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 -
Now, before anyone jumps in with "yeah but that's only a story, not all marriages in 1897 or 1904 were like that", no, they were not.
But a story demonstrates social attitudes. Some things have to be believable; to abbreviate a Chesterton quote, people might or might not believe a story that Gladstone was haunted by Parnell's ghost, but they would not at all believe that Gladstone slapped Queen Victoria on the back and offered her a cigar.
People reading that story would have gone "Yeah, that happens", the same way somebody reading a story today where the wife took the husband to the cleaners in the divorce would go "Yeah, that happens". The motive for the murder would be explicable to them: the wife was stuck in an abusive marriage and had no legal means of getting out, and if she ran off with her lover then she would be the one in the wrong and socially ostracised and blamed. And why couldn't she get out of this marriage? Because that was the law at the time. Men Are Wonderful effect. Men had the power, women didn't.
See also the "Would you be more surprised to find a walrus or a fairy on your doorstep?" debate from two years ago.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link