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 solution to America’s rape crisis is to…..ban male only spaces. I will declare that I believe in male only spaces. I believe in female only spaces. I think both sexes have significant psychological differences that they both tend to find benefits to have some organizations that are segregated by sex. Both sides socialize differently when segregated and it has real benefits.
My broad understanding is that when male only places begin to allow female membership they tend to disappear a decade later. I read an interesting paper in the last year that when a college major gets about something like 30-50% female it then quickly becomes 100% female. Biology did this. Veterinary science did this. I think Law will survive but it’s going thru this process now.
The other major development on college rape crisis is an incident at FIT. In this case 19 year old drug dealer gave the two FIT students fentanyl while claiming it was cocaine. Then proceeded to rape them. One of them died. Many posting on Twitter leave the part out that this was brown drug dealers doing the raping and really bad stuff and show this as evidence of bad smart male rich kids.
I am 100% in favor of executing these drug dealers. Also 100% in favor of executing anyone selling fentanyl as it’s really bad stuff. I am also in favor of deporting and denaturalizing basically everyone of these kids background. This is sort of an interesting case where the left can use it as evidence of the bad stuff they claim is happening by leaving out details and then the right can come in while adding details and saying we have policy proposals to deal with this issue.
I am only in favor of this if at the same time we execute those who falsely claim rape.
Female anti-social behavior is just as destructive and socially corrosive as male anti-social behavior; you are posting about the results of that now, yet are still only willing to punish stereotypically-male bad behavior.
The reason sex-segregated spaces work is because most men are psychologically/evolutionarily incapable of holding women to the same standards: removing themselves (and forming a mirror image, though not a copy, of a sorority) is simply the lowest-effort, highest-return strategy.
And it's fine to criticize the lowest-effort for being lowest-effort (and indeed, early 20th century boarding schools are famous for being lowest-effort), but when the average human being isn't capable of constructive criticism... well, that's the ur-justification for censorship, isn't it?
Sure in theory, but only if the claim is proven false, which I suspect is practically never. Even if the accused has a perfect alibi, the "victim" may have misremembered or misspoke the location; you'd have to find multiple obvious fabrications, but if you report finding one, they may suddenly not remember much else, which is not unusual genuinely after a traumatic event. The problem is that many women who are actually raped don't report, fearing getting mislabeled as a false accuser, and judicial consequences will worsen this.
What should happen, obviously, is that people accused of rape should be minimally affected unless and until solid evidence. Which is obviously not completely possible, but can be mitigated a lot by providing extra (financial and emotional) support to them. Look at it this way: the people who hating the falsely accused cannot be coerced into not hating them, locking up the "victim" would only and surely increase their hatred. Also, we can teach women to not only avoid dangerous situations, but (if they want) entrap potential rapists with real evidence, because who's defending someone who would actually rape?
(Ok, that last part they have to ensure the person is unambiguously planning rape, otherwise we get more "teenagers beat up random guy they assumed was a pedophile" and we just had Primetime, not to mention the woman must be careful for her own safety...so it's not actually a good idea in general. But I can't let go that it may be worth it for someone accused of serial rape, to also vindicate them if they turn out OK, because an ambiguous rape hurts both parties' reputations.)
lol, lmao even. The "victims" in this case tend to leave evidence that they didn't believe it was rape until it was a convenient cudgel to wield, as in the Cornell case, or leave evidence of active collusion, as in the Ghomeshi case (the aftermath was to make that evidence much more difficult to use, by the way- it embarrassed the privileged).
Every rape case that makes it to national media is false.
Half the country defended a child-killer simply because she was a woman, including 11/12ths of the jury on that case. This is just a proxy for "who's defending someone who is male?", and the answer is, well, apparently nobody.
She has the privilege of tens of millions of simps; why should she be careful? Even the notion that she should be careful is offensive, and you don't even believe that anyway [why would someone want to put themselves in harm's way to "entrap potential rapists with real evidence"?].
Ann Coulter had a piece talking about rape cases on campus that failed to capture the zeitgeist. They frequently involved black men raping (violently) white women.
I think this is largely the result of anti-Southerner liberal narratives. The accepted line of thinking among the Blue Tribe faithful regarding this matter is that Jim Crow laws, lynchings, anti-black racism in general etc. in the South both before and after the Civil War were mainly driven by the sexual anxiety of angry and frustrated white men regarding the inclinations of their women and the prowess of black men, the main manifestation of this being accusations that horny black thugs are always looking for opportunities to rape clueless white women (this being the usual justification for lynchings of blacks). The average white liberal is soaked in this propaganda and thus reacts with willful ignorance, eye-rolling, incredulity and disdain to reports of black-on-white rapes.
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
More options
Context Copy link