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 -
Ok, do you want to give 12 year olds the right to sign contracts, join the military, etc?
Also, if you want to RETVRN, I'm pretty sure that wanting to chop parts of your body off would be grounds to limit even an adults autonomy, due to lunacy and/or demonic posesion.
Not really. Even you accepted that in case of babies, it's normal for parents to override autonomy, we already accept the parents will be making. Also, there's a difference between forcing a procedure on someone (vaxx), and banning it. We do the latter all the time, but there's a taboo on the former.
Only a tiny minority (if anyone), of trans activists is in favor of a complete abolition of all medical regulations, so I'm not sure why you're seeing hypocricy in only one side.
Uh, are we talking about transitioning kids in Samoa? Why bring them up?
Sure, I'll even grant that in extreme enough circumstances, mandatory vaccinations could be justified.
They already can
Sure? It's not like the military is gonna be accepting a bunch of immature 12 year olds nowadays, same way they kick out adults who keep acting up too.
The large majority of, if not all, trans procedures on a minor would need permission from at least one parental authority. So (at least one parent + teen consent) > (at least one parent consent - baby can't consent at all) in terms of autonomy.
Ok I'll give you there is a single front in which they differ and mandated vaccines are arguably worse, but I don't think it's that different. Both are the government telling parents and their children what they are and are not allowed to do with themselves.
I don't see hypocrisy in only one side, I think someone who thinks the reverse could also be hypocritical. It would be quite nice if more trans people recognized how government regulation is a threat to their autonomy and stood up against government elsewhere, instead of the whole communist thing many get into. The same way it would be nice if more antivaxxers stopped trying to shove their naturalist bullshit down.
The same people who believe in banning treatments that they think is harmful for political reasons won't stop at just things I don't like. They'll go after vaccines, MRNA technology, gene editing, and other important things. The only way to keep their grimy hands off is to constantly disarm their ability to ban disliked treatments.
Did you not read what the original comment was about? Comparing anti vaxx effects (specifically RFK Jr's own influence) to trans ones. Anti vaccine choices do far worse damage to far worse people who aren't even able to agree to the death themselves because they're literally babies. If government is going to restrict any choice in pursuit of the "greater good" (it shouldn't), vaccine mandates would definitely be far more important than anything related to the trans choice.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link