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 -
It's a stark reminder that cancel culture is not dead. Your post doesn't walk through all of the fallout from this ad which was posted briefly and deleted quickly. But every new day is bringing more fallout to the brand from various partnerships:
So much for the "Woke 1.0 was stupid we went too far" conventional wisdom, it seems it never left. All the more surprising the hysteria exploded within golf, a right-coded subculture.
The hysterical reaction to that ad shows why gender equality is impossible. Good Good was obviously not trying to portray domestic violence but the opposite: Alexis the girl hanging out with a group of guys as one of them- a friend and a colleague, participating in a dumb skit to promote a driver. The mob interpretation that this ad promotes "domestic violence" implies an inherent, sexually submissive role of Alexis in a polyandric circle or something. She can't roughhouse with the boys because she's a woman, it would be inherently sexually suggestive for her to do so. Whereas someone who truly believed in equality would not anticipate a problem with Alexis playing this part in the script.
There's another layer to this though, which is that much of the hate mob appears motivated by hatred for Good Good itself, a hatred that is in turn downstream from ressentiment towards the "country club" social organization, a resentment which also comes through directly in OP's post mockingly describing Garret as a "country club golf gentleman (fine member of high society)".
Ressentiment towards the Country Club Gentleman has also long been promoted in popular culture, producing endless films where the Country Club Gentleman is the villain, meant to be humiliated by the outsider protagonist who has no respect for the cultural tradition or decorum expected by these social institutions.
The primary driver of this backlash is ressentiment towards Good Good itself, for the crime of being White young-adults making money from filming golf YouTube videos.
Wait for it... wait for it....
Ah, there it is.
Do you agree popular culture and Hollywood has engaged in consistent criticism of the WASP Country Club? Are you just going to point and sputter or participate in the conversation?
Point and sputter? Heh. Dude, you'd be more sufferable if you had some self-awareness and a sense of humor about it. If you can't put hands on keyboard without making it about Jews, just own it.
Making fun of WASP Country Club has been a thing for as long as there have been WASP Country Clubs (i.e., pretentious rich people to make fun of). Dickens did it. Austen did it. Freaking Tolstoy (one of the few people with less of a sense of humor than you who comes to mind) did it. Wodehouse definitely did it. It was not invented by Jews.
Can you elaborate on your argument? I've read Dickens but the mockery of the WASP country club that has been transmitted to me, and everybody else who hates Good Good for representing a "country club golf gentleman (fine member of high society)" has not come from Dickens, or Austen, or Tolstoy, it has come from difference sources, like the one I posted.
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