site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   33050 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 24, 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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If it's true the Grossberg lawsuit is the reason for Tucker's firing - (there's also a LA Times story that Rupert thought Tucker's 1/6 coverage might get them in trouble), it proves that the Right needs to learn that yes, you can probably make "cancellable" statements about minorities in a college-educated conservative-leaning workplace, because any minorities who work in such a place aren't going to be upset about it or they'll just agree.

OTOH, making jokes about which female Governor candidate you'd rather have sex with is likely to upset even otherwise quite conservative women at that said workplace, because even in a right-wing space to the right of much of the nation, the median conservative woman is still going to be upset about openly sexual comments like that. 1960's/1970's feminism - aka, I can have my own job, financial independence, not getting fired for getting pregnant, and freedom from open sexism in the workplace is basically believed by 90% of women in the US.

The Right needs to learn this, or they'll keep ending up in the same place.

And where are we going to be in another few decades?

The Right needs to learn that 2010s trans activism - Trans Women Are Women, respect people’s pronouns, etc - is believed by 90% of people even in a conservative workplace.

Someone needs to put their foot down.

Someone needs to put their foot down.

Are you defending people's right to discuss which governor you'd most want to have sex with in the workplace? I don't think that's ever been an acceptable topic. You could probably get away with it in small workplaces where you're joking with friends and it'd never leak, but I think it'd pretty much always cause controversy if it was leaked.

but I think it'd pretty much always cause controversy if it was leaked.

"Controversy" like playing footsie with the idea the election as stolen? If so, do you think Fox always cares about controversy?

Let's put it another way: let's say this information leaked about Fox (or any other workplace) but there was zero lawsuit risk. How important do you think the "controversy" would be in practical terms?

"Controversy" like playing footsie with the idea the election as stolen? If so, do you think Fox always cares about controversy?

I think Fox probably should be firing people who have lied or severely misled about the facts of the 2020 election.

Let's put it another way: let's say this information leaked about Fox (or any other workplace) but there was zero lawsuit risk. How important do you think the "controversy" would be in practical terms?

I think it's a tough comparison because before you fire someone for skepticism about the 2020 election, you've got to firmly establish the facts of what happened in the 2020 election. That takes some time to do. Whereas Don Lemon's comments,

“Nikki Haley isn’t in her prime, sorry,” the journalist said in February while discussing Haley’s suggestion that politicians over age 75 should be subject to mental competency tests. “When a woman is considered to be in her prime — in her 20s, 30s and maybe her 40s.”

When Harlow, 40, asked her cohost to clarify, Lemon said that an internet search would explain what he meant. “Don’t shoot the messenger, I’m just saying what the facts are,” the Transparent author told his fellow anchor. “Google it. … Nikki Haley should be careful about saying that politicians are not in their prime, and they need to be in their prime when they serve. Because she wouldn’t be in her prime, according to Google or whatever it is.

are pretty clearly sexist to me. Unless I'm missing some key context, it's saying a women's prime as a politician is equivalent to her prime as a sexual partner. That's just clear cut not acceptable for a mainstream news anchor to be saying, at least if the news network isn't trying to break into some dissident right niche.

Oh, I thought we were talking about some Tucker situation like the Nancy Pelosi bikini pics!

Lemon's comments were clearly sexist. I didn't even consider you meant him because he's gay* (which makes him using red pill ideology on national television very funny).

CNN and Fox may not be in the same boat here in terms of how much they have to be "PC".

But you do seem to be right in this case- at least part of the story being put out by CNN is that it has affected CNN's ability to book guests

In recent weeks, CNN’s bookers had discovered that some guests did not want to appear on the air with Mr. Lemon, and research on the morning show reviewed by CNN executives found that his popularity with audiences had fallen, one of the people said.

His job -unlike most - actually depends on such relationships.

I think Fox probably should be firing people who have lied or severely misled about the facts of the 2020 election.

They can't fire people who were merely guests on their shows.

They can make a point after the guest leaves to say that person is wrong about everything, Biden won the 2020 election fairly, and they will not be inviting them back.

And then they'd be redundant with CNN.

More comments

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats