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 -
There is little gender discrimination based on pay; it's a gap that opens up when women choose to enter into relationships with men, have children, and enact gendered labor norms. My objection is to the idea that women who do choose to do just that are entitled to the same income as men, despite e.g. working fewer hours or in more flexible jobs than men in order to care for kids. The "pay gap" is largely a relational issue, driven by personal choice (and unfortunately constrained by gendered norms).
More broadly, we make a big deal of women doing more housework than men, but why should that be a social or political concern? It's a purely relational issue, similar to how men not being able to find a partner is a purely relational issue. We can very easily say to women, "get better!" and attract a mate who'll do equal amounts of housework; but we never do that and instead start hurling invective at men. But when a man can't attract any kind of mate, we stop at "get better!"
I've no objection to purely economic anti-gender discrimination laws. When laws and social attention get into the realm of structuring interpersonal relations, either everyone is worthy of protection by them (with equal emphasis on different gendered protections) or no one is.
The housework thing always seems odd to me -- these are consensual relationships. If it bothers the people they should talk about it, or leave.
(Also, apparently the leisure time of both is about the same, men are working longer, or doing things that don't get counted. I tend to be skeptical of these things, for the reasons noted in this thread).
Time use surveys suggest that men and women do about the same amount of work, just with a different distribution of paid vs unpaid.
I see a meaningful complaint there: if there's a large portion of women who want an equal or reversed distribution of labor but men do not want to switch the current distribution, I think there's room for legitimate activism there, even though women always have the choice to not be in a relationship with one of those dastardly men.
But it is fundamentally about changing social and gender norms to improve women's experience of relationships. Which is fine in my book, but I don't see a justification for that that doesn't apply to improving men's relational experiences (beyond men bad).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link