site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   38856 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 5, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If wokeness is of paramount concern, then the choice is DeSantis. If you care more about immigration or economic nationalism , then Trump.

DeSantis knows that "destroying wokeness," is a meaningless term that's simply throwing red meat to the base. What does that even mean in concrete terms, from a policy standpoint? Is he going to implement a national ban on gender studies or revoke gay marriage? If he's smart I think even he understands that he doesn't have much of a chance contending with Trump. Possibly, but his campaign may better serve his future odds of election, and this is just an attempt for name recognition.

Yet another "bake the cake, bigot!" case in favour of the Real Genuine Totally A Lady, this time a spa owned by a Korean and wanting to restrict attendance to women-only because the clients will be naked in the pool. Trans ladies can attend but they must be post-surgery. Twist to it is that the owner is not alone conservative but Christian.

"Women with dicks are valid too!" says activist, who then sues the spa and wins the case based on a phone call and not even turning up to attend and being refused.

Seattle District Court Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein on Monday upheld a discrimination ruling against Olympus Spa filed by local trans activist Haven Wilvich, who gloats about being “more woman” than many feminists who’re “only incidental.”

The traditional Korean Spa had maintained that its “women-only rule … is essential for the safety, legal protection, and well-being of our customers.”

It willingly accepted transgender women — but “only if they have ‘gone through post-operative sex confirmation surgery,'” the ruling noted.

Wilvich, however, “‘identifies as a woman’ but ‘is biologically male and has not undergone sex reassignment surgery,’” the court papers said, noting that the activist never actually went to the spa.

Wilvich told The Post on Friday that the complaint came after a phone call to the spa — not a visit — and being told that “pre-op trans women were not allowed.”

“They were breaking Washington state law and I reported that violation,” the activist said.

...Spa owner Myoon Woon Lee sued to reverse the decision, saying it defied his “traditional, theologically conservative” Christian values and put his clientele at risk.

Lee — who has owned the spa for 20 years — also “conveyed his fear that exposing female customers (especially minors) to male genitalia could subject Olympus Spa to criminal penalties.”

There had been “several” incidents where customers “noticed male genitals exposed ” in the spa — creating “humiliation, trauma, and rage,” a complaint by the owner said.

“Those patrons apparently demanded refunds and never returned.”

Lee claimed that the discrimination policy “requires them to service nude males and females in the same rooms,” forcing them to “choose between violating the law or their religious convictions,” his complaint said.

The cherry on top, if I may use that phrase, for me is this:

Meanwhile, Wilvich said she regrets that she was identified in the complaint, insisting that “my name never should have been part of the public record.”

She claims that the identification in the court documents is a “dangerous precedent to be set for minority people.”

So it's okay for Ms. Genuine Even Realer Woman Than Cis Women Haven Wilvich to remain anonymous while dragging the name of the spa and its owner into public view, which might get him into trouble, but I'm A Real Lady is endangered merely by being identified as the face-ache looking for cases to be offended by and go to court to force businesses to change their policies.

So much for downstream of "gay marriage will never affect you", eh? Trans rights activists took the game plan and ran with it.

Gosh, however can a reputation for "fighting wokeness" advantage DeSantis, you wonder?

The Bud Light and Target rows may be more pertinent now. Before, it was easy to paint DeSantis as fighting a stupid battle in Florida with Disney. But now? It's a national mood, baby! Companies not festooning everything with rainbows as much, DEI movie projects not doing so well - it's the pendulum swinging, and I think it really is down to "the children".

People will put up with a lot of stuff when it doesn't really impinge on their day-to-day lives. Oh great, the workplace has the Pride flag up on the wall for this entire month, whatever, I just put my head down and do my job.

But when it starts getting into schools, and when you have people arguing that six year olds do too know their own gender identity and it's genocide if you don't put twelve year olds on puberty blockers, then it starts hitting home. Then you have people going "Hang on a minute, I don't care what adults get up to, it's their choice, but what the hell do you mean I can't tell my kid there are only two sexes?"

DeSantis knows that "destroying wokeness," is a meaningless term that's simply throwing red meat to the base.

Really? There are lots of concrete proposals federally akin to what he's done in Florida.

  1. Schools. DeSantis narrowed curriculum requirements to stop giving woke teachers free range to teach whatever quack theories they wanted. Almost all student loans are now through the feds and are the lifeblood of universities. Make them conditional on total transparency on admissions, make them partially dischargeable after a number of years, and make schools financially on the hook for a portion of that discharged debt.

  2. Our of control bureaucrats. DeSantis, unlike Trump, has cultivated a corps of appointees he can port from FL to the US alphabet agencies.

  3. Transing the kids legislation is clearly a possibility under the gigantic federal medical bureaucracy. At a minimum, good appointments in the medicaid realm will stop federal dollars paying for such things.

DeSantis specifically talked about accreditation as a possible way to target wokeness in schools (also power of the purse with funding).

Also through SEC he can influence ESG standards.

Right. I had already stated above that there were things he's done, but how impactful it's actually going to be, I think is somewhat overstated. And on a federal level, what specific policies do his supporters think that 1) he's willing to propose and 2) is likely to get signed into law, that'll have the effect of "destroying wokeness?"

'build the wall' was almost equally meaningless and meat for the base

Oh definitely. I think he realized at some point he had to deliver something to show for it, even if it wasn't much. Equally, people like AOC and Warren's wealth tax, "eat the rich," Green New Deal was just as populist and unrealistic as "build the wall" was.

DeSantis has done lots to hobble woke indoctrination in education and also to energise citizens against it. That's been his most powerful point of leverage as as a state governor. The Presidency has different points of leverage.

Ironically Hanania has done more than anyone (except maybe Chris Rufo) to document how much of the modern woke-imperium is upheld by American law, especially civil rights law. Hanania is also the one who pointed out how much of that is actually done through executive orders. Any republican could deal a big blow to that, and their respective track records show DeSantis is likely to actually do it while Trump is not.

Trump didn't have an explicit aim to 'target wokeness' as a matter of his official platform, but I'd say he did the left far more damage as a matter of his public persona, than DeSantis could likely achieve by legal fiat. I think DeSantis has generated a much greater image that's incommensurate with the actual political impact he's had governing Florida. Sure, he's accomplished things, I'm not denying that, but I think far too many people who want to play up his qualifications largely discount the substantial media effect that the impact of his actions have actually had, in reality.

Trump just had to sit around as the establishment media wrung their hands and made complete fools of themselves, crying about this or that, demonstrating how little power they actually had.

Showing people what a complete farce the whole thing is, and leaning into it.

Sometimes I'd wonder if I was the only person on an island who thought the impact he had on the media was brilliant. The desperation with which they wanted to paint him as someone who was completely insane, left me with the sinking feeling that it was all projection that was true of the MSM itself. I sometimes get asked by people why I don't trust the media, and they look at me like I'm crazy; because it isn't something that can be explained in a 15 second elevator pitch, but requires extensive background. I think anyone who's even slightly educated as a layman under the whole 'manufacturing consent' framework for instance, can see the trappings of the American ideological system pulling the wool over the eyes of the American people. Especially when you look at something like western coverage of the Ukrainian conflict.

Personally, I 'loved' what Trump did to the media.

I don't think Ukraine is a great example, so I wouldn't lean into it, otherwise I agree with you.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1240540.shtml

We instigated the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.

You may want to find a better source than the literal CCP propaganda mouthpiece.

No, we didn't.

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