site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   32563 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 13, 2023

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.

10
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Pretty sure the anti-trans NYT people would universally hold to 'trans women are women'. I don't see that going 'out the window'.

Not sure precisely what "rude, but not beyond the pale" means. Most trans people don't go into screeching fits of rage when misgendered, that is (I don't like saying this!) mostly an internet thing. Many of them are often misgendered by e.g. family members and go along with it.

I think many sports already don't allow transwoman athletes in female leagues, but could be wrong. Either way, that one seems plausible, although not any moreso than a week ago. I'd guess changes to prisons won't happen, but it's sufficiently noncentral to the trans movement that it might.

"The amount of minors being referred to gender clinics drops to around 2010 levels" - I don't see that happening. Most of the increase is caused not by lowered thresholds by medical professionals, but massively increasing interest in transitioning by minors (they learn about it via the internet or irl friends). So pulling back to 2010 levels would require much more restrictive standards.

Pretty sure the anti-trans NYT people would universally hold to 'trans women are women'. I don't see that going 'out the window'.

"Going out the window" means you're not going to have that argument thrown in your face if you disagree about letting trans people into opposite sex spaces, that you won't be forced to recite the slogan, and that you won't be cancelled for denying it.

Not sure precisely what "rude, but not beyond the pale" means.

It means you won't be able to whip up a mob to go after someone who does it.

Most trans people don't go into screeching fits of rage when misgendered

"Most" trans people are irrelevant. Like I said many times before I don't believe in the "democratic model" of society. It's the leadership of trans activists that's relevant.

I think many sports already don't allow transwoman athletes in female leagues, but could be wrong.

Yeah, because that was the status quo pre-trans activism. I'm saying we're going back to it.

I don't see that happening. Most of the increase is caused not by lowered thresholds by medical professionals, but massively increasing interest in transitioning by minors (they learn about it via the internet or irl friends).

Funny, out of all the points this one is the one I'm the most confident about, and your arguments is precisely why I think it will go down. Yes, medical professionals have no way of telling whether someone actually has gender dysphoria or not, so the increase most likely had nothing to do with the medical / psychological condition being more prevalent, or more detected than before. The majority of referrals to gender clinics are between ages 12-16, with a massive drop-off around 18 years old. It is far more likely that the whole thing is a social trend, and all social trends are eventually replaced with new ones.

I'm sorry, the referrals to a gender clinic go DOWN at 18? That's very surprising to me. What about all the closested trans people with conservative parents that are finally able to make their own choices when they turn 18? Shouldn't it go up?

They desist. Turns out for most marginalized people, getting away from high school greatly improves the quality of their life.

Time for my regularly scheduled link to Tavistock data. The drop off begins at 17. This is the UK but I've seen similar age profile from a gender clinic in the US.

What you describe may still be happening, it's just their numbers are dwarfed by the number of minors.

Headline: "Referrals to GIDs level off in 2018-19"

Numbers

Should read "Referrals of males to GIDs level off in 2018-19" -- the tomboy genocide continues apace.

I should be rather interested to see crosstabs for age/sex -- not that we will.

I've argued this before, but turning 18 does not magically grant one the actual ability to act on the agency they're legally considered responsible enough to have. Many kids who reach that age may still be stuck at home, especially in this modern era.

And how does this explain there being more referrals for 12-16 year olds?

On that, I'm not terribly sure. I just wanted to point out that reality doesn't reflect GSYM's model.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats