@Home's banner p

Home


				

				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					

					
joined 2022 October 04 21:46:46 UTC
				

				

				

				

				

				

					
				

				

				
				
				

				
User ID: 1483


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
Home


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				

				
				
				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 October 04 21:46:46 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 1483


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top New Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


how is it not his fault that he makes his "puppy play" fetish part of his public persona?




This 'public persona' is a part of their private life that has now been made public by the media. A lot of people do a lot of interesting shit - I'm sure if we followed other mid-tier government officials closely we'd find some interesting shit too. But it's not like they're doing anything illegal here either.




Why can't he keep his kinks and fetishes inside the bedroom?




Because they don't have to? I keep my sexual life private as most people do. But I don't do that because it's against the law. I do it because I choose to do so. If someone else has a different approach, good for them. This isn't exclusive to the LGBT community either - plenty of straight people engage in similar things and get half as much flack for it. Our decision on how we conduct our private lives is up to us assuming we don't break any laws. Just because we find something weird to us doesn't mean that it is or that we should immediately disapprove of such behavior.


At the end of the day, we're talking about a mid-tier official. Their personal lives are irrelevant as long as a) they're qualified for the job b) perform the job well and c) aren't a threat to national security. Brinton (assuming he's innocent lol) meets these criteria.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Thank you. So what is your point with this? People are freaks if they talk about their kinks to an audience who wants to hear about it? Are you saying that the government shouldn't hire people who talk about their personal life?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Yes, he is a sexual deviant.




Just to be clear, this is just your opinion. I'd like to hear more about why you think they're a sexual deviant with more reasons than 'I disagree'.




And I’m totally comfortable saying the government shouldn’t hire people who talk about how awesome it is to have sex with animals.




I'm not familiar with them ever advocating for sex with actual animals, rather just some sort of creative role-playing. Otherwise we'd be in jail when girls call us daddy in bed. Regardless, I'm still interested to hear exactly why you think this sort of role play is so bad as to justify the government knowing about it.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm not so sure this info becoming public was exactly voluntary but I digress. I guess I'm the type who doesn't think that one should make negative inferences without having good reasons. So I'd ask myself what exactly I dislike about them and if it is something that I should find to be morally bad.


Without that, anyone that looks or does anything differently than you just automatically becomes a freak. Seems like a reductive way to live but to each their own.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


You're arguing the over representation of Jews in some cases led to a deadly historical event?




No, I'm arguing that the line of reasoning that starts with 'jews have an outsized influenced' has resulted in pretty heinous outcomes.




Noticing the outsized influence of Jews in some cases when they tend to represent a very small minority of the population, and noticing 'white' men have been most of the presidents during periods where people of European ancestry represented significant portions of the population is fundamentally different.




I think men is also a key term here - why hasn't there ever been a woman president in hundreds of years while making up 50% of the population? We know the answer to that question. So what about the Jews? We also know the answer to that question too. There's a ton of history that explains why some industries have a higher percentage of jews. The real history is very different than any mainstream conspiracy explanation.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
No one is arguing that Jews don't have an outsized influence in some cases. It's the narrative that forms from that statement. The issue is people taking that statement and assuming that Jews must be using this outsized influence for evil, bad reasons. One statement is true, the other is baseless conspiracy.


It's like pointing out that white men have had an outsized influence on US power because most US presidents were white men. This is a true statement. Saying that white men are engaged in a conspiracy to maliciously keep and wield their power over everyone else is an unfounded conspiracy.


Lastly, one of these 'facts' has led to a deadly historical event and the other hasn't. We can't forget about context when talking about this.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


fetish for pretend bestiality while giving interviews about their appointments to the department of energy.




Can you link this interview? I'm not familiar with it and I wasn't able to find it




The whole kink lifestyle is weird enough, you don’t have to go on TV talking about it.




What kink lifestyle are you referring to? Is it in the same interview as above?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This isn't about choice, it's about an action by an individual leading to a stereotype of an entire group. They could be talking about the type of person to wear a suit to a party for all I care.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


What an odd conflation of highly identifiable niche/deviant behavior and uselessly broad identity categories.




Can you clarify why you don't think these examples are relatable? Specifically with men and sexual abuse - men are significantly more likely to commit sexual crimes and a large amount of them do so. We're talking men of all shapes and sizes. If this rare incident changes your perception of an entire group than surely the rather commonplace sexual crime committed by men should do the same?




I think it's reasonable to suspect that the coworker is simply trying to deflect from the swastika tattoos, yes?




This hypothetical isn't relevant. Swastika tatoos are historically and contextually related to violence and a highly specific type of person. It's impossible to compare that sort of history and baggage with something like a subset of the LGBT community.


To reiterate, these sorts of events are not as common as you think they are. These stories do get happily promoted by the media when they do happen because that's the society we live in. We aren't writing headline stories about yet another father molesting his daughter.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


So maybe the best way to resist is with a bit of dishonesty. Take down the n-word under the untenable pretense that it's a direct incitement to violence, and then just don't make that same mischaracterization with respect to misgendering or deadnaming or whatever.




I'm referencing this - endorsing intentional dishonesty to allow 'harmful' speech for some groups but disallow it for others.




I don't want Twitter to ban even swastikas or n-words . . . but - It dies without advertising dollars, simple and lamentable as that."




So advertising dollars would be your way to determine what forms of 'harmful' speech you'd allow? If old Twitter told you that they banned deadnaming due to advertiser concerns, would you support that move?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Right, but I find it frustrating that people are just now realizing this. People on the left have been saying the same thing forever - It's not that we don't support free speech (we do), but, like Musk & nearly everyone else, we think that there should be some limits placed speech when it comes to the internet.


Musk isn't doing anything new or different here. It's what's always been done. Twitter has always moderated content that they believe to be harmful. Musk is doing the same exact thing but he just has a different definition of what 'harm' constitutes. If you agree with his new definition of harm, great. But you should at least realize that this is still a highly circumstantial process and is fully susceptible to bias as it's always been.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What exactly makes them a freak?


Also, why would you say that went out of their way to hire Brinton? They have dual masters' degrees in nuclear engineering from MIT & plenty of relevent work experience. I'd say they earned their position. Is that not enough for the deputy assistant secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
For sure, but I'm advocating for consistency. Your 'social norms' are probably very different than mine. I don't even think criticizing someone for breaking social norms is really acceptable either - Why is this specific action 'bad'? Should we cast judgement on someone because they do things differently? etc.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Can you name a single other government employee who has voluntarily talked to the media about their fetishes in comparable detail?




Can you name a straight government employee that was even asked about something like this? It's not a fair comparison because different groups get treated differently.




What passes for you as an example of a straight person doing something similar?




There's plenty of BDSM conventions, fetish clubs, and other things that straight people engage in all the time. Most of us don't talk about it too much because that's not the norm. Even if we did talk about, we don't get labelled as a sexual deviant. However, there are definitely exceptions to this rule as there is in the LGBT community.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Agreed. Going by your assessment, Harvard passes that test with flying colors.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I think there's a little more nuance than that. While I can't speak for every case, most of the warnings I saw were placed on tweets whose sources were fully or partially unknown. Now, the government certainly isn't all-knowing, but in terms of getting the most reliable data, it's hard to argue that numbers from hospitals submitted to the government were as questionable as random unverified sources. (Note: this is all dependent on wether or not you think the government intentionally and maliciously doctored the numbers to manipulate people. If that's what you think I don't think we'll be able to see eye to eye).


We also need to consider the unique nature of the pandemic - If people get bad info, they put themselves & others at serious risk. In that sort of scenario, it's hard for me to justify using bits and pieces of less verified data instead of government data (as we have in the past). I don't think it's an easy decision at all and I also can how bad it looks from the other side. But if you frame it as "Private company opts to promote verified data in attempt to save lives" it's not as bad.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Take down the n-word under the untenable pretense that it's a direct incitement to violence, and then just don't make that same mischaracterization with respect to misgendering or deadnaming or whatever.




So you're arguing that a company should be intentionally dishonest and use their biases to explicitly allow one type of hate speech while banning the other?


First of all, how is that any better than how Twitter used to be? Isn't that the sort of thing that you'd want to avoid?


Second, I'd argue that your system is far worse than Twitter's old system. At least the old system had written rules and warnings instead of letting intentionally dishonest 'personal opinions' to be the determining factor.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Conditional on being right about 2), no. If I’m wrong and Mx. Brinton was unable to control perverted urges...yeah, I guess.




Let's assume the worst: They stole the bag for sexual reasons.


Given that this single person's actions moves the needle for how you'll trust, hire, or promote other members of Brinton's group:


Does a story of a man repeatedly abusing and eventually murdering their young child move the needle for how you'll trust, hire, or promote other men?


Does the story of Sandy Hook move the needle for how you'll trust, hire, or promote other white men?


Does the story of Pittsburg Synagogue shooting move the needle for how you'll trust, hire, or promote other people with right ring beliefs?


Considering that all of these stories are far worse than the worst thing Brinton might have done, I'd hope that you'd have the same response.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


In this instance, removing one person's ability preserves the platform's availability for many others.




This is interesting to me - I'm a leftist who is generally in favor of more content moderation than less. What's interesting is that my thought process is literally exactly the same as yours - I value the platform's experience as a whole much more than I value individual accounts. Although far from perfect, most of the platforms have very clear rules about how to avoid suspension and sometimes even offer a warning. Since these platforms are so valuable too so many people, I don't really have a problem with a stricter content moderation policy. Like you, I also value freedom of speech, expression, & ideas. I just think that content moderation is useful as well.


In my leftist circles, we'd all pretty much agree with your statement. What are the differences between mainstream ideas on content moderation and free speech maximalism?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Why are those dudes who go naked under their trenchcoats and then flash children on the subway bad? Do you agree that they're bad? What specific harm are they causing?




I can't believe this comment has 8 upvotes - you're telling me that you can't see what's wrong with directly exposing underage, nonconsenting children to sexual body parts? Or exposing themselves to any nonconsenting adult? Reading an article online about a kink is in no way comparable.




It undermines the norms of monogamy and private sexuality. Why isn't it bad? If you're the one proposing a radical change in public norms, shouldn't you bear the burden?




Why is undermining a norm a bad thing? Isn't that what humans have done for thousands of years to get us to this point? Sure, it's different, but that doesn't immediately make it 'bad'.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
If I'm reading correctly, it looks like this was published in 2019. The commenter I was replying to specifically said that they were talking about this while also talking about their appointment to the DoE (which happened in 2022).


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Burying what exactly? You're putting the cart well before the horse here. Strip all identity politics out of this story and here's what you get: A mid-tier government official claims to have accidentally stolen luggage on a business trip.


Why is that worth reporting on? A story this small rarely makes the news. The only reason this is news is because it involves identity politics. I thought we were against identity politics here?


You should be asking the other question: Why did right ring media jump all over this minor story? It's simple, it's because they knew they'd get easy clicks by sensationalizing a story involving identity politics. Again, I'm pretty sure most of us here are opposed to media outlets doing this. But now it's somehow not only ok but appreciated? Especially when we have no proof of what happened yet and have good reason to believe this was a stupid mistake? It's ridiculous.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Now we have people dragging us into their bedrooms, or rather putting their bedrooms out in the public square, in order to tell us all about what they do.




What? Where in this story is Brinton dragging you into their bedroom and forcing you to learn about what they do? Yes, there are articles that talk about Brinton's sexual kinks. Yes, you can find Brinton talking about these kinks on youtube as well.


But that is literally what people/media do: They talk about shit. If you don't like it, you don't have to click. Or read. Or listen. There is nothing being 'forced' here. Their beds aren't out in the public square - their story is in a link that you chose to click.


Since sharing your sexual kinks isn't illegal, this entire issue can be chalked up to personal preference. I read shit I don't agree with all the time and move along since it doesn't apply to me. I know you don't support this but that doesn't mean that it's automatically bad and should be done in your way. Make me an argument about why this is morally wrong and/or should be considered illegal. That's valid. But getting frustrated like this is the same thing as some Karen yelling at people blasting music in their cars. Move on.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I never said they weren't an outlier? But 'freak' and 'outlier' are two completely different things with completely different social connotations, especially when talking about a person.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I of course agree that using tax dollars poorly is to be avoided. But I think the OP was making a bigger point: how can you possibly quantify value in this instance? What are the requirements for a school admin to be "fiscally efficient"? Who decides that? More importantly, if we could somehow determine this, would Harvard be the worst offender?


I think this is much more complicated than it appears.