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 is obnoxious, don't do this.
You've managed to garner a pretty impressive array of reports (nine so far) including AAQC nominations and "boo outgroup" complaints. The tone of your presentation is... excessively smarmy, I guess I want to say. It doesn't invite discussion. And yes, some portion of that may be the natural result of you Noticing things you're not, on some views, allowed to Notice. But this is not a space where you get modded for Noticing, this is a space where you get modded for not speaking plainly. Don't connect a few dots and then dangle implications, here. Make an argument. Tell us what you think the evidence on offer tells you.
You really read through all of that to find the one thing you don't like?
They were trying to express frustration... And did it effectively.
As a reader of the site, please don't do this.
More options
Context Copy link
People with specific sexual fetishes centring on castration of minors are now being accepted as experts when it comes to setting policy dealing with minors engaging in decisions about medical treatment including hormones and surgery?
That seems to be the OP's argument, but it's just made in an obtuse and somewhat annoying way. It could have been shorter and more direct. Write for clarity, not amusement, and all that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I get modded every time I outright say "These people want to mutilate and sterilize children." Now he's getting modded for provided reams of evidence for any reasonable person to come to that conclusion themselves, cheekily hinting at it. Possibly because he saw me modded for saying it directly, who's to know.
You say you won't get modded for noticing, so people don't need to play coy. I don't believe you.
You were most recently moderated here. Let's take a look at what Zorba said about it:
This does not quite fit your interpretation of why you were moderated. In your case, you stated your view without bringing evidence. This post did the opposite--brought evidence, of a kind, while failing to state a view. The best way to avoid moderation on high-heat issues is to carefully bring both evidence and argument, along with a heap of charity for the outgroup.
I'll plead guilty to not keeping with the rules or their spirit, but I think @drmanhattan16 above explained the issue much better:
I do like a good horror story, and I think I got carried away writing this post.
I guess this also means I never get to make fun of wannabe writers, who pour out their frustrations onto news articles ever again.
For what it's worth, as a horror story it's pretty good - it does a great job selling the mounting sense of dread as new information is presented.
Just that's not what The Motte is for.
Maybe we need a The Motte Horror Story Hour thread, where we can post purely facts-based horror stories.
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