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 understand the analogy between teacher/parent trans activists and child groomers, but it's also the case that conservatives are "kidding in the square" here. Many are also darkly hinting that trans activists are pedophiles. For example, the Stonetoss comic about predators hiding in plain sight or the "Don't overcomplicate things, they're evil and want to fuck kids" meme. I don't have the data to evalute the truth value of this claim but it's definitely being made.
You're misreading this one IMO.
Democrats, America's party for social engineering, have naturally come into conflict with families over gender ideology, vaccines, school curriculum, you name it. This isn't a naked attack on the Red Tribe (though they do do that) but on the right of family — any family — to inculclate its children in values contrary to the state.
The family is the most enduring relic of pre-state humanity. How things work in your extended family is a good approximation of how a band or small tribe worked thirty thousand years ago. The family has long been the thorn in the side of states trying to engage in social engineering. Do I need examples? Attempts to fight civil servants and non-ruling class citizens from funneling resources to their family is, boldy, the entire project of the state.
About the bill, then. There was an interesting podcast over at Bennett's Phylactery about the relationship between Christianity and hierarchy. I link it (a) because it's a good response to Guzman's "The Bible says to accept everyone for who they are" quote, but also (b) in one part, he makes a good case for why preserving parents' arbitrary rights to discipline and educate their children is good, even if they may in fringe cases abuse it.
I think it's a good response to Guzman's attempt to impose gender ideology in the houshold, even if she can come up with one or two horrifying anecdotes. If our standard for abolishing rights and local institutions is "something horrifying was done" we will have no rights or local institutions in short order.
I think it's a little hazy to try to draw equivalence between a state legislator's attempt to pass a criminal law targeting parents with an anonymous webcomic's provocations.
I also think there's a better steelman for the "groomer" meme than you're acknowledging. I think it's accurate that a mainstream element of the Democratic party is trying to groom children to become transgender. I have heard this first-hand from good friends of mine with a kid in preschool. I am certain the proponents of this sort of policy think of it as identifying the children who are innately gender dysphoric and trying to give them a nurturing environment (no one is the villain of their own story), but I think I've accurately described the steps that they are taking. Yes, there is some intended double entendre with the "grooming" nomenclature, but that's politics; everyone tries to put their opponents in a bad light and themselves in a good light. The left has their mirror of this, terming it "conversion therapy" when parents would prefer to treat their children's stated preference to transition with therapy rather than surgery, intending of course to conjure images of evangelical prison camps administering electric shocks to gay kids in the 90s or whatever.
Were the prison camps and torture ever the main representative of conversion therapy in the USA? It’s still going on, and AFAIK seems to consist mostly of team building activities, awkward talk therapy, lessons in gender appropriate hobbies, prayer, and now ivermectin because of course it does.
Beats me, fortunately it's all outside of my experience. I guess it's just one of those things... you can set up a hundred nice wholesome pray-away-the-gay camps, but just a couple of your friends do some electroshock torture on child prisoners and suddenly that's all anyone wants to talk about. 🙄
More options
Context Copy link
My understanding is that it involved literal Clockwork Orange style condition/torture. Being given drugs that induced nausea, and then being forced to watch gay pornography. Electrical shocks to the genitalia in response to arousal at gay porn. Basically attempting to condition the body to not be gay.
Given then people who ask young kids "Hey, boys can play with dolls too, do you still think you are a girl?" are accused of "conversation therapy" now, I have doubts about whether gay conversation therapy was what they say it was.
Oh, I'm sure they can come up with a few examples of torture camps if they want. I have doubts about whether that was the mainstream or if the most common example was a more-awkward version of a standard summer camp.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Where did I draw that equivalence? OP claimed conservatives are only using "groomer" as in "covert attempt to directly modify a kid's sexuality in unhealthy ways". I provided two prominent examples of conservatives saying "groomer" as in "those people are pedophiles". But they are just two examples. If you browse /r/conservative or /r/politicalcompassmemes (pre mod-purge) you regularly see (saw) posts of trans child sex abuse cases with comments like "groomers gonna groom". Admittedly there's no conservative pope I can cite for the mainstream conservative usage of "groomer", but I'm just trying to keep it real.
The second part of my comment addresses the Virginia bill, and is completely separate.
Fair enough, but I'm also not sure that Stonetoss is a reasonable exemplar of the conservative movement.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Well, if "not convinced your four year old child really is trans means you are a child abuser just like if you beat them so hard you broke their bones" is being attempted to become law, then "trans activism is grooming" is just as legit.
The Venn diagram of ‘people that work in contact with children’ and ‘people with an interest in the genital arrangement of other people’s children’ not surprisingly includes pedophiles. Also urologists but I can’t really think of anyone else.
Certain other medical specialties and researchers, I would imagine.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
So the standard we're going by is "the other side is equivocating too"? I'm not outraged by the right bringing knives to a knife fight, but let's call knives knives, please.
I think another aspect is that trans activists are lobbying for children of all ages to be able to consent to life changing decisions even against their parents' will. This is basically one step away from making pedophilia legal. Though I agree that a lot of it is just squaring up with weapons of their own.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link