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 -
The first comment is in response to someone that literally said they "can't imagine people spending hours at a time contracting their muscles presumably for fun, instead of enjoying gathering new knowledge or engaging in the debates with educated people from around the world", as though that's actually a set of interests that compete with cycling. The second is a comment that I stand by. I do think maintaining fitness is superior to neglecting physicality, so no objection there.
That said, the idea that I "despise them with a vitriol usually reserved for heretics or murderers" is absurd and completely unsupported. Yeah, I think obesity is usually a product of gluttony and sloth, but no, I don't hate people for having normal human failings. I do hate that we have a massively subsidized medical system that profits immensely from medicalization of everything from obesity to sadness and dispenses hundreds of billions in drugs per year. I'm sure that there are people, such as the topline commenter in this sub thread, that really do benefit from that, but I'm appalled by pharmaceutical solutions to character issues as a normal matter of course.
You say it's a character issue, but it's difficult for me to credit the modern phenomenon of mass obesity to sudden onset degeneracy rather than the mass availability of Oreo biscuits. Maybe we were always gluttons in search of a buffet big enough to kill us.
The Oreo dates back to 1912; it was a slightly sweeter of the 1908 Hydrox. The obesity epidemic is not that old.
In 1912 Joe Average couldn't afford to buy a shit ton of Oreos and also did a lot more physical activity.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I assumed 'vitriol reserved for heretics and murderers' was the kind of hyperbole often used by people who feel unjustly despised, because never mind the motte, there are so few people anywhere in Western society who vocally hate fat people on the same level as murderers. It was considered impolite to be visibly disgusted by fat people even before the body positivity movement was created.
Anyway hate is the kind of word everyone rates differently, would I be wrong to assume you consider fat people broken? Or that you think obesity is repugnant? If charles hadn't explained his situation and had just said "I used to be obese, I've used semeglutide, and I no longer am", would you not have assumed he was just taking a lazy shortcut?
I would consider them "broken" in the same way that anyone that has a reparable defect is.
Yes, of course it is.
Yes, because the vast majority of obese people are obese for straightforward reasons that don't have much to do randomly distributed crises. The correct prior remains that it's not that complicated of a story - modern food is too delicious, too plentiful, too subsidized, too cheap, and many people just eat too much of it. I still think drug treatments are a shortcut that I'm unconvinced of the long-run efficacy of. If it works and gets people back on track, that's great. I don't think the cornucopia of pharmaceuticals approach to health is actually working out very well and I'm not excited about subsidizing it. I do wish individuals well though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link