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 -
Texas's new required school reading list includes stories from the Bible
Texas is the first state to establish such a list, as others generally give wide latitude to school districts and boards to select their own texts.
There are fourteen stories, listed in order of grade level: Jonah and the Whale (Jonah 1:1-5, 10-17, 2:10), David and Goliath (excerpt from The Children's Book of Heroes), Daniel and the Lion's Den (Children's Adapted Version), The Necessity of Humility (Luke 14:7-11), Moses (Exodus 3, 14), Do Not Be Anxious (Matthew 6:25-34), The Shepherd's Psalm (Psalms 23), Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12), To Everything There is a Season (Ecclesiastes 3), Lamentations 3, The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32), Job (Job 1-7, 11, 14, 19, 28, 38-42), Adam and Eve (Genesis 2-3), The Definition of Love (1 Corinthians 13).
They also select a variety of translations: the New International Reader's Version, which is for a third-grade reading level, the English Standard Version, the King James Version, and the Jewish Publication Society. The ESV/KJV have their own history as evangelical texts; this is why there are so many parochial Catholic schools, though it's doubtful whether modern Catholics (who make up ~22% of Texas's population) care as much.
Teaching Biblical stories as cultural or historical texts does not violate the 1st amendment. Certainly the Bible is the most influential book in Western thought and has relevance to any serious study of literature and history. That being said, certain passages err on the side of theology and perhaps should be avoided outside of a comparative religion course. And some atheists will be disappointed that the more controversial passages have been excluded.
Just on a quick look through the list there's quite a lot of odd choices. Like why does seventh grade have so few items, most of which are short poems - and then they double up on Robert Frost and Langston Hughes? Why?
What was the goal here? It doesn't seem like breadth of cultural understanding. It seems more like a list put together by a committee with a few busybodies each pushing their own favorites and no clear criteria for what to include. Why is Pride and Prejudice, essentially Victorian era chick lit, required reading? Answer: who knows?
Like many such efforts, I can get behind the concept but find the implementation unimpressive at best.
Ask my Irish school curriculum circa 1978 (and then 1980 for Persuasion*) about that one, friend. It wasn't chick-lit in those days, the term was yet to be invented. Instead it was considered a classic novel in English. If Manly Men could be Janeites, I don't see why the non-gender-binary-normative young human animals (as distinct from non-human animals, don't be speciesist!) of our day can't be introduced to her writing! Granted, the highly intelligent youth of our time probably would struggle to read English that is not contemporary but let's be hopeful and make the experiment, yes?
*One of the girls in the class had the surname Durand and it was always deemed hilarious when we had to read (yes, we read it aloud in class, everyone taking their turn as the teacher went through it):
This is Texas. The teachers may not be particularly based, but the elected officials setting curriculum standards do not believe in 'non-binary', and might think this is some kind of new computer technology, and if I had to guess a majority of the state board of ed would vote in favor of sodomy laws if they thought they could get away with it.
Let us be correct and pure in our thinking and expression, even if the Texans are woefully recalcitrant.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link