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 -
A society accepting what you see as a bad set of memes affects everyone. No man is an island.
The activists know this - that's why they went from "we just want to be left alone!" to "we need X, Y and Z to feel comfortable, fulfilled and validated".
"'You do you and I do mine" is at best an ideal that the temptations of actual power erodes or just an outright tactical lie to wear down opposing norms before instituting your own.
But does an ad targeted to a diffetent demographic do that, if said demo is already different?.
The people who would buy Bud light after seeing promoted by Mulvaney are presumably onboard with transness already no?
Society is not based on reason in the first place so I don't care what beliefs Bud light are exploiting or if they are true or not. Like i don't care if America truly is the greatest nation on earth in every third beer commercial or whatever. The truth doesn't matter. Its aimed at people who already believe it.
I don’t think any reasonable person thinks this demographic actually exists outside of like, 10 people.
The real story is probably that bud light is in decline, there isn’t really a way to fix that decline, and the head of marketing knows that and is trying to make it look good on her resume by attributing declining sales to transphobia. I don’t particularly care about that, but I do care that this is the one time my demographic can hit corporates with a boycott that hurts.
Why isn't the more parsimonious answer more likely? Bud light is in decline. They decide to market to a younger demo and pick a person to sponsor accordingly. The campaign was small it wouldn't cost much to test.
Sure, but I think both the left and the right (the mainstream of each at least) both agree that Nazis are bad. If we stipulate the right thinks Trans are bad, that still leaves you with the left. Obviously broad strokes there. But if you get Blue Tribe to like Bud Light that is a relevant demographic with generally more disposable income.
They are potential Bud Light buyers. It might not be an easy shift but it is one that could be made. As Bud Light went from the drink of wimps to the drink that is popular with Red Tribe today.
More options
Context Copy link
It boggles the mind that anyone would be so ignorant as to think that there are potential bud light buyers in support of trans.
Why? Bud Light is a low cal beer. All my Blue Tribe friends drink is low cal stuff it seems. Remember light beers themselves used to be looked down on by "real" men back in the day. There is no reason with proper marketing it couldn't evolve it's demo again.
More options
Context Copy link
As weird as this campaign seems to be, I'm not actually sure that's true. There's probably some traction with the seltzer, hard cider, hard lemonade crowd. Plus "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take," I guess?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It’s simple. Trans is bad. It’s not a demo. It’s a mental illness. Like would you drink a beer that promotes Hitler?
I observe that Hitler is neither a demographic nor a mental illness.
Conversely, to the best of my knowledge, Mulvaney has not ordered millions to their deaths, nor even seized political power.
More options
Context Copy link
Even if it is a mental illness that doesn't stop it being a demo. But the demo in question is people who don't think it is a mental illness and are supportive of it.
But this is basically my question, why is celebrating one trans person considered in the same level as celebrating a genocidal dictator? They aren't really the same no?
More options
Context Copy link
Look, you are allowed to criticize transgenderism and say you think it's a mental illness, but this is just waging war against your outgroup. However strongly you feel, accept the fact that there are trans people who might be participating in the discussion and while you're allowed to tell them you think their self-identification is not reality, you are not allowed to tell them they're just like Hitler.
Respectfully you’ve drank the trans koolaid if you think this post was bad
I think I've made my own position on trans pretty clear. You make the same mistake every bitter ideologue does, of assuming that because I'm enforcing the rules against bashing your outgroup, it means I'm on "their" side.
Trans isn’t my outgroup. They don’t exist as a people
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
But I do care buddy and the truth is I'm not going to buy bud light anymore. life is real beyond mental calculations of possibilities and hypotheticals
Would any trans spokesperson elicit this response even a conservative one? No gotchas, just trying to explore this.
Skipping past the joke I can't quite form about the paradoxical 'trans conservative spokesperson' - my gut says no, there was something uniquely perturbing about this specific AMAB being selected as a brand ambassador. Although the bathtub aspect would be an aggravating factor regardless of who it was
Caitlyn Jenner (the most MSM-famous transwoman) and Jennifer Pritzker (one of the main funders of trans causes) are both Republicans. Jennifer Pritzker appears not to be a movement conservative, although (s)he is obviously to the right of the median voter. Caitlyn Jenner endorsed Ted Cruz in the primary and Trump in the general in 2016, so I am reasonably comfortable calling them conservative.
More options
Context Copy link
Thanks, I appreciate you expanding and thinking about it. I might not agree but I do appreciate you engaging.
I appreciate your engaging as well, and your thanks. Gratitude all around! Best wishes
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Bud Light buyers would probably buy a Bruce Jenner-themed can campaign, but not a Kaitlin Jenner can. But I’m neither a beer drinker nor a sports guy, so I’m just listing my priors.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why would who the ad is targeted at change that it is a normalization of something some people clearly see as bad memes/unreason? They [the ad critics] know it is aimed at a different demographic; that is precisely the problem.
The "'You do you' is a lie" comment was more of a general response to "how does it impact you?" and what usually is the implicit idea behind it - that if you can't draw an easy direct causal link to some harm done to you, the changing of social norms should be of less concern to you.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link