site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   31922 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 10, 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.

men willing to play the role for free college (and a lot of people will do quite a bit to make college affordable).

See Andraya Yearwood. Got into college, got onto the college women's athletic team, dropped out of the college women's athletic team. Yearwood seems to be genuinely trans (or at least, they haven't detransitioned so far as I can find out) but running on the girls' team was the way forward for them. They don't seem to be going for the Olympics and subsequent professional athletics career (though granted, the Olympics don't seem to be permitting trans competitors yet so that was probably never going to happen):

"Yearwood received recruitment interest from Harvard University, the University of Connecticut, Springfield College, and West Point to run track and field in the NCAA. She is currently a student at North Carolina Central University."

They were in college in 2021 when this article was written:

Andraya Yearwood echoed that sentiment – she just wants equality between cis and trans women. The story of her high school career has been written about in many national publications, though she no longer runs – she’s now more of an advocate (though she hesitates to call herself one).

Yearwood is now a freshman at North Carolina Central University. She wanted to stop competing when she got to college for a few reasons: she was tired of the criticism and scrutiny, she didn’t want to dedicate all of her time to track, and she wanted to try something new.

Now she’s a Spanish major with a political science minor, with goals of pursuing careers in linguistics, translation/interpretation or anything language-related.

They seem to have moved on now to study in Brazil. But would Yearwood have gotten the attention to go to university if it wasn't for the trans sports angle? Did they take a sports scholarship away from a cis female athlete who might have gone on to a professional career? 🤷‍♀️

While Yearwood seems to have used athletics as a means to an end, CeCé Telfer seems to be serious about wanting an athletics career, but has had problems with meeting the requirements for trans athletes.

However, the photo used for this otherwise mildly sympathetic (at least neutral) article is - unfortunate. Reading up a little, I begin to feel a little sorry for Telfer; they want an athletics career, they couldn't make it as a male runner, they switched to being female and had some initial success, then it all ran aground. I don't think they're ever going to get that shot at the Olympics they so wanted:

"While a student athlete at Franklin Pierce University, Telfer first competed without success in the men's division from 2016 to 2017 but after coming out and beginning transition, Telfer was allowed to compete in the women's division. Telfer eventually took first place in the 400-meter hurdles event in June 2019."

"Telfer was entered in this week’s [2021] trials but was ultimately not allowed to compete because of guidelines World Athletics released in 2019 that closed off international women’s events of between 400 meters and a mile to athletes who did not meet the eligibility requirements."

"Telfer competed for NCAA Division II Franklin Pierce University men’s track and field team for three years, although she told FOLX Health last year that she “never saw myself as a male athlete.”

Competing on the women’s team as a senior, she won the NCAA title in the women’s 400-meter hurdles in 2019.

In 2021, the Jamican-born Telfer competed in and won prize money while taking part in events sanctioned by USA Track and Field (USATF).

She says she was given formal permission to take part in the Olympic trials for the Tokyo Olympics that year but was told the day before those trials began that she had not met eligibility requirements.

Then ahead of the 2022 national trials for the World Athletics Championships, she says she was told she had submitted her blood tests in the wrong format, leaving her unable to compete.

Despite the regulation change, Telfer is still able to compete at track meets that fall outside the jurisdiction of WA and plans to compete at the Bryan Clay Invitational next month in Azusa, California.

...The 28-year-old also says she feels a growing sense of isolation within the athletics community and will attend the meet alone as she doesn’t currently have a coach.

Telfer says she has reached out to more than 500 coaches asking to work with them but has so far not received any long-term offers."

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