site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 21, 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.

14
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

my first crush included the confusing and intense desire to be the girl I was crushing on

I wonder if there are studies on the internal/external Identity-Object relationship in transgender psychology. Is this limited to the sexual, or does it hold broadly? For instance, are transgenders more likely to believe that they are of the same kind as their idols, without being able to discern a mismatch in personality/looks/skills? We might see, for instance, that transgenders interested in music are more likely to believe they are better musicians than they are, or those interested in writing are more likely to believe they are already a good writer when they are not. I wonder if you couldn’t do a test to see how well a transgender can objectively discern their characteristics and skills in relation to the social standards and affinities that they have. I also wonder if there is any relationship to parenting histories — when the child professed a desire to be an astronaut did the mom immediately give him a NASA shirt and tell him he will be an astronaut, are there differences in static vs growth mindset, lack of objective judgment by parenrs, etc

That’s the first time I hear of such a hypothesis and I would say that while there might be a subgroup to which this applies to - the exhibitionist type that flaunts their bodies regardless how well they pass and engage in hugboxing on Reddit - the majority of trans people I know are the opposite in that they have body dysmorphic disorder, imposter syndrome, and issues with self worth. Of course the former group is going to be more visible, but applying conclusions to the entire transgender phenomenon based on them would be a mistake.

I don't think what you are saying contradicts each other. A la "The Last Psychiatrist," having incorrect beliefs and assumptions about your own skills and relationship with the world is what craters self esteem. Fewer kids testing themselves on dangerous playground equipment created a rise in anxiety disorders and people who cannot perform risk management.

No one knows what Liriope and Cephisus did, but whatever they did, it worked: he didn't even recognize his own reflection. That's a man who doesn't know himself. That's a man who never had to look at himself from the outside.

How do you make a child know himself? You surround him with mirrors. "This is what everyone else sees when you do what you do. This is who everyone thinks you are."

You cause him to be tested: this is the kind of person you are, you are good at this but not that. This other person is better than you at this, but not better than you at that. These are the limits by which you are defined. Narcissus was never allowed to meet real danger, glory, struggle, honor, success, failure; only artificial versions manipulated by his parents. He was never allowed to ask, "am I a coward? Am I a fool?" To ensure his boring longevity his parents wouldn't have wanted a definite answer in either direction.

I would expect such a person to have very low self esteem once they are grown.

I think there are potentially two things going on here that we should be careful not to conflate:

  1. The X is Good --> I Want to Be X pathway (a good pathway in many cases, by the way); it is my belief that this improperly and strongly activates in sexual matters in many trans people (as well as "trans-adjacent" people like me who ultimately decide that they just have some Issues to work through), leading to the Venus-AGP and Eros-AGP described above.
  2. The tendency to move from "I want to be X" to "I am already X", which is what you seem to be describing.

It might very well be the case that (2) is more prevalent among people who decide they are trans than among those who do not, but I doubt it is a strongly indicative characteristic in the same way as (1). A bunch of (2) is just in the cultural water (particularly in progressive circles); e.g. "if you have written anything, you are a writer [regardless of whether it is published or earns you a living]", referring to anyone who does some math in school as a "mathematician", etc. so I would be surprised if the tendency was that much stronger in trans individuals than in generic progressives.

These are good observations. "Am I prone to pretend I am what I want to be" is kinda a given -- like any self described "Alpha male", for example. Or the people who inspired the phrase "the tolerant left". People do that a lot.

The other question is much more interesting, and Zach's "Sexual Dimorphism in Yudkowsky's Sequences, in Relation to My Gender Problems" is insightful here.

The fascinating thing to me, is that despite being a quite gender conforming (and non-AGP) straight guy, when I read his description of his underlying desires it resonated. I could have written the exact same thing with one minor and meaning preserving word swap.

Consider this (word swapped) quote from Zach's post:

I'm mostly imagining a specific woman (which one, varies a lot) as from the outside, admiring her face, and her voice, and her breasts, but somehow wanting the soul behind those eyes to be mine. Wanting my body to be shaped like that, to be in control of that avatar of beauty—not even necessarily to do anything overtly "sexy" in particular, but just to exist like that.

The relevant difference between Zach and me isn't that we feel "X is good" for different X. It's the same X.

Here's another quote, this one direct:

"Oh my God, I have breasts and a vagina that I can look at and touch without needing anyone's permission; this is the scintillating apotheosis of sexual desire and the most important thing in the world."

The most obvious way to fulfil this desire isn't "become a woman", but to own a woman -- but that doesn't fit with being (in his words) a sensitive boy who was ideologically committed to "antisexism" as defined by the religion of feminism. And if "owning" a woman is too unthinkable, you might come up with creative solutions.

When phrased that way it does sound sexist, and words do kinda fail here, but there's a nonsexist way of achieving this too, which Zach touches on slightly here:

It's because I was straight. Because I loved women, and wanted to do right by them. It's an identificatory kind of love—loving women as extension of the self, rather than a mysterious, unfathomable Other. But that's not unusual, is it?—or it shouldn't be. I would have assumed that guys who can't relate to this are probably just sexist.

If you can imagine a woman saying to you "I don't want to be 'your girlfriend'. I want to be yours" -- and meaning it, and being right to mean it, then you can love her "as an extension of yourself". There's no more "needing permission" because the mutual love breaks down the boundaries and the idea your lover "needs your permission" to touch you just becomes absurd and nonsensical. "Wanting my body to be shaped like that"/"wanting the soul behind those eyes to be mine" takes on a different literal meaning, but the desire being fulfilled is the same.

The question is whether "X is good" leads to "I want to be X" or "I want to be sexually/romantically involved with X".