site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 10, 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.

14
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Regardless of whether "grooming" is literal grooming, it has enough aspects in common with grooming that the comparison becomes obvious; it's exposing children to sexual things and it's deliberately excluding the parents from being told. If you're going to do that, people are going to call it grooming regardless of any technicalities about whether it's being done for the personal pleasure of the groomer rather than in the name of ideology.

deliberately excluding the parents from being told

I'm not sure what, specifically, you're referring to here. I don't think keeping sex ed topics secret from parents is common. Do you mean the "a child can use pronouns or dress as the other gender and the school will assist with it without telling the parents"? That just doesn't feel like grooming.

This would be grooming: A teacher picks out specific students who have few friends / are shy / seem unusually influenceable, befriends them specifically, maybe shows them favoritism. They try to build (initially non-sexual) emotional intimacy. They'd spend some time in private doing shared, fun activities with the kid. They'd then move those fun activities to things like - dressing or acting feminine, doing weird (not sexual yet) things the teacher orders. If/when mild resistance occurs, pull the general friendliness temporarily. Then over time move more and more to more explicitly trans or sexual acts.

And - that's something that does happen, constantly! Sometimes with the explicit trans angle, although it's much more common w/o the trans angle. But the many-to-one nature of instruction, the generally regimented nature of school (there's usually somewhere you're supposed to be, doing the group activity), and the general cultural suspicion of authority figures being pedos makes it hard for a teacher to do that. But for a random old guy on the internet dming kids, all that reverses - 1 on 1 interaction is trivial, kids spend lots of time clicking away on their phones, many of them are lonely / don't have many internet friends, and you can start off making a connection just by sending memes or playing video games.

That's grooming! It describes a complicated and purposeful set of actions on the part of a specific individual towards specific, harmful ends. Alleged grooming in school is diffuse, done by different parties for small amounts of time, and is mostly just 'normal progressive stuff'. What part of "sex ed including gay/trans info", "kids can, if they choose to, come out in school if they want", "teachers putting pride flags up in their classrooms" is explained better by "grooming" than just "most people are progressives on gay/trans issues"?

I'm not sure what, specifically, you're referring to here. I don't think keeping sex ed topics secret from parents is common.

Whether or not it's common is irrelevant. Murder and rape are uncommon.

This would be grooming:

No. Grooming has a much broader definition. The sudden restriction stems from it striking a chord.