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 -
Are you aware of things like the Catboy Ranch discord server?
Absolutely not -- you could sub "Catboy" for "Lizardman" in my OC if you like.
Catboy Ranch was a discord server run by keffals where minors would be invited and then pressured into taking HRT, which keffals would also provide.
The relevant threads on the farms have all the info you might want, as well as screencaps.
OK, that I believe -- maybe I phrased this thing poorly. I don't mean that zero groomers exist; I mean that essentially zero of the people accusing their local librarian of being a groomer really think that she is doing it for sexual pleasure reasons. Which to me is an essential element of the definition of the word -- the "you're such an egg" people probably have some element of that at least.
What the librarian is doing is also bad, I just don't think "groomer" is a good word for it. Other than trying to make the librarian (and her supporters) feel bad -- which probably won't work. But at least it's an effort, and if it makes the people slinging it around feel good I'm OK with it. At least it signals that not everyone supports the groomers, in a fairly unambiguous way.
I don't think it's an essential element, personally.
I don't think someone needs to be consciously grooming for their own use, I think it's sufficient merely that their actions have, as a byproduct, primed the victim to be more open to abuse from other sources. Teaching kids to hide things from their parents, that it's okay to have secrets between you and another adult that you keep from your parents, is the exemplar behaviour I'd point to to illustrate this. This is not, in itself, paedophilia, but it will make it a hell of a lot easier for paedophiles to prey on that child once they've accepted the concept.
Moreover, I can't really think of a better, more accurate word to describe that kind of thing.
Over on DataSecretsLox the problem has been noted, and they coined "flergeflamming" -- I'd like something that captures the essential evil of it more, but the idea is to promote rational discussion rather than shouting matches I guess.
"Medical malpractice" covers it for the doctors doing this shit, but I'm not sure of a pithy way to put it for their army of support staff -- "sexual genocide workers"?
Yeah, I'm sorry but I'm never going to accept that kind of term for it. Something that sounds like a word you'd smugly play in scrabble if you were in Middle Earth comes off as an attempted dismissal of the seriousness of the action. Names have power, and naming this manipulation of children after something that sounds like it would tumble whimsically out of Tom Bombadil's mouth after altogether too many extra strength pints doesn't cut it at all, I'm afraid.
This is even more hyperbolic and less accurate than just calling them groomers.
Agreed on the flergeflamming -- the point being that making a new word might be better than repurposing an existing one with a slightly different meaning.
"democide" might be better than genocide, but how is that less accurate? They are literally destroying people's reproductive capacity based on sexual ideology/fetish.
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