's sports to watch.

According to YouTube's front page, though, there are better women's sports to watch, at least if you want to stare at athletes' rear ends...

The post linked from three days ago kind of swims up against this without explicitly stating it but - the supposedly charitable reading of this is that the volleyball player making the claim "misheard" the word being used (suggested as "Cougar" or people shouting "Nikki" at one of her teammates). Of course, the additional context here has this player talking about the environment she was in, suggesting instead she was the prejudiced one.

I dont know if there exists a name for the phenonemom but it goes as you described.

Accucasion/Claim of bad thing is levelled. Some people lose their shit. Claim turns out to be false or overzealous . Not as many people find out about that.

Sanity waterline is on net lowered, despite object level situation being unchanged.

Behavior like this would be deemed extremely antisocial/"toxic" if done within a group of individuals/social circle, but publicly its A-OK.. This is not sustainable.

I would replace your term "Twitter mercenaries" with "Twitter vigilantes." Perhaps some get paid but it's my understanding that most do so out of sheer love of persecution.

I don’t get how making up this accusation isn’t as bad as if it happened. It’s the same sum total public anxiety, needless investigating, and social discomfort.

This and the recent news that Oberlin had to pay 42 million to that local bakery have been nice whitepills

Of the four boxes, it seems "jury box" is the most likely to deliver victory to people who think like you and me. I'm hoping someone can get a "Are social media platforms like company towns when it comes to civil rights?" case in front of the supreme court one of these days.

It's also worth worth noting that (1) the University of South Carolina canceled a two game women's basketball series in response to these accusations and (2) South Carolina lawmakers are asking why. So this has already gone further than just "did it happen or not"--there have been direct consequences of people drawing their own conclusions concerning unproven allegations.

While researching this story I was intrigued to see how much bigotry is directed at BYU athletes. If BYU canceled games over bigotry and slurs directed at Mormons, they might not have any games left. If they're now to have games canceled by others over hate hoaxes, maybe they should just get on with it and end their athletics program entirely.

Mormons, quite frankly, are used to it. That doesn’t mean they’re fond of it or that it’s okay, but they have functionally no true allies in the sociocultural landscape (with other Christians considering them a heretical near-cult and progressives considering them self-evidently bigoted), and there are no real social penalties for even the harshest of criticism towards them.

When I was Mormon, I was used to mostly keeping my head down to avoid trouble in the public sphere, and I doubt I was uncommon in that. Criticizing Mormons is playing the social game on easy mode.

Criticizing Mormons is playing the social game on easy mode.

Among the juvenilia of Scott Alexander is a piece called Mormonism: The Control Group For Christianity. (There are other hints scattered across his blog that his father lives or lived at some point in Salt Lake City, and that Scott visited him there. Beyond that it's unclear to me what SA's connection with Mormonism is.) This particular case makes me wonder if Mormonism is also a suitable "control group," or at least a bellwether, for religious toleration.

Actually, Google tells me that there are approximately 15 million Jews in the world, and maybe 16 million Mormons. Judaism is a much older religion, has a dedicated ethnostate, boasts numerous special interest NGOs dedicated to defending it against anti-Semitism, and so forth. Mormons have not been subjected to a Holocaust, but were apparently subjected to a surprising amount of murder in their early days. Mormons did not trek through the wilderness for 40 years, but they did follow a bearded prophet into the desert and then settle in a not-that-pleasant place (sorry, the mountains are lovely but the fact is, inland from the Pacific coast the western United States is a barely habitable wasteland, and if you post a picture of the Grand Tetons I will respond with a picture of the Salt Flats). Is there an ADL for Mormons? (Google suggests no!) Are Mormons subjected to employment discrimination, etc.? (Google suggests yes!) Like Jews, Mormons punch above their weight politically, but again--not with the same oomph as Jews. Lists of "famous Mormons" have some interesting entries, as do lists of famous ex-Mormons (actress Amy Adams? New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Adern?), not quite to the degree that we see famous Jews in, say, Hollywood but certainly to an unusual extent considering the size of the sect.

And here it looks like Jewish universities are also culture war targets. I feel like I need an image macro along the lines of: "Mom, can we stop and get some Jews?--We have Jews at home!--The Jews at home:" [insert picture of Donny and Marie Osmond having dinner with Mitt Romney].

But I wonder if Mormons benefit in job markets from being considered trustworthy? Better to have people privately discriminating in favor of you than giving you public support.

It was widely believed that Mormons were preferred in job markets in my small ~20% Mormon area.

One area where they're strongly favored is security clearance jobs, where not drinking and the mission experience are both plusses.

I would be very surprised if they do not in heavily Mormon areas.

How often does religion come up in job interviews? I expect there are a few advantages from connections through church etc. but other people have those same connections from other sources.

Lots of people get jobs through connections. If you think someone is honest you are more likely to recommend them to be hired by your firm.

The coded way for LDS people to signal their religion to employers is a bit of a joke within the Church - putting a section on your resume about your missionary service, but trying to make it as subtle or as not obvious as possible so gentiles don't pick up on it. To be clear, it's really only something you list as a new grad when you're scraping the barrel for things to put on there.

"Organized door to door sales presentations, presented quarterly earnings reports to superiors", it's kind of a meme.

I'd forgotten about that option. Those resumes are always hilarious. I've seen worse--I saw a resume where a guy boasted about "organizing a multi-billion dollar fundraiser" because as a missionary he had volunteered to help with the fundraiser.

FWIW, as a Mormon I do what I can to obscure that fact. So if there's much of a benefit there, then I've been missing out. I do work in tech though where things are possibly more anti-religion than the average field.

I've taken it off my resume at this point, I have enough project and technical experience that I don't need that. I only had it there when I was looking for first job out of school and had like, no good experience. I doubt it had much of a benefit, but it made me feel better to have a full page at least.

I bet they benefit more now than they used to. I will never forget the first time I worked with a Mormon - I was working for my dad one summer and we had a new guy working with us - he was friendly, polite and a hard worker, but my dad wouldn't give him the time of day because he was Mormon, and my dad thought that meant he would refuse to serve in the army if asked. It was baffling to me back then and it's baffling to me now.

Did he confuse Mormons and Mennonites?

I was thinking Jehovah's Witnesses, who also proselytize a lot, but don't participate in war.

But according to the doctrine of Orthodox Intersectionality, the hatred of mormons is a good thing to be encourage.

Right, well--and to be clear, I don't necessarily find polygamy jokes to be super objectionable speech; "fuck the Mormons" does seem a bit much for a public event (sub in Jews, blacks, etc. and see how well it sits, I guess) but even then, I have never known sports fans to be especially gentle in their trash-talking (so something like "fuck the Red Sox" seems less objectionable, if still not exactly polite).

Brian Leiter (philosopher of law) reblogged something just this week about the directness with which H.L. Mencken once took the religious to task in newspaper columns--this seemed somewhat relevant to me. I'd like for people to feel free to level the criticisms they feel warranted in leveling. But this case seems to show how "intersectionality" is just code for "bigotry is permitted encouraged against politically approved targets."

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