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 -
I care because it is one of the many instances of how the social norms are established and before you know it, it will be your own daughter smelling around the dinner table. I am done with the "live and let live" attitude for all the craziness it brought upon us. I am now all for return of good old shaming/blaming back into town. So yeah, I have no problem calling Aella and any of her partners as disgusting people. Sue me.
You, a stranger on the internet, will not achieve anything by "shaming" another stranger on the internet.
Edit (because of much confusion) - Shaming works if the right people shame you in the proper context. For example, a teenage boy might not take a shower ten days in a row if his mom tells him to, but will shower 2x a day for the rest of his life if his crush calls him stinky (even as a joke). Work backward using the demographics of motte users and determine if shaming is a good tactic for the modal motte user.
Your edit is good stuff, but without it your original post is just so wrong as to be jaw dropping. And here, of all places! Honestly, I would be embarrassed if I were you. (Not really, but this post is more about practical application than discussion.)
Hardly. The original post was obviously correct to me, and it was surprising that others were willing to do confidently (and incorrectly) declare it wrong. The point @f3zinker was making from the beginning is what he clarified in his edit: to Aella (or anyone else reading people here for that matter), you are a nobody who doesn't matter. You can't possibly affect behavior by shaming people from such a position of unimportance to them.
Oh you sweet summer child...
Is another example of a regularly successful attempt to affect behavior by shaming people from a position of unimportance. Is that not shaming in your eyes?
No, not at all. Why would I care if someone thinks that?
You are typical minding then. Every interaction on the internet is a status game, and the vast, vast majority of people are insecure enough to let statements like 'you sweet summer child' or 'ok boomer' or a picture of captain Picard holding his face modify their behaviour. Not from a celebrity, from a nobody - maybe a friend of a friend on Facebook or Twitter, but usually just a complete stranger - and all they have to do is drop a meme that makes them feel stupid for saying whatever they said. If you couldn't change a stranger's behaviour with shame, cyber bullying wouldn't be a concept. Kiwifarms would never have existed. Gamergate wouldn't have happened. Tyler the creator wouldn't need to tell people to look elsewhere.
I think you're missing the possibility of "telling people they're wrong and they suck mysteriously causes them to dig in and say they're not wrong and don't suck"--posting a reaction image at someone on the Internet is just as, if not more likely to be met with a negative counter, the other party digging up something on you that looks cringey, or just blocking you altogether.
If (if!) every interaction on the 'net is a status game, then the gameplay clearly has room for "the other player is allowed to shoot back." If anything, my recent post outside this thread should have had a section about websites like ED, Kiwifarms, Bad Webcomics, etc., because another thing that has changed about the Internet from what I considered The Good Old Days (2005-2011-ish) is how every website that was dedicated to roasting strangers online for being weird has basically been forced into obscurity.
Maybe I'm using status game wrong and I mean something else? I mean any interaction between people in which their status is raised or lowered. Digging in and claiming you don't suck, digging up dirt on your opponent to take the focus off you and put it on them, and even blocking is modified by your reputation and can modify it in turn - remember when Trump wasn't allowed to block someone? Would you block your boss if you were friends on social media? Digging up and digging in are defensive reactions to a potential besmirching - why would you refuse to admit you were wrong when you know you are wrong, unless you are afraid of a hit to your reputation?
Furthermore, while that is a great thread and I am glad you linked it, status games don't have level playing fields. I mentioned your boss before, but anyone in power gets moves and advantages not afforded those not in power. That doesn't mean you can't fight back, but the options available for you to do so are much more limited and harder to use.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link