site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 2, 2023

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.

10
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So did you intentionally or unintentionally cut the ages out of the article? The Collins' are in their mid 30s, and they're at 3 kids. They are highly unlikely to make it to 8 without serious, expensive, high health risk, and failure prone technological interventions. It is highly likely their fourth kid, let alone their eighth, is going to require thousands spent on procedures that might not work. And in a geriatric pregnancy highly likely to lead to severe autism or other genetic defects that make further generational breeding unlikely to be successful.

The whole scheme strikes me as hilariously inept, the sort of thing that happens when investment bankers try to go farm or Blue tribes go Red; figuring that if those stupid rednecks could do it surely we can do it better. The Collins' think breeding must be easy, they always heard about dumb welfare mothers doing it. Dynastic history is littered with men who needed heirs and couldn't produce them, men who would have loved to have eight kids and wound up with none. Having eight healthy children is physically difficult! That ability is rare!

She has undergone at least 6 rounds of IVF according to the article.

I also noted that the 8 kid goal is unrealistic at this point, but I think they have chances for 2 more without too much trouble. My wife had our kids at 37 and 40, and though we did go through some fertility treatments (which proved to be ultimately mostly unnecessary, both times), it didn't cost thousands. There's no guarantees for it, of course (as you indicated nothing is guaranteed when trying for kids).

I tried looking up statistics it's actually much more complicated than I thought because the raw numbers don't necessarily apply to very fertile women.

I agree one or two more could be possible, but unless you have quadruplets you're not hitting 8 if you start that late.

I was also thinking in terms of quiverfull families I know, out of eight they all get one genetic "dud" at least. So what do you do with that kid? To get 8 x 8 you'll really need 10 kids at least, to sub in for the duds.