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.)
“ The problem is that many women who are actually raped don't report,”
My gut says approximately 0% of rape rape goes unreported.
It’s the rape that many people don’t consider rape that goes unreported. For example I don’t believe a husband can rape their wife. But by US law they can go.
Black grab grabbing a white girl and dragging her behind a building a raping here has a high report rate.
So if a woman calmly and reasonably says "no right now," with a good reason (perhaps an injury or disruption to the specific anatomy), and makes it clear that she considers it important to the point where she will divorce her husband and take the kids away if he violates her clear express wishes..... that's not rape?
No.
I think husbands should be good husbands. I do not believe a husband should have sex with her wife when she has legitimate pain or other issues. But I do not believe that is rape. Vows were exchanged. Both sides should follow their vows. But I do not believe the law should be involved in the relationship of a married couple.
I would never convict a man of raping his life because I don’t think the government should be involved in the relationship of married people.
So if a man beats his wife while she screams no please stop until she loses her voice and then he penetrates her and she spends the next three days crying and covered in bruises and bleeding from a torn vagina no crime was committed?
This was the law of the land until the 1970s. Sorry I have old school Christian beliefs.
I also do not believe a husband should do this to his wife.
He can burn in hell for treating his wife poorly.
I want you to imagine your sister being brutally raped and assaulted by her husband, beaten within an inch of her life, torn up inside, even if she gets a divorce she won't be able to have children again or walk ever again.
And what you aren't going to be mad about it because she was married?
If that's what marriage is to you then the majority of the country will demand it be banned.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link