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 -
The NYT is currently running articles about ICE picking up people overstaying tourist Visas at airports. I read these articles and think yes that is common sense enforcement of our nations laws. And a lot of the people overstaying tourist’s Visas I personally like. Most went thru some vetting to get approved for a tourist’s visas. And they will fill broke our laws.
There is a very good reason to deport people who overstay tourist’s visas. The reason is you want to issue a lot of tourist Visas because you want people to see America and spend money here. And a lot of people want to visit America that get turned down for Visas. Every short term visa should not be permanent residency. The US turns down a large % of tourist Visas they view as high risks. I want to let those people in and I hope they leave after 3 weeks.
Article
Also isn’t it illegal for a lawyer to advise a client on covering up a crime and helping clients break the way? Lawyers seem to be bragging about doing that in the article.
The alternative to not enforcing tourists Visa restrictions is either (1) not issuing tourist Visas or (2) open borders/end of nation state
So she was here as an au pair and thought she could stay indefinitely?
Au pairs are age-capped at 26, how long ago did this au pair enter? Oh:
So she came on a non-immigrant visa, was attempting to turn that into permanent residency, and the government at that point was okay with that.
Didn’t know the US actually had an age cap for au pairs. But indeed, dwight_schrute_its_true.gif
Rare based policy of the US government, being a wingman for husbands out there: “Honey, if we get an au pair to live with us and help you around the house, she’ll have to be a young woman between 18 and 26… I know, how awful right… it’d totally be so much better to have an older woman with more experience… but it’s the law, our hands are tied.”
The idea is that an au pair is not a professional nanny or maid, she's a young woman (college student perhaps) getting to live with a host family and learn/practice the language while being paid pocket money/allowance for some light domestic work or childminding. It's not supposed to be "cheaper than legally hiring a live-in housekeeper" but often that's how it's used.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link