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 disagree with your premise that childhood bullying is less than before. Bullying is a universal feature of children's culture (and arguably, human culture) where low status outsiders are ritually demeaned and excluded by the mainstream. If violence is allowed, violence will be used; if not, the bullying will express in other ways. It's just that the people you think should be bullied are no longer outsiders; they are the mainstream, doing the bullying.
That makes sense. I don't even know what kind of bullying kids do these days. I haven't been bullied by classmates in a school environment since.. the 2010-2011 school year, before the Great Awokening.
If kids can't call each other fags or retards anymore, what do they say?
More options
Context Copy link
My impression from talking to older people is that the severity of, and violence involved in, school bullying has declined significantly over the past hundred years. I'm not super confident in that, but it'd make sense as part of a general intentional move away from things that seem to be harmful and coercive. E.g. really old people talk about parents and teachers harshly physically punishing children and students, that doesn't happen anymore.
In our majestic modern enlightenment, the law prevents both boy and girl from bullying in ways that only boys are sociobiologically suited to.
Yeah, now it's just "culture war".
More options
Context Copy link
Like @jeroboam, I suspect there's a important difference in the way we're using the word "bullying". Let me share an anecdote from Rachel Simmon's Odd Girl Out: The hidden culture of aggression in girls which I got via Joyce Benenson's book on male v. female friendship.
To me this is bullying, and the psychological content received by Jenny is equal to that if it were 1923 and MacKenzie and Brianna instead took her out to the woods, stuck a bonnet in her mouth, and strapped her with a branch. Or if it were 1963 and they circled around her and screamed SLUT to her face. Social disapproval and assertion of dominance, when it comes to bullying, are the essence; violence and open confrontation but delivery mechanisms.
So, yes, we have created rules that limit beating a kid up or yelling slurs in their face. That doesn't mean bullying has decreased, it's just become harder to measure.
Those are not equals. Jenny can decide to just not have friends and eat alone. Read a book during lunch.
Having your own physical space threatened is a lot worse. Words you can just check yourself out of.
The intent behind them is, though; indeed, that's the whole problem. I see no difference consequentially or deontologically between burning down your enemy's business directly, or spreading rumors so that your enemy's business is destroyed.
"But it wasn't my fault anyone else believed me" is the distaff counterpart of "how could I have known that breaking in, dumping gas all over the floor, and lighting a match would burn the building down?" and for a society to function properly both must be punished the same way.
More options
Context Copy link
No, most normies find social death worse than physical violence.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link