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 -
This encapsulates my entire objection to the Apps as a class.
Regardless of how they advertise the intentions of their service, the ONLY thing they 'promise' is to show your profile to other people, and to initiate a connection if you both click 'like.'
They have done no vetting, their algorithm is sorting your matches but makes no guarantees as to quality, and they give you no recourse if your match doesn't pan out despite doing everything 'right.'
They abdicate all responsibility for filtering and policing and otherwise giving any useful feedback, basically disclaiming any blame for what happens after the match. WHICH IS THE PART THAT MATTERS.
And yet, they expect to be paid money for this service, and refuse to openly admit they can't help police people's behavior, continually implying the blame lies solely with the user.
This would be intolerable in about any other industry.
Anyway, if I were going to pass just one law to regulate these apps without banning them outright, I'd require they post their 'success rates' for the average user (by gender) for both achieving matches, and achieving actual relationships.
And have these appear on the screen for like 5 seconds every time you boot into the app.
If you're going to turn dating into a casino, you should be required to post the odds.
More options
Context Copy link