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 -
No, I see it as an obvious direct consequence of their decisions. You're the one loading this completely-unobjectionable fact with emotional valence.
It's not a fact - abortion can avoid it, just as technology has allowed us to avoid many "obvious direct consequences" in the past 300 years. Yet only this one you take issue with. I wonder why.
You're not arguing in good faith here, having repeatedly attributed stances to me which I did not take and do not hold.
Say what you mean, coward. Maybe then we can have a real conversation.
I’m not thrilled about how AT is putting words in your mouth, but this sort of callout helps approximately never.
Be polite or refrain from responding at all. No one will think less of you for it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If I hit a hobo while driving drunk I can avoid the consequences of my actions by finishing him off with a brick to the head and hiding his body in the woods. Murder lets you get away from the consequences of all sorts of things, provided you can hide the evidence well enough. Fortunately for women, we've decided to make avoiding accountability for their decisions via murder legal in the case of pregnancy, and some segments of society even actively celebrate their right to murder to avoid accountability!
It's still begging the question.
The question here, really, is whether anti-abortionists are coming from a place of A) wishing punishment upon women for enjoying sex or B) concern for the resulting human lives.
Within this context the question of whether nascent humans should count as humans isn't being begged. It's established that this is the background belief of (almost all) anti-abortionists, which is what matters here.
Claiming that anti-abortionists just want to punish women is a weird sort of disbelief in the foreigner, I think. Indeed it seems to beg the question of whether we really care about the nascent lives involved, and it comes down on the side of 'no'.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link