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 -
Last week, right-wing gadfly David Cole wrote a banger exploring the parallels between the childhood transgender craze and the “childhood sexual abuse”/“ritual satanic abuse” panics of the 1970s and 80s. Cole points out the irony of the “say groomer” obsession on the right, and the larger moral panic in right-wing spaces about how the “trans kids” phenomenon is primarily about “sexualizing children”, given that the first wave of moral panic about the molestation of children was driven primarily by leftist women, which is the same demographic now primarily driving the movement that is in turn being accused of molesting children. I think Cole makes a very convincing case that the “groomer” thing is a red herring, a distraction which has blown up into a full-blown purity-spiraling moral panic in the hothouse ecosystem of the Extremely Online right. If you think that the people teaching kids that they’re trans are primarily doing so because they’re interested in molesting kids, why are they so overwhelmingly women?
His observations ring true for me; from the constant sharing of the Auron MacIntyre sign-tapping meme and the Sam Hyde quote, to Pizzagate and the obsession with Epstein, the right wing is proving that it’s every bit as susceptible to purity spirals and moral panics as the left wing. And as Cole points out, it’s especially odd because the “groomer” panic on the right is itself a response to the “trans kids will all kill themselves unless we affirm them” panic on the left. The “groomer” panic also features the same obnoxious and cancerous motte-and-bailey strategic-equivocation tactics that rat-adjacent rightists despise so much when it’s used against them; figures like James Lindsay, Rod Dreher, and even Marjorie Taylor Greene, are all involved in a linguistic shell game, wherein they use a word which they know for a fact is supposed to refer to grooming children for direct sexual abuse, and when pressed they retreat into “well, they’re saying that children have a sexual identity, which is kind of like sexualizing them, which is the same thing that child molesters do.”
There are certain topics that I won’t publicly touch even in a space like this; I’ve thought about one day trying my hand at starting a Substack and joining the right-wing online commentary/content-creation ecosystem, and there are certain subjects where I fear that if I deviate too much from the party line, I will be cast out into the outer depths before I even begin. The whole issue of child sexuality, how it relates to teen sexuality, whether or not queer theorists want to rape kids, etc., seems like the most high-voltage of any of those third rails. Being seen as an apologist for child molestation is a hell of an accusation to face, no matter how specious and lacking in credibility, and it’s nice to see a writer with some level of clout in right-wing commentary stick his neck out there and identify this moral panic for what it is.
I’m even hesitant to offer too much more of my own larger commentary on the issue, but I wanted to put this piece out there for commentary, particularly for those who do take the “groomer” thing more seriously than I do.
I just think trans is a mental health disorder and a bad thing to teach anyone but especially kids while doing long term body transformations that will damage their entire life.
Probably some pedophiles involved to because it’s a useful movement for them.
I don’t view trans people and promoters for the most part as bad people or my enemies. I think they are mistaken and feel bad for them.
Why do you think trans is a mental health disorder.
Because it makes you reject the material reality of your own body, and compels you to modify it in ways that are detrimental to your health.
I don't buy this. I don't think choosing to trade off life expectancy for something you value more constitutes a mental illness.
Even if you go full natural law I don't think you can reasonably argue that maximizing lifespan to the exclusion of exploration or ideals is man's nature.
Hell, I took estrogen for years just because I perceived the world as having two Ice cream flavors that I was only allowed to have one of, and I still endorse having done that, even now that I've stopped. It seems like depriving yourself to me if you don't try the other feel at least once in your life. Do you really want to die without knowing how that flavor you've had in front of you your whole life tastes?
And- the material reality of the body is that you can alter it with hormones. Why pick on people who take hormones instead of people who work out to get buff? They're also battling a material reality.
What would make you consider something consider a mental illness then? Depression driving you to suicide is "trading off life expectancy for something you value more" under your approach.
As long as you're aware of what you're signing up for, it's fair enough, but under the current ideology "trans women are women", which implies the material reality of the body is not accepted.
Yeah, depression is an illness. I could posit my standard natural law argument (the human telos throughout western history and each human life has been that of ascension and transcendence, which subverting gender is another example of, whereas depression is a lack of motivation that drains that telos- yada yada) But really I know it when I see it.
"I, a trans women need to transmute myself such that I am a perfect cis woman in order to be able to function."
That- is a mental illness. That's the sort of thing that leaves Contrapoints in a ditch for months.
"I, a trans women need to transmute myself such that I possess a perfect cisgender female morph. I will not stop. I'm working on my bio doctorate. That Y chromosome's days are numbered."
That- is Metal. Get me more girls like that I want to marry those. A whole start-up of them. We'll build our children together like proper engineers.
So even as a trans advocate I appreciate people attacking the precept that "trans women are [cis] women!" ... in theory.
The thing is- the way the lines are drawn right now,
I don't think any of the people trying to tear that down have any real interest in helping trans people find the replacement I'd like them to have.
And if it were torn down, I don't think it would be followed with a reasoned, evidence based cultural conversation on the safest place to redraw lines for bathrooms or sports.
I think, if either side gives an inch right now, the other will take a mile. So naturally, no-one gives an inch.
Fair, but so do others, and they might draw the line somewhere else.
You're mostly right, but there's a handful of people who are trying to have a reasonable and compassionate approach to this issue. I don't rate their chances of being listened to when the whole thing comes to a head particularly high, but they are out there.
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