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 -
The "socially conservative" countries also did the things the reactionaries criticize, so I don't think it soothes anxieties around collapse. These places fell to the same pressures: educate women, push them into the workforce, compete globally, and acquire wealth. Afghanistan has a declining TFR, but not at a rate that will bother the Taliban anytime soon.
I don't think you need to argue societal collapse to see room for improvement. Yes, there is a mean spirited fantasy of the shitpostariat that goes full bore into denigration. Sexless reactionaries are resentful and as a result they don't value women very much, or express as much. The edgy memes were evolved in a period where anything not-feminist -- whatever it meant on a given day -- could be summarily discarded as misogynist. Full stop, end of story. How dare you? Which means some part of the reaction here can be chalked up to unfortunate, if predictable consequences.
At the very least it seems important to investigate radical changes to our society with an appetite for rigor. Improvements may not lie in RETVRN, but they may not lie in our understanding of concepts like "gender role" as wedded to things like second-wave feminism. Judith Butler shouldn't get the last say on how women think of themselves in our world. That's madness! Instead, women should listen to me. Barring that, we should want to look for alternatives or improvements. Why couldn't the next revolution be more traditional without fulfilling a young adult dystopian fiction? What if we can't have whatever makes you happyism without the cost of anxiety disorders, unhappiness, and civilization grinding to a halt?
We probably will avoid that last bit, but "traditional gender roles" shouldn't be off the table for consideration as a Scarlet Letter. That is also not the conclusion of this essay/book review by Ginevra Davis. She is more concerned with biological constraints she feels were imposed on her as a woman, and how that interacts with ideals of traditional feminism. I found her conclusions disagreeable, limited, pessimistic, and a little sad, but this thread made me think of it so I'm plugging it as a different take of being a woman.
One common conservative value, which most people don't outwardly object to though fewer find actionable, is holding motherhood as (if not the "highest and most virtuous") a significant, fulfilling achievement. Most progressives with families value motherhood, but of young women -- who are becoming more progressive with time -- this is a conservative coded value. Society relies on the fact cool, progressive girls ignore their politics, which they consider more important in more key areas than the past, and discover a natural desire for kids. At best, this seems suboptimal and unnecessary.
If we can effect a change in our values we might be able to leverage values into stuff. If it's all structural nothing-we-can-do forces, then the future is looking grim indeed. Baron Trump might put it off, but eventually he'll have to do the annual insemination tour to keep tax dollars flowing. I do hope this is our Malthusianism, and somehow we go back to something more normal and satisfactory in the future. Oh, and personally, I appreciate a woman who can read a book. You can trust her with so much more!
More options
Context Copy link