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 -
Your examples have some superficial similarities, but some of them are actually quite different. Assuming none of your kids or their friends is a 4-sigma hyperactive retard, you can just remove or disable the damned WOCDs. This may increase your chances of liability but only by a very trivial amount; as you note, kids falling out of windows is pretty rare. On the other hand, a public slide is going to be involved in at least a minor injury at some point, because kids like to play and unlike their parents aren't super concerned about their own absolute safety. Which means there's a good chance of someone being sued. So if you're going to repair something like that, do it on the sly.
The short version is that we cannot. The longer version is that the steps we would have to take would have consequences all the Good People would clutch their pearls in horror about. Kids could rarely fall out of perfectly good windows and it would be nobody's fault except the kids! Kids could burn themselves, cut themselves, even break a bone or very rarely kill themselves on playground equipment and the parents would get nothing but sympathy.
One of the open tenets of modern safetyism is that you do not do cost-benefit analysis with safety. This is a tenet violated all the time (because it's completely impractical), but it serves to anchor discussions and short-circuit objections. And a more general principle that is widely understood though rarely openly stated is that neither liberty nor enjoyment have value in cost-benefit discussions. That is, "because I want to" and "because it's fun" are not considered valid reasons to do something that has other drawbacks. Both these rules would have to be repudiated to return to the society you refer to. And they will not be, the safetyists are firmly in charge.
I'm... kinda confused by the window example. I can go down to the hardware store and buy pet-resistant screen door mesh that can protect against a hundred pound dog lunging and clawing for thirty-plus minutes, or chicken-wire grid that block less air intake and is designed to protect a chicken coop against invasive predators for weeks at a time; both will cost less than thirty bucks. Even if we presumed Safety Above All, there are simple solutions that would be as or more effective and allow much better airflow (and be compatible with boost fans).
As I made clear in a comment below, the window example would only apply in a situation where you had a casement window where the sill was less than 3 feet above the floor and more than 6 feet above the outside ground, which is basically nowhere. I don't think I have ever been in a building that has such a window. I don't even think I've been in a building with a double hung window that would meet these requirements, but at least in that case you'd be able to adjust it so the top part slides down and the regulation wouldn't apply.
I have a bow window containing four casement windows each of which meets these requirements. This is a replacement window; there used to be a triple-window -- two double hung and one fixed window -- there, and both double hungs met those requirements. A large number of houses in my development have such windows (or a bay with two double hung and one fixed), they're not some exotic thing. Fortunately I'm in neither Canada nor New York so no guards or opening-prevention devices required.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Such items would not meet the requirements of a window guard. It's not enough that things are safe, they have to be legibly and documentably safe according to the standards set by the building codes. You need a guard that's at least 1070mm (and no, that doesn't work out to something even in inches either; it's a little over 42 1/8 inch), doesn't pass a 100mm sphere (so the chicken wire grid is likely too coarse), and has load requirements that the mesh isn't documented to meet.
Or you spit on your hands, run up the black flag, and remove the WOCD without installing a guard.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link