site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 26, 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.

11
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Not a good day for Mr. Tate Andrew Tate, Brother Tristan arrested amid human trafficking probe

Andrew Tate and his brother have been arrested and led away in cuffs after their luxury Romanian mansion was raided by police.

The divisive influencer, referred to by his fans as ‘Top G’, and his brother Tristan are being quizzed over human trafficking allegations, according to local reports.

The pair have reportedly been under investigation for the alleged kidnapping of two young women in their villa in the town of Voluntari.

Their home was raided by the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism in Bucharest earlier today, reports Libertatea.

The brothers were issued warrants in relation to forming an organized criminal group, international human trafficking, and rape.

I am skeptical. This does not make sense from a risk vs. reward perspective. Presumably their hustler university program and other businesses provide plenty of legal revenue; why engage in such unnecessary risk? Romania's criminal justice system probably does not have the same requirement of burden of proof as in the US.

I am skeptical. This does not make sense from a risk vs. reward perspective. Presumably their hustler university program and other businesses provide plenty of legal revenue; why engage in such unnecessary risk?

I mean..part of the "scam" of Hustler's University is that Tate has a great life and makes a lot of money and will teach you how to do the same.

Even if the Bugatti and houses are leased and rented, you still need starting capital to sell that scam. How did Tate make said money? He didn't have a lucrative MMA career... I think he didn't expect to blow up this big and now his past is catching up with him.

TBH I feel the same way about his misogyny: Tate could have been vastly more popular and could have skirted the ban (as other "manosphere"' guys are doing now) but he said and did things early on that allowed him to be tarred as an actual misogynist. But, at the time he was saying it, he probably didn't expect to ever get as big as he did. But he was locked in.

So another SBF...a fake or fraudulent rich person whose lies caught up to him

He might have actually have been independently wealthy (though I'm suspicious of this - he speaks like a rapper in some ways) but it would have been through illicit activities like pimping or pseudo-illicit ones (since it just collapses into pimping) like running a webcamming business.

Tate could have been vastly more popular and could have skirted the ban (as other "manosphere"' guys are doing now) but he said and did things early on that allowed him to be tarred as an actual misogynist.

Why not just say "said and did things that were actually misogynistic"? Hard to get more misogynistic in the actual meaning of the word than treating women as chattel, no?

In some ways doing things allowed him to be tarred is worse for his career, it wouldn't matter how sexist he was if no one ever found out.

I think that was the clear implication of "actual misogynist" (especially in the context of the rest of the post) but your framing is better.