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 -
Well, there was that time not too long ago when they found themselves in a shooting war with state governments... But more to the point, are they wrong? Sooner or later, one must look at the decisions being made, both by individuals and collectives.
GFM is an individual. My two best guesses at why they do what they do would be Ideological zeal, or status games hustle; probably it's a mix of the two.
On the ideological zeal end, either they're conforming to their ideology, or diverging from it. If they were diverging from it, I'd expect to see their community turn on them, the way it frequently turns on others who stray from community norms; there's hardly a shortage of examples of what that looks like. If they're conforming to it, then their actions give us evidence of how that ideological community actually thinks. It seems clear to me from this and numerous other examples that to the extent GFM is acting ideologically, they are conforming, and their actions are representative of the collective LGBTQ+ zeitgeist. This is where the movement is going.
On the status hustle end, they're doing what they're doing because they think it will be popular and will gain them status. In this way, the action is a test of broader social norms and attitudes, a way of betting, with skin in the game, on the nature of our society. From where I'm sitting, it looks like a reasonable bet. Not a million-to-one jackpot, but a limited win with negligible downside and solid gains secured. They were a nobody, and now their name is out in a (for them) net-positive context, with the name of their book attached. The campaign against Sanderson is back on, and wherever it goes, GFM will be riding it. Reddit normies and twitter folk are playing along. TOR isn't, yet, in this case, but the effort costs the attackers nothing, and gains them much, so it will happen again. It costs them nothing, because this sort of behavior is, in fact, popular, norm-affirming, in step with the spirit of the age.
If GFM is roughly equivalent to a neo-nazi, one must observe that this variant of neo-naziism is actually quite popular, growing more so by the day, and is in a position to secure dominance of our social, political and economic systems.
More options
Context Copy link