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 -
It's not quite analogous, but IIRC some states have written their traffic laws such that the owner has strict liability, regardless of whether they actually drove the car through the light. "I didn't run a red light" "But someone you lent your car to (you didn't report it stolen) did, so pay up" isn't that Kafka-esque.
That justification doesn't transfer over from the analogy. If you lend your car to someone, that's a deliberate action you take, with your responsibilities being clear beforehand. A man who got cheated on by his wife took no such action, he's the victim in this situation. If your car was stolen, making you pay for what the thief did with it I would indeed call kafkaesque.
Second, you have ownership of your car, with all that implies, but you do not have ownership of your wife. I do in fact get to lend my car to someone, or decline to, and the car gets no say, so it makes sense that the responsibility is on me. But husbands to not get to rent out their wife's body. It's also understood that I'm responsible for its safe operation. If I neglect to put on the parking brake, that's on me. Is it also negligent to not put a chastity belt on my wife?
Third, the car is a tool, not a person with agency. It doesn't do anything on its own (or if it does, I might be able to hold the manufacturer liable instead.) A woman, of course, is a person, who can take her own actions that aren't my responsibility.
More options
Context Copy link
Someone else pointed it out, but in that analogy I feel like the woman would be strictly liable. They own the vehicle of birth. The man is more like a driver.
It would be like charging someone who once borrowed a car with a crime associated with the car.
More options
Context Copy link
It's still Kafka-esque, it's just precedented Kafka instead of unprecedented.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link