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 -
Update on the Scottish Dual-Wielding Incident:
The BBC has now published a brief but informative report on the Scottish “dual-wielding” incident, mostly relaying statements from the local police. If you missed the story: a Bulgarian couple, male and female, were approached by local youths in St Ann Lane, Lochee, at about 7:40 pm on Saturday. At some point, an axe made an appearance. The police have issued a statement, and the BBC, in a notably careful choice of words, clarifies: “BBC News understands that officers have found no evidence to substantiate claims being made online the youths were at risk of sexual assault.”
Of course, I have every confidence that some corners of the internet, including select denizens of The Motte, will find this hopelessly unconvincing. If your current epistemic stance is “If she floats, she’s a witch; if she sinks, she’s a witch,” then no combination of facts, logic, or official statements will ever suffice. If your model of the world is that everyone is lying except you and your Telegram group, my ability to shift your priors is probably limited.
Still, let me offer my own semi-informed perspective as someone who is, if not a local, at least more familiar with the Scottish context than your average Redditor. From the beginning, both /r/Scotland and /r/Dundee expressed skepticism toward the popular Twitter narrative. You know the one: a pair of wide-eyed local waifs accosted by a “brown pervert,” who then had no choice but to brandish medieval weaponry in righteous self-defense. You can practically hear the John Williams score.
Now, Scotland is not short on delinquent youth. The British white underclass is, in fact, legendary for its supply of teenage hooligans. Here in Scotland, the local taxonomic label is “ned.” While “non-educated delinquent” is probably a post hoc invention, the behavioral phenotype is easily identified. There is a rich ecosystem of teenagers hanging around bus stops, acting tough, and performing questionable antics. One of their favorite tactics, if challenged, is to shout “pedophile” at the nearest authority figure, thus flipping the script from “annoying brat” to “potential victim.” This tends to work, at least until they age out of the game and (statistically) either get jobs or fall prey to Dundee’s prodigious drug scene.
On the question of weaponry, it bears repeating that it is illegal in Scotland to carry anything that even vaguely resembles a weapon for self-defense. For the Americans in the audience, this is not Texas. Not only is it illegal, it is also, in local context, not normal to walk around with an axe. While I actually find this arrangement not to my libertarian sensibilities, that's neither here nor there. My own priors, which seem to match those of most actual Scots I’ve spoken to, lean toward a more mundane explanation. The girl went out carrying because she wanted to impress her boyfriend, or at least to raise her standing among her peers. She might have been looking for trouble, or simply wanted to show off, and twelve is not too young to have social status games on your mind. Puberty isn’t the only thing that comes early in these parts.
I can only reiterate that an axe is not normal to carry, even if one feels threatened. A pocket knife? I can understand, sure. But this is about as 'extra' as taking a hand-grenade to a seedy pub when you're worried about being roofied.
As for the “migrant crime” angle, I want to point out that Scotland is not England, and certainly not Rotherham. The “migrant problem” is much less pronounced here. Outside Edinburgh or Glasgow, brown skin is still a curiosity, more likely to prompt a friendly question than suspicion. Most of the time, it’s just an excuse for conversation. Scotland has its own problems, but racialized sexual predation is not at the top of the list.
I would like to believe that this clarification settles things, but I am also not naïve. If your epistemic filter is tuned to maximum paranoia, then the absence of evidence is merely further evidence of a cover-up. For everyone else, the police statement, local skepticism, and sociological context should nudge your priors at least a little.
Of course, if you prefer your axes in the hands of twelve-year-olds fighting imaginary Bulgarian sex pests, I suppose nothing I write will convince you otherwise.
I knew something was up with this when the alleged assailant was the one who recorded the video. Putting aside why you would record your attempts to perv on a little girl, why would you post that online? The only other person who could have posted it would be the police, and there's no indication that the video was released by police. Why is a twelve-year-old girl hanging out in a place where she feels unsafe enough that she needs to carry weapons? Why do they keep slowly backing away instead of running? I know that when I was a kid if I had ever though someone was about to abduct me I'd get out of there as soon as possible. It's not like it wasn't a wide open public place with plenty of escape routes. And although it's not unheard of, it's certainly rare for attacks of the type that have been implied to be carried out by a man and a woman working together. I didn't comment earlier because I didn't want to speculate without more information, but the whole thing seemed fishy to me from the outset, because it conformed to a narrative certain people have. It's almost as if some of them want it to be true, and are hoping that it will turn out that these were nonwhite people there trying to rape children because it will validate the ideas they have about immigrants from certain parts of the world.
This really isnt persuasive to me at all. Posting video online where someone over-reacts to your jerk move is pretty standard fare. We have the Shiloh Hendrix case, thousands of cases where women dress provocatively at the gym for the purpose of cussing out men who looked at their butt or bosom, trans people being aggro then filming clerks who "misgendered" them, and many more. I think the term is outrage farming. Its super common. My presumption now is that anyone filming a sole, private citizen, in public at a non-public event is probably a bad actor. You dont just film a 14 year old girl, even if she is being an asshole and brandishing a hatchet if you are a normal guy. A normal guy just shrugs and leaves. Video guy tries to provoke the situation so he can get a good video. Whether he is just a jerk video guy, a snitch, or a creepy rapist remains an open question. But I see no situation where he is actually a positive contributor to the community.
(Assuming that the girl started an interaction and was harassing/intimidating, which we don't know):
I think there is a case for thinking (not saying) 'fuck you, you little punk. You don't get to scare me out of public spaces. I'll film this for the police.'
I do agree most people would leave, however there is a pro-social element of recording teenage thugs to make public spaces safer. Particularly if they interact with and brandish a weapon at you. Its not for everyone and its probably prudent to just leave things be and tell any police you walk past what happened.
If the kid hadn't initiated an interaction though and the man did (say after spotting she was carrying an axe), well its much harder to justify that in the current zeitgeist.
Edit: Looks like the kid started it (the guy says he has a witness and cctv reviewed by police) from @jkf
The transcript in that video is really weird, though. Her words are aggressive, but he keeps saying variations on, 'yes, yes, show the knife'.
It could be 'get the knife again, I want the world to see what you were threatening me with' but coupled with the weird way she's holding them (face on to the camera, maximum display, minimum threat) and his background as a 'digital artist' I would not be at all surprised if he's paying her.
Okay, but paying for what purpose? What's the exact business case for a video showing yourself being threatened with an axe and a knife by an underaged girl?
BLM2 electric boogaloo. Or just raising your profile as a Stunning And Brave artist, which I think worked quite well, if that was the goal.
The point being moreso the "by an underaged girl" part than "video showing yourself being threatened with an axe and a knife" part.
The fact that we're talking about it is proof that it's an effective way to raise your profile, no?
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