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 -
If you thought US politics could not get more (figuratively) retarded ... you'd be wrong.
Apparently Trump called Tim Walz (among other things) a (figurative) retard. Walz is pretty dumb but is not (medically) a retard. But Michael Bohacek has a daughter with Down's and apparently he's it went over poorly enough to derail the GOP redistricting effort.
[ An interesting parochial aside here is that decades of abortion politics has made Down's a bit of a CW item. And Indiana was among the first to react to Dobbs writing a ban that not only doesn't except Down's (only lethal anomalies count) but in a (laudable) fashion, it specifically un-excepts it. ]
My (subjective) take is that Bohacek's stand seems noble in a wildly-out-of-time kind of way. Like we're back in the 80s/90s and mainstream conservatism was still broadly anti-transgressive while the left was about iconoclasm. But I suppose also that 'family over politics' is not a value that either party is willing to endorse -- certainly not the scolding types gloating about talking down to their transphobic uncle at thanksgiving.
Lately, I've noticed many disabled babies and children on Twitter. While I want them to be happy, I'm not sure to what extent they can have enriching and productive lives. I wish I could push a button and make them all better (and make the billions of abled people better too, and myself. We sinful creatures all fall short of our abilities and obligations.) It took me a while to realize this was anti-abortion advocacy.
Theology tells us we existed before birth. As a wretched modern, I wrestle with the temptation to overcome disabilities with technology. Ultimately, it seems the key's when the soul's coupled to a body - past that point its murder. But if we could get rid of bad bodies before hand, more souls would have a chance. Is that akin to Talmudic legalism trying to one up God and ignoring the spirit, that for whatever reason these souls/people are born with different potential and context than us? I know nothing. But I feel very uncomfortable.
More options
Context Copy link
I can't find it in me to believe that this is anything but performative pearl-clutching on Bohacek's part used as a reason to do what he wanted to do anyway. I suspect his recent DUI conviction has probably made it look impossible to get re-elected and he's doing what he believes is right outside of party lines or he's just lashing out because the GOP was going to primary him because of the DUI or something like that. The alternative is that he's seriously retarded.
Anyway, here's Bohacek's response to questions on redistricting(?) that started all this:
No, I didn't skip anything there. I know dems are making hay about the "slur" but the fact that a politician of any kind is deflecting policy questions this blatantly is pretty embarrassing. Both from a standpoint that he could (and did) get away with it, but also how unbelievably lazy and obvious it was as a deflection.
More options
Context Copy link
I've heard that this woman was actually involved in Kamala's campaign. Can anyone confirm? What's her name?
Edit: apparently her name is Arielle Fodor and she joined a "white women for Kamala" Zoom call.
That would be hilariously tragic or tragically hilarious.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's too bad the Republicans have to lose seats over no-no words, but we've seen what happens when they yield to this kind of thing, and it's no different than losing.
The mechanism for offense seems pretty tenuous anyway.
It’s both very small and very large at the same time. Are talking about the man’s daughter.
No, we are not, and thinking Trump was is retarded.
More options
Context Copy link
Nobody was talking about the man's daughter. His daughter has Down's syndrome, Trump called Tim Walz a retard. There's the sometimes-joked-about mechanism of offense, which is that he was offended by the comparison of that loser Tim Walz to actual retards like his daughter. And there's the real mechanism, which is just that "retard" is considered a no-no word because it can be used derisively to refer to people with Down's and others with actual mental retardation.
When I was a schoolboy, the slur for Down's syndrome kids was "mong", not "retard". "Mong" was also used to describe kids of normal intelligence who did something unconsionably dumb in a moment of weakness.
That's British English, though, an American would not say that. An American might say 'retard' or just 'tard' or 'downie'(not always a slur). An older American might say 'moron' or 'idiot' as a slur but nowadays that wouldn't be used for an actually retarded person, it's used for other drivers.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link