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 -
From what I recall of reading the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the proprietor was willing to sell them one of the generic cakes. The issue came up when he was asked to provide one with personalized, theme-appropriate decoration.
Which is to say, to produce an expression of the beliefs the couple had regarding their wedding. And so in that way the couple, too, was attempting to impose their beliefs on him.
Now, it's a very mild sort of imposition I am talking about, of course. That kind of economic incentive to get someone else's expressive faculties dedicated to your cause for a moment is quite common, and in fact it is a good thing that the modern world lets those of us with less training or talent harness the voices of others that way. But it is nonetheless their voice, and many people are leery of forcing someone to say something they disagree with.
For comparison's sake: imagine Mr. Euphoric-Fedora advertises a service where he will leave one of a selection of texts in the hotel drawer if the person renting the room requests it. The local newspaper, or a copy of Godel Escher Bach, or one of several others from his collection. At his discretion he may even purchase a new one if you contact him ahead of time. But he won't put a Bible in it. Is that a failure to "provide rooms to religious people on the same terms as he provides to non-believers"?
A reasonable point, and one which was unfortunately lost in the noise as the pro-equality side either naively pattern-matched¹ the case to one of a business posting a '
WHITESSTRAIGHTS ONLY' sign (or worse, all the businesses in a less tolerant area doing so), or possibly sought to avoid creating a precedent which would allow such an outcome.¹cf. the Rightful Caliph's Meditation on Bingo Cards.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link