site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   34939 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023

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.

In the recent Memphis police shooting case, some have noted that, aside from the actual assaulting officers, several others were apparently standing by and not intervening. That is a violation of Memphis PD policy and may be a criminal act.

In most (all?) states, people in mandatory-reporting professions, such as teachers, are required to report certain kinds of wrongdoing.

My understanding is that it is widely accepted that teachers et al do report mere suspicions of wrongdoing even against their coworkers. But cops seem to rarely do so. Do you think that's inherent to the us v them nature of policing? It forces people to a side more intensely than teachers and such? Or is that the law requires teachers to report any suspicion but the Memphis PD are only supposed to report the things they witness (I think)? But this recent incident clearly goes well beyond a suspicion...

Just curious what others think.

Is there any evidence that teachers report each other more than police?

My understanding is that it is widely accepted that teachers et al do report mere suspicions of wrongdoing even against their coworkers.

Interesting, considering the development of things like rubber rooms for offending teachers, the high rate of sexual abuse among teachers, etc. Perhaps they report a lot because they see a lot. Or perhaps they report a lot of the wrong things while not noticing or even actively covering for groomers among them. We'd need to know more than just generalized feelings.

But cops seem to rarely do so. Do you think that's inherent to the us v them nature of policing?

I'd think so. The job of the police is, defined broadly, legalized kidnapping. You are taking people into custody against their will. That is true of even a traffic stop (even though most of those are transitory) or a tackle and cuffing of a suspected murderer. Violence is inherent to the profession, and violence is very nuanced. The line is probably very easy to accidentally cross, thus "but for the grace of god go I."

even moreso

I doubt sexual predators are actually overrepresented among the clergy.

Maybe they used to, but I'm pretty sure they can figure out when a well has dried up.

The clergy is a much stronger commitment than public school teaching(which is in turn a greater commitment than scoutmastering), so it stands to reason people most interested in something other than the actual mission are going to be more overrepresented as schoolteachers and even more as scoutmasters compared to clergymen.

Perhaps they report a lot because they see a lot

I don't think it's a stretch to assume it's strict Machiavellianism in a profession whose actual job performance is, outside of the most egregious cases, both illegible (apart from standardized tests) and irrelevant (failure to properly educate students in terms of their worse life outcomes is ultimately not the education system's problem). These conditions and the resulting toxicity are also present in the other kinds of social work- report everything "out of an abundance of caution", but also because merely facing a bunch of allegations looks bad in a dossier when being considered for transfers, promotions, etc. the same way records of arrests can for regular citizens.

It's not like this doesn't hold true for cops, but as you noted the accusation space for malfeasance is a lot smaller, it's inherent to the job in general, and perhaps most importantly, holding back inappropriately can get you or your coworkers killed in this profession in a way it cannot for teachers (while students can and do kill their teachers on occasion, that's not something the actions of other teachers directly affect the chance of, excessive reporting or not).

The wildcard here is body cameras- they likely have a non-trivial effect on "holding back" (I'm sure I've seen some studies to this effect, but I could be wrong)- but at the end of the day, I think the above matters more... plus your boss (and union) will likely go to bat for you because of the above. And even if it does start a riot... well, the cop in question is going to get arrested and tried anyway, and if the public is demonstrating just how much the lives of criminals matter to them (by encouraging widespread criminality), who are the police to disagree?

Violence is inherent to the profession, and violence is very nuanced.

This was also true to a wide degree for teachers in the not-so-distant past; physical violence ("corporal punishment") is actually still part of the job in some places (including the US). And teachers still do have this power at least as far as kidnapping is concerned- at least, as far as the students know (detention, etc.)- sure, the administration will give them guff if it isn't reasonable, but just like when dealing with cops, "you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride" applies, and the teacher still has the upper hand when describing the facts ("us vs. them" applies too- neither criminals nor students are really human beings anyway).

And in those places... well, yeah, kids scream when they get hit, probably because they aren't used to getting hit at home. That means it's working.

Just here to point out that even in the heartland of first world corporal punishment(the rural southern USA) the vast majority of teachers never carry any out- it’s done by the principles or a designated faculty member(usually a female coach), and treated as the equivalent of a suspension(that is, teachers don’t make the decision themselves).

I kind of wonder how much of the teacher/cop reporting difference is real- that is, do teachers claim they report suspicion of child abuse at very high rates because they think it makes them look good, whereas cops claim they don’t report misconduct very often because they don’t want to admit that there is much misconduct, and in actuality the reporting rates are very similar.

This would fit very well with my impression of how teachers and cops think.

It's also possible that the nature of the job may result in different baseline levels of suspicion.

If you've put your life in someone's hands (successfully), it might just be harder to see them in a negative light. As opposed to another job where you might have normal office politics, or even be competing.

A brotherhood, instead of co-workers, as it were.

They could also all be corrupt enough to not want IA snooping around. There's several options for a difference in reporting rates viewed from the outside.

AFAIK, the certain kinds of wrongdoing that teachers (and doctors) are required to report is child abuse. This isn't necessarily child abuse that they or their peers are committing - it can be child abuse committed by the parents or by other students. The teachers themselves are not usually the subjects of the complaint; they are simply reporting observations. Policing on the other hand is an inherently confrontational job; you often have to get physical with people, and it falls to the observer to try and parse out acceptable physicality from unacceptable physicality, and if you get it wrong, you're in your colleagues' bad books, etc etc. It's understood that police get into fisticuffs a certain amount of the time, whereas students don't, so a bruised suspect in police custody wouldn't instantly raise alarm bells the way a 6-year-old with purple contusions on their ribs would.

Furthermore, the targets of potential abuse are very different. The majority of people police officers deal with (especially in a physical confrontation) are criminals and not innocent bystanders. Teachers are dealing with children, which society places a large value on protecting.

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