site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  3yr ago (text post)   33270 thread views

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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What is the evidence that this was the case? How does the issuance of a warrant give us any insight into the reason for the theft?

The warrant nixes the theories about the original incident being an innocent mistake/snowball of errors. Brinton pretty clearly has a thing about stealing other peoples' luggage.

Now that we're reasonably certain that this is intentional behavior, the question turns to motive. Stealing other peoples' luggage/clothing is a very weird, socially transgressive thing to do. Brinton does a lot of other highly visible, weird, socially transgressive things, and all of those are connected in one way or another to their sexuality. It would not be a shock that this weird, socially transgressive thing was also connected to their sexuality.

In addition, this is a very stupid, destructive thing for an otherwise-competent professional to do. Presuming that Brinton is in fact an otherwise-competent professional, one imagines that they must have perceived significant value in such an action. Illicit sexual gratification is a form of significant value infamous for getting otherwise-competent professionals to do very stupid, destructive things, possibly the most common motive for such actions there is.

Obviously neither of these arguments constitute conclusive evidence, but it seems to me that they add up to a reasonable starting prior. Likewise, it seems clear to me that Progressive objections to this prior consist at least somewhat from their ideological commitment to the LGBTQ+ movement as a unfailingly anodyne social force, and their reflexive rejection of any Conservative criticisms of LGBTQ+ sexual behavior or norms.

The warrant is strong evidence that he actually stole stuff and the whole story isn't a troll.

We do know they stole stuff. We don't know the motivations behind it. It might be a sexual fetish, but it might be kleptomania or another reason. Just because Brinton dresses like a walking freakshow is not sufficient evidence that they steal in order to get women's clothing in order to indulge in whatever a fetish involves.

Just because Brinton dresses like a walking freakshow is not sufficient evidence

It is not sufficient evidence to say with certainty. It is sufficient evidence to elevate the probability of some weird sexual fetish several orders of magnitude above the baseline, possibly even into the realm of being the most likely cause.

Just because Brinton dresses like a walking freakshow is not sufficient evidence that they steal in order to get women's clothing in order to indulge in whatever a fetish involves.

Maybe it's not sufficient for you; but some of us have different priors.

I am not doubting that Brinton stole the luggage, merely the purported justification for Brinton's doing so.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats