site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 5, 2022

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.

9
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

the right wants the "status quo" of people with penises and Y chromosomes to have separate bathrooms, prisons, sports teams, and certain other facilities from people with uteruses and lacking Y chromosomes.

I think this is a major part of the disagreement. Genetic testing for Y chromosomes is not exactly something done often. Literally checking people's genitals to determine which sex-segregated group they belong in as opposed to relying on appearance of secondary characteristics which can be faked with varying levels of success (generally much easier for trans men than trans women, the latter usually requiring some amount of surgery to pull off) or just trusting their identification or (possibly faked) documents also seems like an escalation.

Literally checking people's genitals to determine which sex-segregated group they belong in as opposed to relying on appearance of secondary characteristics which can be faked with varying levels of success (generally much easier for trans men than trans women, the latter usually requiring some amount of surgery to pull off) or just trusting their identification or (possibly faked) documents also seems like an escalation.

Yes, this is why one designs laws that punish defectors who manage to evade detection, since we choose NOT to adopt more intrusive measures and trust people to follow generally accepted social edicts. You're just quibbling about the enforcement mechanism, not the validity of the norm it enforces.

A trans person who wants to be 'left alone' need only choose the bathroom or facility that corresponds to their biological sex and I daresay they will be left alone. Maybe they're a bit offput because social norms aren't 'accepting' their identity, but we COULD have a discussion to weigh the costs/benefits of accepting their identity vs. enforcing said norms.

But we HAVEN'T had that discussion and at present CAN'T have that discussion because even attempting it will get you literally banned from most social media sites. And that's not the right doing the banning.

But you'll have a hard time convincing me that the left is willing to cede any ground on this debate.

Prisons, of all places, are CERTAINLY capable of checking people's genitals before admission, and yet:

https://nypost.com/2022/04/25/transgender-rikers-inmate-gets-7-years-for-raping-female-prisoner/

If the left is incapable of even admitting that there exist valid reasons to keep people born with penises out of facilities delegated specifically for people who menstruate (I don't know what the most up-to-date prog terms are and don't care enough to check) then THEY are the source of the disagreement here.

But then again, if they admit to such valid reasons, this pretty much unravels the entire "your gender identity is what you believe and say it is!" logic.

A trans person who wants to be 'left alone' need only choose the bathroom or facility that corresponds to their biological sex and I daresay they will be left alone.

Back a few years ago I saw multiple social media posts along the lines of this selfie of a trans man in a woman's restroom with a caption asserting the absurdity of that belief. Following the hashtags in that tweet finds some similar ones (although mostly a lot of screenshots of that one as far as I can tell).

Again, you're just quibbling about the enforcement mechanism, not the validity of the norm it enforces.

Do you think there are valid reasons for the social norm of penis-havers and people of menstruation being assigned separate lavatory facilities?

Why should the extant status quo be altered?

Just to be clear, you're asserting that the person in the photo I linked should indeed use the women's bathroom? And you expect that to be the popular (or at least red tribe) consensus?

Do you think there are valid reasons for the social norm of penis-havers and people of menstruation being assigned separate lavatory facilities?

Why should the extant status quo be altered?

I'm rejecting the claim that that was ever the actual status quo.

Just to be clear, you're asserting that the person in the photo I linked should indeed use the women's bathroom

I have one of those for you too. According to your rules, which bathroom should this person use:

https://twitter.com/pic/media%2FFi6TZG1XEBIcEvu.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall

That link is broken for me, it just says "Hmm...this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else.". Maybe try linking to the tweet instead of the image from the tweet? Or doing a Google Image search on the image to see if you can find it hosted elsewhere.

Ah, the utterly demonic "feature" of this site, that replace nitter with twitter links, strikes again. Try this:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fi6TZG1XEBIcEvu?format=jpg&name=small

nitter with twitter links

Ah, I should have thought to try nitter on your original link. That does work. As does the twimg link.


Anyway, as to your actual question... I'm not sure what your point is. I'm arguing for letting people use whichever bathroom they feel like is appropriate and not having other people police that choice. The point of the photo I linked was to point out that the issue is complicated enough that a simple rule is not going to result in a working binary division. I don't think pointing to another edge case is a counter-argument.

More comments

Just to be clear, you're asserting that the person in the photo I linked should indeed use the women's bathroom?

I do not assert that. I dare you to show me where I asserted or implied that.

MY assertion is that the entity that owns the property in question can set up it's bathrooms however it likes and have whatever policy regarding gendered usage they care to, and it's up to them to enforce such policies. I think passing laws regarding bathroom usage on private property is actively stupid and detrimental in the vast majority of cases.

However I think there are simple and logical reasons to have gender-segregated lavatories, which are mostly related to the comfort of the females, especially females accompanied by children.

I think similar reasons apply even more starkly in, e.g. women's sports and in prisons (and I am not a fan of the whole concept of prisons, either). Bathrooms are just the ur-example that tends to impact everyone.

I'm rejecting the claim that that was ever the actual status quo.

I'm rejecting the claim that the right is the side that brought this matter to the forefront of the culture war. I'm claiming that the left deliberately pivoted to and advanced the transgender rights cause immediately after achieving victory on the same-sex marriage matter in mid-2015.

So what, then, do you believe the 'status quo' on this issue was prior to 2015? As I asked at the outset, what narrative of the last 20 years do you think shows the right pushing these issues and the left merely defending?

I'm rejecting the claim that the right is the side that brought this matter to the forefront of the culture war. I'm claiming that the left deliberately pivoted to and advanced the transgender rights cause immediately after achieving victory on the same-sex marriage matter in mid-2015.

Accepted. I conceded this point to you in a different reply to you in this thread where you provided evidence for it.

So what, then, do you believe the 'status quo' on this issue was prior to 2015?

I made some attempt at answering this in a reply to someone else in this thread.


I do not assert that. I dare you to show me where I asserted or implied that.

MY assertion is that the entity that owns the property in question can set up it's bathrooms however it likes and have whatever policy regarding gendered usage they care to, and it's up to them to enforce such policies. I think passing laws regarding bathroom usage on private property is actively stupid and detrimental in the vast majority of cases.

I apologize for the misunderstanding. I did not mean to put words into your mouth. The position you assert does not appear to be a popular one, so going further would be delving into your personal position, which is unlikely to shine much light on the greater culture war.

Genetic testing for Y chromosomes is not exactly something done often.

Yes. That proves we used have a high trust society, where people expected everyone to follow the rules without having to be verified, not that we as a society used to believe in the concept of "gender identity", by which we decided to segregate our bathrooms, locker rooms, sports, and prisons.