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 -
ESPN just released an article on the top athletes of the 21st century. The list is…interesting.
Shocking Phelps is ranked No 1. This is contra evidence against culture war fodder. He is white, male, and I assume straight. But then, their No 2 is Serena. The list is allegedly about how great they were at their sport. There is no good argument where Serena had a better career than Novak Djokovic. Novak has more slams, masters, career grand slams, only golden master, calendar slam, weeks at No 1. And Novak did it against the two other greatest tennis players of all time. Serena’s field was weaker. And of course, Serena wouldn’t last on the ATP whereas Novak wouldn’t lose a set on the WTA.
But Serena became famous for being good at a white sport while being black. And Novak (who shocking is ranked lower than Roger Fed despite clearly being better) is famous for refusing to take the covid vaxx.
So culture war? But then how do I explain Phelps at No 1? Maybe ESPN is just bad at its job? After all Brady is at five. On the other hand, ESPN has a ton of WNBA players on the list. Which is funny. The WNBA is not a good league and doesn’t generate (at least historically) a lot of money. There is no way the three of the top 34 athletes of the 21st century are WNBA players. Yet shockingly no female soccer players that high. What am I missing?
ETA: 8 of the top 100 athletes of the 21st century happen to be WNBA players per ESPN. And that is out of all Olympic sports, soccer, cricket, football, hockey, MMA, etc. Why so many WNBA players — a minor league that wouldn’t generate sufficient revenue to attract this alleged level of talent.
https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/40446224/top-100-athletes-21st-century
Brady is clearly better than either of them. Winning big at a sport a small percent of people play isn’t the same thing as winning big at the sport the best athletes in every American high school plays.
It should be filled with football, basketball, and baseball players. Soccer if we are doing global.
Track is also good to include. Everyone knows who the fastest kid in the school is.
More options
Context Copy link
That and swimming leads to absurd overinflated medal counts. Each race results in a medal.
I would only knock Brady because his team cheated numerous times.
Brady was also able to coast on the abilities of his team.
Dont get me wrong, he totally earned his Superbowl Rings, but it's a lot easier to rack up an absurd win-count when you spend the bulk of your career standing behind one of the best O-lines in the league.
Brady had absurd work ethic and determination. Obvious things like studying the game, but also stuff like totally changing his diet, reinventing his exercise regimen multiple times.
Some aspects of freak athleticism aren't strength and endurance related - hand/eye coordination, quick decision making, low heart rate under pressure.
He also had a frightening lack of pride when it came to reinventing his game, in game decision making, and so on that let him do things everyone else could but never did.
Don't discount those things, and while Mahomes peak may be more athletic, longevity is its own value.
I completely agree with you regarding his work ethic and lack of pride/ego which I believe is the secret of his longevity, and the reason that he totally deserves each and every one of those Superbowl Rings.
At the same time I can think of multiple QBs off the top of my head who I would rank above him in terms of raw talent and athleticism.
I don't think we're all that far off from eachother.
Is decision making under pressure an athletic skill? He's the best of all time at that. Is over riding your body's sympathetic activation athleticism? He's gotta be one of the best at that. Skilled scuba divers who force their bodies to do things that don't make sense are athletic in my mind.
It's just not speed/strength/the strongest arm in the world.
Separate to that is the longevity. And instead of a Lebron longevity vs. MJ argument, Brady is 100% of Lebron and 90% of MJ.
I would say "no" but can also see where and/or why others might disagree.
Quick feet and a strong arm are one thing, grace under pressure and a readiness to adapt are another
What moves the needle for me on this is the physical aspects of this like low heart rate. Additionally special forces type guys have similar skills sets and response, and are also athletic freaks in other ways, which makes me think some of this is tied together.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Brady at minimum should be above LeBron and probably Messi. LeBron won less in a league where individual talent matters more.
Agreed on LeBron, I'd rank either Kobe or Shaq' over him but Messi probably deserves a spot near the top.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link