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 -
Let me be clear: nothing in my comment implies that you have ever said or implied that you are God. It is purely a matter of a tool for biblical interpretation. AFAICT, the Bible says that there is a difference between you and God. (Nothing to do with anything you have or haven't said.) Ergo, presumably, the Bible may think that there are things that God does which may not necessarily be things that you should do. One possible thing that might be in that category could be "treating people as a class". But of course, it could be complicated; maybe it's not in that category! But I don't think one can generally reason from, "Here is an example of God doing X," to, "Therefore, I should do X."
Disagree, but I’ll move on.
"What is permissible for Jupiter is not permissible for a cow.”
With you so far.
You’ve lost me, because this maps exactly onto “treating people as individuals.”
If “for everything there is a season,” and everything includes in a non-exhaustive list, “a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; a time to love and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace,” then I think it is perfectly reasonable to argue that there is “a time to treat as a class; and a time to treat as individuals.”
Both of those “times” can also be happening at the same time on different levels. I can’t imagine the author of Ecclesiastes was thinking “When the time for war with another nation comes upon me, the time for peace within my family is ended. It’s the war of all against all, baby!”
Neither am I thinking “The time has arrived to acknowledge that women, as a class, are damaging the civilization in which they live, ergo, I should treat my wife or even individual women like shit, because they are damaging the civilization in which they live.”
For this willingness to occasionally treat women as a class, I get accused of Gender Marxism, which is wild, because if that’s what my views are then the first Gender Marxist was…God.
And for men:
None of that says anything about “Some of you women will be helpers suitable, and some of you will be total girl-bosses who don’t need no man.” It also doesn’t say “Some of you men will be hard-working providers for your family, and some of you will be stoners or alcoholics who let your wife do all the work both at home and outside.”
There are failure modes for both groups, we are just currently much more afflicted by the female failure mode and should address that situation as it is.
Unfortunately for your argument, Christ is also God, and we are called to be like Christ, reasoning at a minimum from “Here is an example of Christ doing X,” to “Therefore, I should do X.” And Christ is not a gentle hippy, and he does treat people like classes sometimes.
For example, we know there was at least one decent Pharisee, Nicodemus. And yet, Jesus doesn’t say “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees! Except Nicodemus, he’s one of the good ones.”
He just says, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees!”
This is why I don’t think it’s inappropriate or un-Christian to say things that boil down to “Beware the leaven of what modern women tell each other they should be like!”
I think plenty of people see daylight between treating people like a class and being able to speak with labels. Even going back to the Scholastics, this could probably be viewed as a component (lol) of mereology.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link