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 -
This isn't the Motte anymore. Look- I wasn't expecting my post to be accepted with applause and universal agreement, but my thought out, nuanced, cited post gets 4 upvotes, while apologia for sexually harassing women (that dismisses out of hand what I wrote) gets 30+? I used to write things that got a lot of pushback, and I knew to expect some heat, but this is different. It's just unwillingness to engage with what I wrote. This place isn't about exchange of ideas anymore. Oh, there's some interesting discussion, still. You've generated some here. I didn't follow the Motte over from reddit because it had become uncomfortably closed-minded and misogynistic, and it's noticably worse now. If this place is just about people confirming their own worldviews to eachother, then what is it?
I'm disappointed in this place. I don't know what I expected popping in again. I guess I'd expected some resistance, but hoped for open minded natures to triumph. I don't feel like my presence is welcome here anymore. This whole thing confirms to me that my time and my mind are better used elsewhere. :-\
Perhaps I'm missing something, but your post seems to have 29 upvotes and 16 downvotes, net 13? That's pretty good reception imo. I don't think it should be downvoted, but whatever.
More options
Context Copy link
For what it's worth, I made a long series of posts and replies on a topic that went wildly against consensus here (largely on nuclear power, although my takes on the Ukraine conflict aren't popular here either) and most people were actually polite and respectful, with one person even thanking me for providing a contrary perspective. I still got downvoted to hell, but I think paying attention to those funny little internet points is a mug's game. What mattered to me was the quality and strength of the arguments I interacted with, and those were usually still a lot better than other places on the internet. If you think that engaging in debate is fun and worthwhile, I think just ignoring the internet points is a good suggestion and will let you get a lot out of this place.
More options
Context Copy link
Although subjectively explaining vote counts almost never works out, this one seems to make sense to me (as a lurker throwing around upvotes).
Your first post framed this as exasperated leaders at their wits end just honestly trying to get men to treat women as fellow humans, which apparently doesn't ring true or sound too compelling to people here. "What's wrong with the men these days that people think this is the only way they will behave?" as a question is totally dependent on the legitimacy & good faith of the premise "people think this is the only way", which is the main contention in most of the other top-level replies.
The_Nybbler seemed to cut through right to the key point, that attractive/desirable men are going to keep winning in online dating regardless of how many rules they follow or break. So making more punishments and penalties available to women to use against men they aren't interested in is continuing the same one-sided trend we've been in, which can feel unfair and avoidant of root issues.
Then you spun that into a long and somewhat interesting comment (though with about 3 too many links) about how we're screwed if we just let 'cheaters' win, which also characterized persistence in the most nasty way 'lying/manipulation/harassing to get laid'. But the point wasn't that we let cheaters win, it was that desirable men win online dating whether they cheat or not.
So to an average observer, it looked like you had perfect form and a great-looking swing, but you just whiffed the ball on both swings. Meanwhile The Nybbler had a bit of a lazier swing but nailed the ball square-on. Hence you not being downvoted to oblivion or anything, but just receiving merely mild internet reward points.
More options
Context Copy link
You end your post with that and expect pleases and thank yous?
More options
Context Copy link
Yeah and it kinda sucks that he got 30 upvotes.
But I don't believe you don't care about only getting 4, because at the end of the day you aren't downvoted into the ground like with other echochambers.
The best achievement you can get in a place where there are serious debates happening is to go against the groupthink and come out on top, which you've done.
Jfc conventional BBSs like system remains superior to reddits.
More options
Context Copy link
Oh absolutely, this place has become an echo chamber every bit as bad as /r/politics or whatever leftist hangout you care to name, and this subthread has been especially bad. There's just no interest in the actual reality - each event simply serves as a jumping off point to go back to the same old grievances and resentments.
I accept it for what it is and farm the downvotes - I've seen what gets upvoted and want no part of it. If you actually want substantive discussion though? Yeah, you're going to have to look elsewhere.
So why are you here then?
Because when I see another uninteresting post about how 'democrats are bad and our entire political system always makes them win and republicans lose because democrats are bad' post I just scroll past it and read the rest of the very interesting discussion on other topics, many of which aren't directly political at all.
There are lots of posts I dislike for a variety of reasons (including your OP, which IMO commits the 'vaguely gesturing at lots of bad social things and then claiming your pet cause is the reason for them fallacy', although that's something the right-wingers do a lot more. "The only winners in today's sexual culture are the small percentage of men who can have dozens of sex partners while an increasing number of men have none at all." Most men, hot or not, tall or not, have sex and relationships and are between fine and happy with it.), and I either read or skip them and move on.
More options
Context Copy link
Because I am attracted to unhealthy arguments rather than productive discussions. It's a vice, but at least it's cheap.
Are there any other places with 'productive discussions' about general topics you know of? This place still has the best quality I know of, outside of the mentioned right-wing circlejerks. The ACX open threads kind of suck, DSL is fine but isn't my taste.
(edit: didn't see the other comment below, but I'm curious if there's anything beyond those and theschism)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
And where would that be?
Honestly, the schism is (despite low traffic) still a pretty good home of high quality, good faith, non-hostile discussion.
Precisely for that reason it doesn't really appeal to my sick lizard brain that wants to tell people they are wrong on the internet. But if you have healthier compulsions than me, it could be the right place for you!
Theschism seems good, I had a vague sense it was totally dead and didn't check it, but it's much much less active than here, has many of the same people and topics, and the discussion isn't really better than the higher-quality fraction of discussion here.
More options
Context Copy link
The Schism is a fine place, true, but it's on reddit. I was honestly glad to be rid of reddit.
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