site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   34966 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 6, 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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Of course it's ideological, as would be the case for a whistle-blower doing a report on how the clinic they worked at was disregarding the risk to the lives of trans youth from suicide and pushing conversion therapy on them.

The difference there is that the media would be doing pieces on how wonderful the whistle-blower was and how this revealed the ugly agenda of anti-trans activists.

When/if the Zeitgeist does swing around to mainstream "hey maybe putting ten year olds on puberty blockers is a bit risky", then the whistle-blowing around clinics being pressured by interest groups to just rubber-stamp and be a conveyor belt for transition will be celebrated by the media. We're not quite at that point yet, hence the "this is all in the same vein as Project Veritas to do away with our human rights" coverage.

I think it is starting to swing around, but we're still in the area where stories like this are celebrated, not regarded with horror and outrage.

Oh, the kid is around twelve now? And has two trans parents? And it was all "her" idea to speak out on trans issues and be a fashion model? And the biological father sure doesn't sound like a spineless wimp who has washed his hands of all responsibility? Though it does sound like he was legally bullied into it, as with all the best divorce and access cases:

Noella and her younger brother Levi (who his parents say is a boy and wants to remain a boy) were born to Dee and Dee’s then-husband, Timothy McCord, a scientist in the Chicago area.

McCord told The Post he has no issue with Noella coming out as trans but said he is somewhat concerned about her life being too public as a model. As for Noella having any possible future medical intervention, like being given puberty blockers and hormones, McCord said he is not quite sure what to make of that.

“I have no say in it,” he said. “She’s not my kid anymore.”

Well, I guess Desmond is Amazing is a bit long in the tooth now he's 16, time for fresh meat! And what fresher than a then-10 year old "youngest ever transgender model for New York Fashion Week"?

And what fresher than a then-10 year old "youngest ever transgender model for New York Fashion Week"?

So I wonder about this. I don't pay much attention to trans issues in particular, but I've run into headlines and documents claiming that kids can know they're trans even before they can talk, which would be quite a bit fresher than 10 year olds. It seems to me that, to whatever extent that such a belief exists, it must be quite niche and extreme even within the trans activist circles, but one of the defining features of the wider progressivism movement that can be said to hold the trans activist movement within is that it seeks to bring the niche and extreme to the mainstream. Could we see some trans toddler celebrities in the future?

Could we see some trans toddler celebrities in the future?

Perhaps; there are already children who are socially transitioning at young ages.

When I met Gracie, she was a few months out of kindergarten — pretty young for a transgender kid, I thought. Gracie lives with her parents and younger brother in a small city in the East Bay. She is already two years into her transition, having started her public life as a girl at four. The family began by discarding her boy name and referring to Gracie as “she” and “her.” She was also allowed to wear girl clothes outside the home, and her parents changed the gender on her birth certificate to avoid confusion at school.

The flip side of the Russell case above was the Zucker case, where a doctor involved with a clinic treating transgender children was controversially fired because his approach was too conservative. One trans activist website at least isn't too dubious about accepting the narrative:

Kenneth J. Zucker (born 1950) is an American psychologist whose ideology has caused profound harm to sex and gender minorities over the course of his long career. Zucker has created several disease models to describe these minorities. He has promoted many more sex and gender “disorders” via The Archives of Sexual Behavior, a journal he edits. He developed a non-affirming model of care for gender diverse children that has been described as “child abuse.” Zucker was fired by his employer CAMH in 2015, his clinic was shut down, and his model of care has now been outlawed in many jurisdictions.

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