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 -
To counterbalance my frothy rant earlier this week about wokeism in the novel Ancillary Justice, I thought I would do a quick write up on another SF/F novel - namely The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison. This is another novel in the speculative fiction genre that has won accolades, is pretty 'woke' in its plot and worldbuilding, and is written by a pretty left leaning woman as far as I can tell.
However, I found it exquisite! To explain a bit without spoiling the plot entirely, it revolves around a half-goblin half-elf man who has been abused and out of favor his whole life, but suddenly becomes emperor of the refined, wealthy, and judgmental empire of elves who his late father ruled. It is a classic tale of the oppressed being thrust into a position of power, and having to navigate racism, prejudice, etc. That's the main theme of the book. For instance in this scene the new emperor, Maia, confronts his abusive guardian, Setheris:
On top of this, there are all sorts of messages about women being useful for more than marriages, masters taking care of their servants, etc etc. All standard far-left, liberal talking points.
I'm wondering if the main difference between my frustration with Ancillary Justice and The Goblin Emperor is just the use of pronouns? I didn't think I had that much of an issue with pronouns/trans ideology separated from the rest of the woke memeplex, but the more I think about it the more it seems that people switching the pronouns they use and forcing others to use their preferred pronouns even if obviously incorrect is the main issue in my mind. Which doesn't seem to make much logical sense - but maybe it's just a disgust reaction.
Anyway, as someone who has identified as a liberal for most of my life, actually hardcore leftist, anti-authoritarian socialist, etc, I'm curious how many other folks are in the same boat. Essentially on board with the project of the left, until the last 5-10 years when trans ideology and pronouns took over the movement. Perhaps there are others who have realized that this is one specific issue they just can't accept for the greater good of the leftist cause.
I think I'm in a similar spot and the way I explain it to myself is that it's a divergence between the ends, with which I am in agreement with the left, and the means, which I find myself disagreeing with more and more.
Particularly, I strongly disagree with a growing authoritarian and collectivist strain of leftist thinking and the popular uptake of it. (This doesn't actually seem like anything new, but it feels like it has been gaining strength during my lifetime. ) To go with your example of pronouns, I have really have nothing against a person asking me to refer to them using a non-default pronoun, but I despise that pronouns are being forced on me from above (eg. DEI training, Chief Diversity Officer, etc.) with an implicit threat of violence (conform or be fired), all of it broaching absolutely no discussion, all of it couched in insultingly primitive corp-speak produced by the bottom of the barrel of "generic bachelor degree holders."
That said, compared to you, my reaction isn't limited to trans ideology and pronouns; rather I see it as a small part of a growing respect for authoritarian means.
Why should we expect otherwise? The left made promises to a wide variety of consituencies, and those promises have, in the main, not born fruit. If you tell people you can solve their problems, and then you don't solve their problems, why should they not turn to other methods for solving problems than the ones you prefer?
Which promises were not held, economic equality? I guess the left has over promised for a while now…..
Equality between the sexes, between the races, lower crime, better education, improved outcomes for a variety of groups, the conquering of prejudice, all the myriad fruits of prosperity, available freely to all, etc, etc. The war on poverty, on crime, on drugs. For specifics, refer to any democratic presidential stump speech in living memory.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This is an excellent point! This idea of ends vs. means hits on a big theme I’ve been missing. Ironic since I just finished a trilogy that was all about that concept.
With trans for instance, I am perfectly fine with the ends. I do think we should have freedom to be gender fluid. (Especially with powerful tech) But the means are frustrating me to no end. Thanks for helping shed some light on the dark corners of my brain.
If your apparently-acceptable ends can only be accomplished by unacceptable means, it's probably worth taking another look at those ends.
I don’t necessarily think that’s true. I just think it takes time, and that technology/material wealth changes the picture.
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