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 -
(Morbid humor:doing a great job representing his constituents .)
He's running for a +5R-+8R district, and his opponent (despite being literally named Poindexter) has some actual union bonafides, so there's a decent chance this sinks Miller, especially if the child abuse gets substantiated. Unfortunately, he didn't have a primary challenger. He could drop out until August 5th, but it's going to be a pretty hard battle to do it and I don't think he has the stones for it.
((Though there's very much a 'throw everything at the wall and see what sticks' here: Ohio's general voting population just doesn't care that much about an under-limit crash where no one was hurt but a lamppole, or about MDMA use. That might genuinely not have even have counted as driving under the influence under state law at the time of the crash.))
That is a fascinating choice of words where one party was credibly accused of multiple counts of rape, and it's not the "one up".
I'll caveat that they're in a very messy divorce and custody proceeding, and there's serious questions that one has (alleged misdiagnosed) BPD (and, tbf, I'd only be surprised for Miller in the sense that he doesn't seem likely to get diagnosed by consent). And the guy's a genuine putz and has been known to be one for a long time, ranging from fighting a glass window at a hookah bar to allegedly slapping Grisham. Which remains a good argument about him not getting reelected, but it makes the factual claims specific to each case a lot less strong than they look at first glance.
Likewise, it's very strange that his alleged expulsion didn't surface in the first election, and the claims are messy: both Mother Jones and the court filings jump between whether Miller "faced" expulsion or was actually expelled, and despite Mother Jone's attempt to frame the court transcript carefully, Miller did specifically deny (and offer to prove non-existence of) the expulsion to the New York Post. The stairs incident was brought up in 2021, but it's also almost twenty years after it allegedly happened now, released by someone who's name isn't on the record, and echoed by people talking as much about rumors or 'fits his character' than actually seeing whatever happened.
There's credible reasons no one can find proof - the former would only exist in records protected by federal law, the latter was allegedly a high-school party where no one was injured and the core of the allegation is just shoving someone at a wall - but it's still not very persuasive on its own.
The child abuse one and the water incident are the most impactful, but they're also the most dependent on facts not in evidence. The child's injuries were investigated and the allegations found "unsubstantiated", and the prosecutor's office that would have been involved doesn't exactly scream 'MAGA diehard'. The boiling water one fell in similar bounds, and was messy enough That Right-Wing Rag couldn't come out and call it clearly proven. The reddened skin is more than we have for Katie Portner, to be fair!
Yeah, I absolutely do not believe anything Parent A says about Parent B, or Parent B says about Parent A, alleging the kid(s) are scared of whomever. Get a neutral third party to back this up, without coaching from A or B as to what to tell them, but "My kid told me they don't want to go to Mom's place/Dad's place because they're scared" is nothing more than mud to throw in custody dispute.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes I think physically abusing a child if true is worse than physically abusing an adult if true. I'm not giving out bonus points just cause the abuse of adults was sexual. Hurting children is a one up.
It's been proven now, there is a recording of Miller and Moreno talking about it.
Now he contests any intent on hurting her, and he contests it being at her neck, but it's clear he understands what she means by "poured steaming hot water on me" and refers to it as the water incident. Maybe he's telling the truth about intent, but pouring steaming hot water on anyone outside of a complete accident is a bad look IMO because at the very least he's ridiculously careless.
From your link: "Cuyahoga County’s DCFS investigation into possible child abuse was “unsubstantiated”—that is, there was not enough evidence to support a finding of neglect or abuse." Now, I'd consider the facts separately from police or administrative findings. But it's a bit odd a look for you.
What an odd thing to say.
One set of allegations is that he literally poured boiling water on her, from a pot on the stove. Another is that he sprayed her with water from a kitchen sink. One of these is a serious allegation of criminal assault, and any pretense that Miller would not have intended injury would be a cruel joke. The other is inadvisable horseplay. The Snopes link has direct images, as presented by Moreno, of the alleged injuries.
I'm not a doctor; it's a single click and five seconds to evaluate.
I don't think this meaningfully proves what you're trying to prove; it picks up the goalposts and sprints for the horizon.
I'm not a doctor either, but I'd diagnose that neck rash as being the result of exposure to ambient ultraviolet radiation while wearing a V-neck top or similar.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link