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 -
Assuming Greta Thunberg has normal female sexuality, I don't think she's the best example. After her pivot from environmentalism to the Arab/Israeli conflict, it became reasonably clear that she's a shameless grifter and that her views are a matter of convenience, even if she herself believes herself to be sincere. I mean, if she genuinely believes that the world is facing an existential climate crisis, why waste time and energy on one of many violent conflicts and alienate potential allies?
So yeah, I could easily see her f*cking or even marrying some coal baron who's tall dark and handsome. Probably she would justify it by saying it gives her the opportunity to gather information and learn about the industry from the inside. Which is frankly a more plausible rationalization than the one she offered for her pivot to the Middle East.
I do agree that there are probably some women out there who would never date a MAGA type under any circumstances whatsoever. But I think for the most part, the vast majority of women would date, have sex with, and marry a man of differing political views provided that the woman believed she would not be publicly shamed or humiliated over her decision. That's just the way women are wired; it's just very very unusual to meet a genuinely principled woman.
More options
Context Copy link