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 -
Compact published a quite thorough analysis of the discrimination millennial white men have faced since the mid-2010s, focusing on the liberal arts and cultural sectors. It does a good job of illustrating the similar dynamics at play in fields including journalism, screenwriting, and academia, interviewing a number of men who found their careers either dead on arrival or stagnating due to their race and gender. It's a bit long, but quite normie-friendly, with plenty of stats to back up the personal anecdotes. It also does a good job of illustrating the generational dynamics at play, where older white men pulled the ladder up behind them, either for ideological reasons or as a defense mechanism to protect their own positions.
A great quote from near the end of the piece that sums it up:
Edit: typo
And his examples are: TV writing, editorial staff of swanky East Coast publications, and tenure track humanities professors at Ivy League schools (not just tenure track professors at Ivy League schools; tenure track humanities professors). I'm sorry, but if your professional success rides on getting any of these positions, you need to reevaluate how realistic your goals are. These are high-paying positions in competitive fields; there's a good chance that you're not getting the job regardless of what the DEI policies of the employer are. Why doesn't he talk about budget analysts for a regional logistics company, or Civil Engineer II at a national contractor that mostly does electric transmission infrastructure, or purchasing agent for a company that manufactures forklift parts? You know, the kinds of jobs that most people apply for with a realistic chance of getting.
Pretty sure it's not just those, also generic govt office jobs and generic white collar jobs at PWC or similar.
Once we get to 40-50% then it's more than just prestigious university jobs? For clarity, I'm quoting another report not OP.
Looking at the actual survey:
Pollfish is a site that pays people ridiculously small amounts of money to take commissioned surveys. The way it works is that the kind of people who are induced by exchanging 5 minutes of their time for 25 cents will take the survey and are then asked questions at the end to do the demographic filtering. If they don't meet the demographic criteria they don't get paid, but from what I can tell a lot of these people just take the survey again and answer the demographic questions differently. In other words, what happened here is Resume Builder paid Pollfish to conduct a 1,000 person survey. Rather than polling known hiring managers at random, they put the poll on their website for people to opt into and did no meaningful verification that these were actual hiring managers. When they got 1,000 responses they closed the poll. I wouldn't take the results too seriously.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link