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 mean I know it's the internet and all but I really do try to be genuine in all of my posts. I am 100% serious when I said that looking at "Tatishe Nteta" doesn't clock any particular ethnicity to me. Like, sure, maybe if I sat and looked at it for 30 seconds or so I might make some guesses, but that's not where my brain went, and I'm not in the habit of staring deeply into every single comment. Again my first reaction was "I feel out of the loop - did I miss something?" because I also tend to assume good faith first. My brain, in other words, got sidetracked by trying to guess the OOTL bit, then skipped past the comment until I saw there was a mod post below. It took me ages to clock who this Hanania guy is and still I don't really have a strong sense, for example, so random unfamiliar name-drops aren't unexpected, that's my stronger prior expectation.
Anyways, I object to posts on this forum that rely too much on innuendo and consensus-building and things like that, so even if it didn't have a racial angle I'd still be annoyed at a comment just going "Oh." We aren't mind-readers, and shouldn't have to be, and often overly-short comments waste everyone's time on extended side-bars because they aren't explicit enough. In other words, everyone here should have a vested interest in avoiding Poe's law traps. I think you agree, right? Someone is welcome to make offensive statements and argue for them, but they have to argue for them, not just rely on innuendo to do all the work. And honestly, I never even disputed the fact that his name might be relevant information -- I just want it to be, again, explicit.
More options
Context Copy link