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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I don't doubt that you have good reasons for believing that you have autism, but I am not persuaded by your argument. If someone has a mental illness or disorder, we make various accommodations for that person and take their diagnosis into account when interacting with them. We don't make special accommodations for neurotypical people because by definition they don't need them, by virtue of being "typical". This arrangement depends on an assumption of good faith: if someone tells me that they have a mental disorder and expect me to make accommodations for them on that basis, I assume that they were formally diagnosed with that disorder by someone qualified to do so. If someone is often rude or inconsiderate, I will treat them with a great deal more forbearance and forgiveness if they have been diagnosed with autism (and hence find it harder to read social cues than a neurotypical person) than if they are neurotypical.
If you think you're autistic, but don't intend to mention this to anyone and don't expect anyone to make special accommodations for you, then fair enough. But if you do intend to mention this belief about yourself to other people and for other people to treat you accordingly (as seems to be the case, given that you've just brought it up to me), I think that's dishonest when you've never been formally diagnosed with this medical condition by someone qualified to make that assessment. It sounds like stolen valour.
I think the phrasing "the stigma around self-diagnosis" is a bit weaselly and disingenuous as well. It's not that self-diagnosis is stigmatized, it's just that most people aren't qualified to do it. If anyone could accurately diagnose themselves with medical conditions, people wouldn't spend years and small fortunes training to become doctors or psychiatrists.
If I said that lay people with no medical training shouldn't be performing neurosurgery, I don't think this position could be reasonably characterized as me trying to "stigmatize neurosurgery".
More options
Context Copy link