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 -
No I agreed that he didn’t represent the other positions charitably. People can make rational pro-Palestinian or 2020 election denial arguments. Which I do not believe you can on “What is a women” (besides a very narrow small percent of true abnormal chromosome people).
My guess is you don’t like me labeling the pro-Palestine people as being anti-might makes right, but I do think you need to take that view. It is a coherent argument to believe might does not make right. Otherwise Palestine was conquered 80 years ago and at some point they just need to accept that and quit fighting under traditional western doctrine.
"What is a woman?" is a question about the meaning of words, not about the world. And "We should, where possible, use words in a way which avoids hurting people" is a good (though in my view insufficient given that it makes it impossible to talk about sex-specific medical issues in non-technical language) rational argument for using the word "woman" in a trans-inclusive way - see any of the multiple Yud essays on this point, or Scott's "The Categories were made for Man"
There are a lot of insane transactivists who think that "What is a woman?" has an objective scientifically correct answer which includes transwomen, but you don't have to agree with them to avoid cancellation.
Given Hobson's choice on the issue, I would rather defend pro-Palestine in front of a hostile audience than TWAW*, but I would rather defend TWAW than a blatant lie like the MAGA position on the 2020 election.
* My actual position on this issue is that Israel is almost certainly the lesser evil, but I don't take sides in evil-vs-evil conflicts where I don't have a stake.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm a bit confused as to the "what is a woman" connection, but also my brain is somewhat more mushy than usual right now, and you are not making it easy with the slightly sloppy/casual grammar. I'll try to reread it when I am more lucid.
(assuming men -> me) I do think "anti-might makes right" is a common motivating value among those who hold the pro-Palestine position, though by no means universally present.
More options
Context Copy link
They were, and they did; that's why they co-locate military installations with schools and hospitals and cry crocodile tears when they get exploded. Western doctrine post-1970 or so really doesn't have an effective answer to "I guess I'll just kill myself, lol" (and the inability to shut down "what is a woman" is heavily related to this), mainly because Western populations are unwilling to permit/enforce that a belligerent that intentionally disregards Western laws of fighting gets to suffer the wages of disregarding Western laws of fighting (and 'we'll step in if you're about to get genocided' is very high on the list of protections those laws claim to offer).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link