site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 12, 2025

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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

To me, disability means lacking the ability to do something.

the inability to experience emotions

But also, if you’re trying to describe disability in terms of mechanical action rather than experience, both of your first examples are about the inability to experience things most people can experience (inability to experience light, inability to experience sound).

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I don’t really see what you’re describing as a coherent rebuttal.

The inability to experience light and sound both severely affect one's ability to go about their life without obstacles and participate in society. That's why they are disabilities. If you are blind, you can't drive a car for example. It has especially been true historically, with modern technology and social accomodations many disabilities like lacking an arm are much less of a disability that before. Lacking sexual desire doesn't severely impede you life, if it does so at all. It's also a matter of severity rather than just inability. My vision is terrible without my spectacles for example, but even if I lack the ability to see properly and it would impede my life if I didn't have spectacles, I wouldn't consider it a disability because it isn't severe enough.

To add on, if lacking the ability to see light or hear sound was just flavor and didn't impede your life, then I wouldn't consider it a disability at all. For example, many people with synesthesia will describe their additional perceptions as deeply enriching and for some it would be fundamental to their human experience. However, I don't consider lacking synesthesia to be a disability. I wouldn't consider it a disability even if synesthesia was a majority trait and thus engrained in human culture, resulting in those without it being unable to understand and participate in core aspects of human culture.