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 thought experiment is perhaps "overfitting to a desired conclusion," (and is certainly an unsubtle allegory) but I want to see what other people think. Where else has this comparison been drawn?
In a world where moral status (or, as you will soon see, we could call it moral stature) is defined by a person's height, what might we expect?
Well one thing is it would be very rude to point out that people have different heights. To minimize cognitive dissonance, we would notice that rulers and yardsticks are banned, or at least tabooed. The taboo of course has justification:
I think they definitely would not go around saying "tall people are morally better." And if you tried to gently tell them "Well you certainly act like they are: tall people make more money and have better life outcomes! And you don't call it unjust!" they will probably get angry and call you evil for suggesting that people have different heights. They will say, the injustice is that life outcomes are inequal among the abled and disabled; between men and women; between supposed racial groups; and so many other axes.
They seem to be making a category error. How can a fact of height differences be evil? So you smuggle a ruler into the room. And you point out that Alice is in fact taller than Bob. "It is just an empirical fact" you say. Of course the reply will be something like, "You think your words are disentangled from context, but the social function of your sentence makes a moral claim." This response is inevitable, even if you bookend your remarks with the notice: "THE SOCIAL FUNCTION OF THIS CLAIM IS TO POINT OUT EMPIRICAL FACT"
At first you think, well its society's social context that is smuggling in the moral "oughts." The problem is certainly not with reality. But then you realize they are kind of right? The social function of this claim, indeed has moral content. In this society, height simply is the gauge of moral status. Stating otherwise doesn't make it go away, just like saying 2 + 2 = 5 doesn't make it true -- that's reality for you. It's at this point you realize your neck is getting a bit strained, because you're constantly looking up -- everyone else in this room is very, very tall. These arguments evolved in Tall Clubs around the nation and are handed down from the credentialed Tall to the less-credentialed mid-statures.
It makes you wonder why all of their interventions to the low-status involve treating symptoms and correlates, instead of identifying how to change the moral valuation, which is the root cause of it all.
So by now most of you are thoroughly short on patience, having realized immediately that "height = intelligence." But the real point: the academic and intellectual authorities that are loudest about the problem are the ones stringently enforcing the taboo holding it all up! Is that a coincidence?
I can tell you this with absolute certainty. As a much above average man in height, but still on the short end of my extended family, I have experienced absolutely zero in social benefits, moral stature, recognition or anything else on the basis of how tall I am. A lot of people I meet seem to go around thinking this, but it simply isn’t rooted in fact at all.
I always tried having a lot of moral consistency and integrity because I was raised that way, but it doesn’t pay off try to remain a pious and morally upright individual who was built for 1950s America, when that culture has been dead for 70 years. Cruel life experience has taught me that overtime, and even as of recent. “No good deed goes unpunished.” I don’t think I’ll ever understand the mentality of the mass of people I meet in today’s world. Maybe that’s for the better, because there’s definitely no logic to what they do.
One undeniable conclusion I’ve come to though is that most people are completely horrible judges of character. I mean it. Straight up. They’re just very stupid people. I’ve had people say I’m too serious. Others say I’m too immature. Others who can’t detect the most obvious red flags and other shit in people they come across, etc. In reality I’m just an ordinary person.
“It isn’t a measure of health how well adjusted someone can be to a profoundly sick society.”
I really don't think you can be "absolutely" certain about this one. I.e. you don't and can't know how worse your life could've been if you weren't tall.
I remember reading a chart a long time ago, probably in /r/blackpillscience, from some dating page, that showed ratings of men sorted by their and the woman raters. The was a mild positive correlation, but the important part was that the ratings fell catastrophically if the woman was taller. Basically the entire half below the diagonal was red. There's some pretty demonstrable assortative mating going on, the number of couples where man is the shorter one is much smaller than what you'd expect is people paired up regardless of height.
Anecdotally, I know a guy who successfully scored himself at least one girlfriend basically by towering over near her at a concert, then bending down to ask her something face to face. He didn't even mean to hit on her :D It helps that he also has a striking face, I don't want to doxx him but he looks very much like Yuya Fungami from JoJo part 4 anime, minus the tattoos.
(Also he was a founder of /r/UNBGBBIIVCHIDCTIICBG/. Small world.)
I may not be able to tell if things would’ve been worse for me, but I can observe everyone else around me who ‘isn’t’ me. And based on what I see, there’s zero evidence to me that suggests I incur some substantial advantage over others based on 3 inches, a foot, or whatever you want to say. I’m typically not into the content you’re referencing but I think you can cherry pick experiences any way you want to have it. Considering there are people much worse than me in the height department that seem to fare just fine, if height is the only variable you’re controlling for it doesn’t prove very much to me in my own experience. Yeah if I wasn’t as tall, things would not be as good for me as they are, but the presumption is that shorter people in general aren’t doing as well. And that straight up is completely false. I see it every day. If you want to say there’s ‘other’ things going for certain people that validate why that’s the case then that’s almost certainly true. Height isn’t a defining feature of why though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link