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 -
Why doesn't "what if the roles were reversed" ever work? I mean it works for me. I actually am convinced when people bring up that argument. But it never works when conservatives say it to progressives.
Why I'm bringing this up is that recently Abdul El-Sayed's wife appeared on stage wearing something not dissimilar to an outfit from "Handmaid's Tale".
https://x.com/FedPoasting/status/2118389760070725932
What if the roles were reversed? What if Mike Pence or Mitt Romney or J.D. Vance of Pete Hegseth showed up like this?
I have a hard time explaining why this line of reasoning just does not land at all with progressives. To me it seems like a slam dunk. What am I missing? And is there a conservative equivalent to this, i.e. a meta role reversal where conservatives are the one being hypocrites?
I'm sure Romney's wife was also wearing magic underwear, and I don't recall that ever being a serious debate during his campaign. I could maybe see some devout Christian woman who is also a public figure (ACB? She doesn't seem that trad) adopting the traditional-in-some-communities practice of veiling, but I doubt that it'd make much of a splash. For better or worse, I don't know that the leftists are wrong that concern about headscarves is from seeing Muslims (especially observant ones) as an outgroup. IMO face covering is a bit different, but I'd bet there are hair covering styles that wouldn't seem too out of place in everyday life from the Christian traditions: hats are pretty normalized.
If Barrett had showed up for her confirmation hearings wearing a veil, it would have been a huge deal. I recall there being a lot of attention regarding her religious background with the People of Praise and whether she was too trad for comfort. I think a headscarf would have been a bridge too far.
Perhaps orthogonal to your point, but People of Praise is not a traditionalist Catholic group, and gets along very poorly with trads. There are traditionalist Catholics appointed to the judiciary(the most prominent of whom is Clarence Thomas) by republicans aplenty; the thing they have in common is that that they are all men.
People of Praise is a charismatic Catholic group theoretically open to non-Catholic Christians. This is the... well technically louder, but you know what I mean- strain of conservative Catholicism.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link