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 -
Sure, I used the Westboro Baptist Church as a cudgel against Christians back in the day, I know the drill.
But, you know. I was like 20 at the time and didn't really understand how to argue honestly and fairly, but that was a scummy and dishonest tactic when I used it back then. It still is now.
If the only version of Christianity that anyone not a Christian ever encountered was the Westboro bunch going around, then hell yeah I'd be "they're not representative and in fact here's a list of how they're heretics in faith, doctrine, and discipline". I do that anyway for other arguments over historic and global Christianity.
But if every Christian said "Well, it's unfortunate that the extremists get all the publicity, but if we say anything about them then non-Christians will just use that as anti-Christian propaganda so we have to back them up" - then would you really be surprised that non-Christians got their views of Christianity from the crazy people? Would you not expect other Christians to explain why the Westboro bunch were not representative? Would you not take from their silence that maybe the Westboro lot were in fact closer to how Christians believed?
More options
Context Copy link
But other Christians are willing to say "the Westboro Baptist Church is crazy and we don't believe what they are saying is true". This doesn't happen for trans issues.
Would you know if it does happen? How much time do you spend hanging out with trans activists, how sure are you that your media channels would promote examples of them being reasonable and moderate to your attention? Our media isn't designed for highlighting people being moderate and reasonable in full generality, let alone on adversarial culture war issues.
As someone who does hang out in those spaces some of the time, I can say that there is nothing like consensus among the trans community and trans activists on most of this stuff, denouncing others for making the cause look bad and being extreme/cringe is common, etc. It is true that this happens more within those like-minded spaces than in press releases, I suppose; in the middle of the culture war battle with bills on the ballot in many states, there is a lot of circling the wagons and presenting a unified front. I think Christians had a much more secure position from which to denounce their own members, and used it, which is good. But I don't think it's as completely one-sided as you may think.
Every mainstream Christian was opposed to the WBC, or near enough, and the ones who remember they exist still are. Most of their reasons for opposing them didn’t boil down to ‘they’re making us look bad’.
Can you demonstrate leaders of pro-trans groups, or simply prominent individuals within the community, opposing the fringe weirdos for reasons other than ‘making us look bad’?
WBC wasn't just making Christians look bad, they were actively harassing people and making their lives worse.
I expect I could find trans leaders denouncing, like, actual pedophiles who claim to be trans, or whatever, for that harm.
I don't think it's common for Christian leaders to denounce other Christians merely for being annoying or having bad opinions, which I think (?) is what we're talking about here?
But anyway, this is a bit vague. I'm going to be busy the rest of the week, but if you have a specific trans analogue to WBC you want to ask about ,I can see if I have time to look around.
Ok. What trans leaders have denounced child drag shows on the grounds of ‘kids don’t need to be seeing that’? I genuinely don’t know of any.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Christians saying that the Westboro Baptist Church doesn't speak for them are blatantly obvious about it almost every time it comes up at all. There's no need for me to hang out at a church or a Christian subreddit in order to find out about Christians disclaiming any association with the Westboro Baptists. Why would I have to do something like that for trans activists?
While the media likes to promote controversy, that doesn't explain it. The media reports on the Westboro Baptist Church to stir controversy, but the media also shows Christians calling them a bunch of homophobic nuts. The media doesn't report on the WBC uncritically, nor does the media treat them as just another pressure group, no different from someone calling for farm subsidies.
The media does not behave this way for trans activists. Reasonable trans activists don't appear in the media calling extremist activists nuts, and the extremist activists are treated as perfectly normal, not objects for derision like the WBC.
There's a big difference between the media signal-boosting someone for controversy and signal-boosting someone out of sympathy.
More options
Context Copy link
I've listened in IRL on the clique of trannies, non-binaries, and tranny-hags that infested a local bar's drop-in RPG night. A 3-minute sample got them calling some neighbor of theirs a disgusting bigot, and something to do with freeing palestine. Their games are also fuckawful. It drove all the non-terrible players to come on a different night.
Not exactly damning airtight evidence, just funny that I walk in on them right at that point. They...failed to win me over.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link