site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 6, 2023

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.

16
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Trans identity reifies the gender binary, so I'm not sure how it's a kludge in response to it, exactly.

In a world where none of these behaviors were coded as male or female, one could choose to land anywhere on the spectrum without being forced to identify as x, y or z. In my mind, the trans label is necessary insofar as we live in a society that does have the binary. I doubt this is a widely held view, although I also doubt that many people think that deeply on it without being pushed.

To, sigh, steelman that point of view: it was incredibly predictable, "we" were told that'll never happen, and then when it did it's just Shocked Pikachu.jpg. It's not (merely) trying to Chinese Cardiologist away the problem; it's "what are you going to do about this failure mode" and then being shocked and having no answer when that failure mode comes up again and again.

And to steelman the rebuttal to that, something like 80,000 prisoners are raped per year in the United States. Huge proportions of female inmates report being raped or harassed, correctional officers have storied histories of raping female inmates. Trans inmates are raped at much higher rates. When's the last time Tucker Carlson ran a segment about prison rape in general? When's the last time anyone here wanted to discuss anything other than the hyped-up rounding error that is men faking being trans to rape female inmates? It's easily possible that a policy allowing trans folks to transfer prisons would result in a net negative number of prison rapes given how often they're victimized in men's prisons.

Small comfort to the victims, I know, I do care and you are correct that those were fairly predictable mistakes, but to say that the sudden concern for the safety of inmates rings hollow would be the understatement of the year. Maybe I'll start to take your argument seriously when conservative politicians/electorates are interested in prisoner welfare more generally.

But there's this big strain in progressivism and liberalism that has this fantastic lack of curiosity, full of weirdness and contradictions, #trustscience (except when it touches on this one topic in a way we don't like), and that's... really concerning.

Fair enough.

Hinges a lot on the details. What does "no stigma and disgust" mean, exactly? What does that mean for gender-segregated spaces? Or sex-segregated? Or genitalia-at-birth segregated spaces, or however you want to define it? Would none of those exist?

A fair question, but a difficult one to answer. 'No stigma and disgust' at least is independent of gender-segregated spaces, as it's easy to campaign on simply being more open-minded and affirming to people who want to dress/act/present themselves in ways that society frowns upon. I don't personally think I have a good answer to your second question and to the extent possible would defer to what women wanted.

Dropped a thought there, hoss.

I knew it was you, with a blackpilled name and slightly different writing style.

Many people view MtF trans the same way, as self-advancement or Munchausen-like trying to enter the "women are wonderful" effect (or trying to escape the "men are guilty until proven innocent" effect).

This doesn't answer why FtM are now considerably more common, but I think MtF and FtM are explained by mostly different mechanisms and it's practically accidental they're treated as one umbrella.

Frankly? I seriously wonder if you're right, particularly given the eye-popping numbers of trans teens right now. But I also wonder if trans acceptance becomes widespread and normalized we wouldn't see a decrease in the number of trans people as being trans lost it's luster of rebellion/counter-culture/righteousness and was treated like being a cis-gay guy in 2023.

It starts off snarky, but I think the point in your quoted section is that Freddie does think anyone that disagrees is only motivated by dishonesty and bigotry, so he's not extending the same consideration that you will.

Fair enough.

Somewhere, quite a while ago, de Boer said his position basically boiled down to always supporting the underdog no matter what.

There are worse heuristics.

Small comfort to the victims, I know, I do care and you are correct that those were fairly predictable mistakes, but to say that the sudden concern for the safety of inmates rings hollow would be the understatement of the year. Maybe I'll start to take your argument seriously when conservative politicians/electorates are interested in prisoner welfare more generally.

There is a fundamental difference between being stuck with a fucked system that no one actually knows how to improve, and inventing new forms of fuckery out of whole cloth. Male rapists getting themselves transfered to female prisons wasn't a problem we had before, and it shouldn't be a problem we need to expend much effort to prevent, given that we can, you know, just not do that. People are outraged about it because its advocates seem to be making the world a strictly worse place, for no reason but blind ideology.

That last sentence, though... the moral lacunae grow. I think you're dead wrong, but boy, do I understand the doomed logic of the argument.

...Put it this way: your best defense is that there might be a net-reduction in rape, because transgenders and transtrenders together have such high rape numbers. If it turned out to be the other way around, and this was just a straight increase in rape, would you agree it's a bad idea?

There is a fundamental difference between being stuck with a fucked system that no one actually knows how to improve

Really? Nobody on the left has suggested any improvements for the American carceral system, nor have they been extolling the virtues of European systems for years now? Issues like forced labor, chronic understaffing, murder and rape1 2 and so on and so forth are rampant. The first time I've seen anyone on the right express any kind of sympathy for the plight of prisoners was the J6 rioters.

Would you disagree with that characterization? Are there communities of conservatives decrying prison conditions that I'm unaware of?

...Put it this way: your best defense is that there might be a net-reduction in rape, because transgenders and transtrenders together have such high rape numbers. If it turned out to be the other way around, and this was just a straight increase in rape, would you agree it's a bad idea?

The thrust of my argument is that I don't trust any of you on this topic because I think you're motivated more by anti-trans animus than compassion. You can't spend days talking about how trans people are ugly, disgusting, mentally ill freaks and then turn around and expect me to believe that You (the right) care for their wellbeing, just like You can't say things like FAFO/carjackers and rioters should be shot/prisoners experiencing rape and violence deserve it and claim some moral high ground. And so far, while all the replies reiterate feeling gaslit and frustration about being told that this would never happen, nobody has actually responded to that point.

...Put it this way: your best defense

You're acting like I'm dead set on allowing anyone into female prisons at any time for any reason. I don't personally have a well-thought out opinion on the issue; probably some screening based on whether they were living as trans outside of prison prior to arrest would be useful if messy. But even there, I strongly suspect the real reason most of you want that is to get a foot in the door for limiting the rights of trans people such that in the future you can say 'Well, look at the example of prisons! If you've already accepted these limitations on trans identity, why should I be barred from doing X?'

is that there might be a net-reduction in rape, because transgenders and transtrenders together have such high rape numbers. If it turned out to be the other way around, and this was just a straight increase in rape, would you agree it's a bad idea?

If you're appealing to my inner utilitarian. There's also an argument that the majority of trans people are malicious actors and should shoulder a higher burden of the externalities (OP's usual favorite hobby horse), but I've yet to see evidence of it.

And lastly, as I state above, I'd accept that you could probably do better than either with some very forgiving screening or a much smaller third set of institutions for trans people if you could get it past the 'trans women are women' crowd.

For what it's worth, while I am dead set against self-ID as a policy, I do think there are instances in which it may be appropriate to house trans women in female prisons. I outlined my preferred arrangement here, and I think it's a compromise that most reasonable people would find agreeable.

And to steelman the rebuttal to that, something like 80,000 prisoners are raped per year in the United States. Huge proportions of female inmates report being raped or harassed, correctional officers have storied histories of raping female inmates. Trans inmates are raped at much higher rates. When's the last time Tucker Carlson ran a segment about prison rape in general? When's the last time anyone here wanted to discuss anything other than the hyped-up rounding error that is men faking being trans to rape female inmates? It's easily possible that a policy allowing trans folks to transfer prisons would result in a net negative number of prison rapes given how often they're victimized in men's prisons.

Small comfort to the victims, I know, I do care and you are correct that those were fairly predictable mistakes, but to say that the sudden concern for the safety of inmates rings hollow would be the understatement of the year. Maybe I'll start to take your argument seriously when conservative politicians/electorates are interested in prisoner welfare more generally.

No. Men wearing wigs so they can enter women's prisons was not an issue 20 years ago. You try to shift the blame around, but conservatives didn't 'suddenly' get concerned about prisoner safety, they are concerned because progressives did something which everyone knew would end up with men putting on wigs to enter women's prisons. It was ignored however, because of progressive ideology - those who said anything were threatened into silence.

So there is no sudden concern for the safety of inmates, there is just the long historied concern about putting a convicted sex criminal in a building with a bunch of women and whistling nonchalantly as you lock the door behind you. It is the fact that the outcome was 'fairly predictable' which outrages people, because you are basically saying that you see those rapes as an acceptable price to pay for advancing your dogma. You do care but you won't take those rapes seriously until conservatives care about other prisoners, or trans rights. How is that different from not caring?

In a world where none of these behaviors were coded as male or female, one could choose to land anywhere on the spectrum without being forced to identify as x, y or z.

Or... you could just do it anyway? I never understand this. So society frowns on the thing you want to do. So what? As long as it's not literally made illegal, why would you possibly care? Why invent a whole new identity to justify doing the thing you want to do, instead of just doing the thing you want to do? And why, oh why, make it everyone else's problem and responsibility to go along with that identity and validate you in every possible way at every possible opportunity?

You know the answer. The trans condition is mired in insecurity. They don't need permission. They need validation.