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 -
RIP James Watson
And so we lose one of the 20th Century pioneers of DNA research. He made it to a nice and comfortable 97 so at least he got to live a full life. His contributions were undeniable but we are all aware of what happened to him in his later years when his awards and honours got stripped because he talked to liberally about HBD. Back then I interpreted all this as yet another example of "Woke gone mad" left wingers who couldn't attack the argument so decided the best shot was to attack the man himself.
Other than the HBD stuff I thought he was a perfectly normal retired scientist, a bit wacky maybe but that's almost obligatory if you have a Nobel prize.
However I have very recently (in the last hour after news of his passing broke) learned that there's more to the sorts of things that Watson said than merely "respectable" HBD. For example there's this quote:
and this:
and this:
and then there's this:
This new knowledge has made me reevaluate my views on him. Now my new provisional views on him are that he clusters with Brian Josephson: academically brilliant but kooky in the head:
except that Watson's views were even more corrosive to modern civil society than Brian's. The more you know, as they say...
Odd, as I'm not sure biology is known as a high-paying field that draws in short men (surely that would be finance or something) but not objectionable.
If a woman finds herself surrounded by very intelligent, conscientious men, she'd be crazy to not try and marry one of them. I'm not the first person to realise this.
Definitely true. The link between vitamin D and testosterone is well-established.
Seems like a poor choice as a hiring manager. Why not take advantage of anti-fat prejudice and get talented fatties at a steal? But still not an earth-shattering revelation.
I imagine the view there is "well, bio is full of women because the ladies, bless their little fluffy heads, aren't smart enough for real science like chemistry and physics, so a short guy will have a better chance there" mixed in with some "and since men are smarter than women, a guy in bio will hit the top of the profession, tenure, prizes, etc. faster and easier than competing against men in other disciplines".
Because fat people are stupid. If they were smart, they would not be fat. It is easy not to be fat, so if you are fat, it is because you are too stupid, lazy and greedy not to be fat. Everyone knows this!
I assume this is a joke, because if not then something has been making us real stupid since the 1970s.
As a fat person myself, I've had the "it's easy to be thin" and "fatness is a moral failing" lines quoted at me, so part a joke, part the weariness of being judged as Watson allegedly judged fat interviewees.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
As someone founded a fin-tech company, I highly recommend the biology route. It is Saturday, and I am at the office and will be stuck here until the evening. Unlike the stereotype of finance people as old money aesthetic, my view is more autistic nerds doing the actual work combined with sales people who barely work i finance or understand the products. Someone considering biology is probably not going into those sales jobs.
The more technical sides of finance are almost all men and women on dating apps don't really understand or appreciate your job title anyways. You are far more likely to meet high quality women in a biology lab. Proximity is the most important factor and finance is not it.
Endorsed. Quant finance is sub 10% women and even the women we do have are very much not "tradwife" types.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link