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 -
I don’t know if this is too post worthy, but many black activists have called the cancellation of Jason Arday and the resulting suicide a lynching. It makes me believe they don’t understand why many people found lynching to be bad.
The classic case is Emmet Till. He was accused of raping a white woman but didn’t. Less people would be worried about the irregular justice of lynch mobs if they accurately hung rapists and Till wouldn’t be martyr if he actually raped the white woman. It was his innocence that really made the lynching galling.
In the Arday context, no one argues he isn’t guilty of the charges. Instead, they claim accurately castigating Arday repeatedly for his crime is a modern day lynching. So either they believe any criticism of blacks is per se illegitimate and blacks are naturally innocent regardless of their actions or they are trying to use powerful iconography to prevent criticism of blacks. But that’s destroying their seed capital.
I'm no longer convinced the words "racism", "white supremacy", "sexism", "misogyny", "Islamophobia", "homophobia", "transphobia", "hate", "fascism", "far-right", "genocide" and "lynching" mean anything at all.
Progressives have as many words for "blasphemy" as Eskimo have for "snow".
It's kind of understandable considering their environments. Both groups have so many words that describe the same thing, because if they didn't, it would be much harder for them to extract resources from their respective environments and thus stay alive.
I've heard that eskimos don't actually have many words for snow, but then, it was a progressive who was insisting, so?
As a Canadian who regularly deals with snow, I can absolutely believe this.
First of all, there's powder snow, the kind that skiers love. But if you've ever tried to make a snowman with it, you realize that it doesn't stick together well - it's too 'dry', and doesn't clump.
Then there's your building snow, which is wet enough to clump but dry enough to handle, and feels kind of like rolling a very large cotton ball. You can actually make an igloo out of this stuff: it's solid enough to be worked with wooden tools and can be pulled away and shaped into cubes.
Then there's wet snow, which is soaked through and difficult to work with. It will freeze solid overnight and be unworkable, but you can walk on top of it.
Then there's the well-layered snow, which the accumulated and undisturbed pilings of at least a week. At the bottom is a layer that has been compressed by the weight above it, so it's safe to step on, but you'll leave a trail. Mice can live here.
Then there's compacted snow, run over by cars: it's almost as hard as ice, and often has rocks or pebbles or other detritus in it.
...and that's just off the top of my head, living as a sheltered urbanite. Inuit doubtlessly have far more fine distinctions, working with it as both building material and environmental obstacle.
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