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 -
Louis C.K. was trending on Twitter because his Madison Square Garden concert was sold out, which some on the left are interpreting to mean that cancel culture is not real, or that it does not hurt people's careers. (link: https://archive.is/ryKrI )
What does it mean to be sufficiently canceled? I think Louis C.K. qualifies as having been sufficiently cancelled. If you look at his Wikipedia page, his sexual misconduct scandal, in 2017, killed off his TV and movie career. His filmography abruptly ends in 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_C.K._filmography
Sure he's still able to sell out, but this reflects individual preferences for his comedy, not the approval of the media establishment, in which he is still damaged goods. Comedians are sorta like contractors in the sense that they have to hustle, not depend on a platform or the backing of a major media establishment. I think this is is what gives comedians an advantage over actors in regard to cancellation, because stand-up comedy can be inexpensively distributed at scale, such as digitally online, without needing the backing of an entire studio or publishing house.
I think the problem here is defining "cancellation" as a general, visible loss of social stature, obvious to anyone. What people mostly, in my experience, fear as cancellation is less that but a loss of specific social circles or life situation - typically having a circle of friends suddenly cold-shoulder you or losing a job, but might also be the breakup of a relationship or marriage, your kids starting to hate you etc.
ie. a prototypical non-political comparison might be that you're a Jehovah's Witness who suddenly starts asking questions like "Hey, maybe Russell's interpretion of the Bible isn't correct? Maybe this stuff is kind of heretical?" and, if you ask long enough, suddenly your fellow Witnesses will decide that you're too dangerous to keep in contact with any more and will shut you out of their circles, not only from the services but also generally from social occasions. For some acquaintance outside of the church this might not seem like that dire - who's going to miss weird Jehovah's Witness crap anyway - but for someone whose circle and social life has included fellow Witnesses for a long time this might cause considerable distress.
If you're a social person, an able worker etc. you'll find new social circles or a job after cancellation in no-time, but it's still not going to be pleasant and it's still going to leave a scar, and if this sort of a prospect already makes you kind of anxious before cancellation, your situation is not going to be improved if everything happens online now and some sort of an online mob might target you for reasons barely beyond your ken (again, the potential for distress is not from the mob of strangers itself, but from the idea that these strangers might actually cause your friends to desert you), or for comments you've made in the past, or so on.
(I'm not talking specifically about Louis CK here, I haven't followed this particular case that closely to really comment on it)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link