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.

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