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 -
Google, the most influential and powerful search engine in America, which most Americans use when searching for product information, released a propaganda music video advising everyone to only buy from black people. Buy what, only from black people? Everything. During a specific day as a kind of protest? No, every single day of the year. This follows Google’s decision to artificially boost black-owned businesses on their Maps app, giving these businesses a special eye-catching symbol.
Buying All Black - Ludacris feat. Flo Milli (A Google #BlackOwnedFriday Anthem)
The music video goes on to tell the audience to “buy black” thirty times, while the Google-funded music video showcases individuals searching for black-owned businesses of every variety, from restaurants to salons.
I for one, am less than enthusiastic about the hegemonic consumer search engine producing propaganda advising consumers to never shop at a white-owned business. I’m less concerned with the music video, which received 15 million impressions on YouTube alone (a Google product), than with the underlying sentiment that clearly permeates through the business. I’m afraid of what Google is doing behind the scenes in terms of showing services, and whether they are going to artificially reduce exposure to a business owned by the ancestor of an Irish slave, in favor of a wealthy and privileged Nigerian immigrant whose ancestors owned many slaves.
2.4% of US businesses are black owned, even accounting for significant fibbing on those surveys by businesses trying to claim to be black owned.
This just doesn't matter. It isn't going to hurt anyone, it probably won't really help anyone either. It is not at all comparable to a boycott of white owned businesses, let alone a boycott of Jewish owned businesses.
Sure, but out of your 4 listed categories the barbershops and salons are already de facto segregated for very good natural reasons, and the restaurants and clothiers probably aren't that far behind. A Black barber would have no idea how to cut my hair, and my barber has no idea how to cut 4c hair. Even worse for women!
And a restaurant owned by your Nigerian slave owner is unlikely to be a local pizza joint* that I'd get confused by to begin with. Idk about clothing, I feel like there are distinct markets there as well but I don't want to overstep my argument.
This is meaningless happy claptrap.
*Though I might be wrong here on second thought, tbf my favorite Italian deli is owned and operated by Koreans. They bought the place, kept the Italian name and concept, improved the menu and offerings. Best meatball Parm I've ever had. Diversity is our strength.
A white guy walks into a barber shop in Compton, where he is greeted by the proprietor
"Hello there sir, and welcome to my barber shop! Who is getting their hair cut today?"
White guy looks around, confused, at the otherwise empty store
"Uh hi, I am? I'm getting my hair cut, I'd like a short back and sides please - 4 blade if you can."
"You?! You want me to cut your hair? But how!? I only have scissors for black hair sir, I don't have even one pair of white scissors! How do white people even start a short back and sides, do you do it in order of colour shade? Should I start on a diagonal? Nope, I'm sorry sir but without extensive training I think this is probably only going to endanger the both of us."
What reasons exist for good and natural segregation of hair dressing services that don't exist for schools, public transport, restaurants etc?
Your confident ignorance is highly amusing.
White and Black hair really are just physically different. A barber that primarily works with black customers isn't going to have a clue how to layer fine straight blonde hair to produce texture in a side part. He's going to be used to doing the opposite, trying to tame overly thick and textured hair into something respectable. Most frequently the issue is seen in reverse, Black women in small towns unable to find anyone who knows how to work with textured hair.
So you are correct in the claim about hair being different but overstating the impact practically. I've been to a number of black barber shops none of which had any issue with my red/blonde hair. Short back and sides with a side part isn't the most challenging of haircuts after all.
They would perhaps lack the experience to deal with complicated or long hair, but for short lengths it's not as much of an issue. For hairstylists for women, your point becomes a little stronger, but even there given the numbers of black women who relax or straighten their hair, most black salons will have experience in dealing with straight hair as well or indeed given extensions/weaves are often put in and then styled, dealing with straight fine hair (often from Indian women).
It's not a symmetric issue in other words. A black woman may struggle in a white suburb to find someone but a white man in a black area is much less likely to have an issue. If they are hipsterish, a rocker or similar with long hair that calculus will change again, but a lot of black stylists are used to dealing with fine straight hair (albeit it is not their clients own natural hair).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link