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 -
Ultimately, actual racial breakdown of employees will matter, and promises won't suffice. Management won't care if engineers feel that their Black female coworker isn't pulling her weight, if she contribues sufficently to the company ESG score.
Products may be worse than if merit was the sole metric in hiring, but this is dealing with the classic problem of seen vs unseen.
This is exactly what I’m not seeing. The report was not setting goals for strategic change, it was setting goals because they sounded representative, then listing all the neat pats on the back we got for other stuff. I see that as the marketing version of DEI.
More options
Context Copy link
Fortune 500 companies are, for all intents and purposes, the epicenter of power in the modern US. The claim that they will be required to make meaningful changes borders on the absurd. Instead they’ll redefine ‘underrepresented’ and ‘minority’ and hire women janitors and secretaries who will be attached to the engineering department.
Awesome, we'll take it seriously and the sales department area will soon look like a pigsty. (We'll let them use our secretaries so we don't go under due to their inability to spell).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link