site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 19, 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.

10
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Moonshot Personal Growth Idea

There are a lot of smart, hyper-informed people on here (don't be bashful). Each probably have 1-5 topics they know A LOT about, who could deliver a knowledgable spiel over voice or text without much effort and intelligently field any number of follow-up questions. So it occurs to me there might be a big educational opportunity for me here if I can capture some of this low-hanging fruit.

I don't know much about American politics, health, business, etc., but eagerly want to know more, and I'm happy to talk over discord/phone/voice or text depending on your preferences. Some topics to jog your brain; if it strikes you that "hey, I actually got obsessed with topic 23 one time and learned everything you could possibly know about it over a 6 month period," please consider reaching out to me. I'll adopt a position indicated by either "pro" or "con" provisionally just to inspire engagement (my actual views here are very low-confidence and "pro/con" means something more like "I've heard interesting arguments for this side of the issue that I want an intelligent person who knows more than I do to explain the merits of to me" than "this is what I believe.")

  1. “The current level of military spending is justified.” Pro

  2. “The typical white male is utterly blameless for the circumstances of the African American community” Pro

  3. "The growth of transgender identity and bisexuality have the character of a social contagion" Pro (Is bisexuality created or only revealed by the environment? Is anyone bisexual because of encouragement, or is the absence of discouragement the only environmental factor that does anything to affect rates of ID?) (Caplan)

  4. “Asian romantic preferences are morally permissible.” Pro

  5. “De facto interrogational torture by the US is justified.” Pro

  6. "Extraterrestrial life is the best explanation of some UFO sightings" Con

  7. “Any minimum wage fails a purely utilitarian cost benefit test due to disemployment effects.” Pro

  8. "Joe Biden's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Would Be Disastrous," (Or: Cost benefit analysis puts several other environmental causes ahead of climate change.)

  9. "Feminism is bad for women." (a la Bryan Caplan)

  10. "Conventional medicine barely makes us healthier" (as seen in Robin Hanson's case for radical medical skepticism, from the RAND Health insurance experiment to the replication crisis http://mason.gmu.edu/~rhanson/feardie.pdf)

  11. "Dietary research is of such poor quality that we know almost nothing about whether any given major diet fad is truly the ideal diet." (Pro) (I would be willing to take the even stronger position that we don't even know ANYTHING about the right diet just to see what a smart, informed person would say in response to better calibrate my reasoning on this issue)

  12. "Most of life is a prestige-signaling game./Social status is the closest thing to a one-variable explanation for everything, and does far better than the traditional rival models like sex or money."

  13. "Diversity is our strength." Pro

  14. "Society does not clearly treat one sex more unfairly than the other." (Pro)

  15. "IQ is real and a major determinant of social outcomes" Pro

  16. "Racial groups differ in socially relevant ways for genetic reasons." Con

  17. “Capitalists deserve their success.” Pro

  18. "Money doesn't really buy happiness." Pro

  19. “The solution to traffic is congestion pricing (tolls)” Pro

  20. "Actions taken by the Biden Admin during the Covid pandemic were generally justified." Not enough info to sway either way

  21. “We should deregulate construction completely.” Pro

  22. “Workers are not underpaid in competitive business environments.” Pro

  23. Question: How do taxes work, and how SHOULD they work?

  24. “Affirmative action is immoral/harmful.” Pro

  25. “State-mandated wealth redistribution is immoral./Wealth inequality is not a serious social problem” Pro

  26. “Abortion is morally permissible.” Pro

  27. “We should put America First” pro

  28. “It is not possible to be a good criminal defense lawyer AND a good person.” Pro

  29. “We should privatize everything.” Pro

  30. “The poor generally deserve to be poor.” “American wealth inequality is generally fair.” (as seen in remarks made by Caplan re: the so-called "success sequence")

  31. “Gender is essentially biological.” Pro (Tomas Bogardus, Alex Byrne)

  32. “We should remove confederate monuments.” Con

  33. “We should not provide trigger warnings/safety culture actually harms mental health.” Pro (Jonathan Haidt)

  34. “We Should Stop Talking about Privilege” pro

  35. “Immigration is Not a Human Right.” Con

  36. “The Death Penalty is Immoral” pro

  37. “The typical meat eater does nothing wrong.” Pro

  38. “Political correctness is just politeness.” Con

  39. “There are no positive rights; There is no right to healthcare or education.” Pro

  40. “Utilitarianism is a bad moral theory.” Pro

  41. “It isn’t morally wrong to misgender a trans person.” Pro

  42. “Artificial intelligence is not an existential risk.” Pro

  43. “We should not have gun control.” Pro

  44. “We should segregate intimate public spaces by biological sex.” Or: “it is not morally wrong to do so.” Pro

  45. “It’s morally wrong for the average voter to vote; we should try to decrease voter turnout.” Pro

  46. “It’s morally permissible to racially profile.” Pro

  47. “Psychological egoism is false.” Pro or con

  48. “Ethical egoism is false.” Pro

  49. “Racial discrimination is not inherently immoral.” Pro

  50. “Businesses may racially select their customers.” Pro

  51. “Equality of opportunity is morally undesirable.” Pro

  52. “Mixed martial arts don’t violate anyone’s rights.” Pro

  53. “We are morally obligated to tip servers.” Pro

  54. “Hazing should be permitted on college campuses.” Pro

  55. “It is just to punish criminals for the sake of causing suffering to people who deserve it.” Pro or con, preferably con

  56. “If we ought to be taxed more, we ought to donate our excess income.” (“Rich socialists/distributive egalitarians are hypocrites.”) pro

  57. “It’s morally permissible to sell oneself into permanent slavery.” Pro

  58. “There is no duty to hire the most qualified applicant.” Pro

  59. “We should completely deregulate the provision of healthcare services.” Pro

  60. “We should not require occupational licensing by law (for doctors, plumbers, or lawyers).” Pro

  61. “Workplace quality and safety regulations are bad for workers.” Pro

  62. “We should not dispense racial reparations to the black community.” Pro

  63. Con “alcoholics (and drug addicts in general) are nonresponsible victims”

  64. Pro: “Race is biologically real”

  65. Pro:“The rich pay their fair share”

  66. “Exploitation isn’t wrong.” Pro

  67. “Free market pricing is a better distributor than queuing” Pro

  68. “Price gouging is fine.” Pro

  69. “The casting couch is just prostitution” Pro

  70. “Affirmative Action is systemically racist” Pro

  71. “Colleges are guilty of negligent advertising” pro

  72. "We should we abolish civil rights law" (Richard Hanania)

  73. “Gender is essentially biological” pro

TL;DR Looking for someone to explain American politics to me, preferably over discord voice. Especially interested in topics like happiness, relationship success, American public policy (esp. healthcare and the budget)

  • -18

“The casting couch is just prostitution” Pro

The casting couch is much more immoral than prostitution because the resources that are being traded for sex often do not truly belong to the person trading them. When the director chooses to hire the actress who gives him sexual favors over the actress who refuses but would be better for the role he is essentially defrauding the production company and anyone who has financial interest in the film.

Alternatively, an actress who refuses the casting couch does not really want the role, and will be trouble on set. The casting couch is a quick and reliable way to see if actresses are biddable. Can you think of a better test to see if an actress is willing to do what the director asks her to?

I wonder what the corresponding task you should set a man is? Perhaps very similar.

Can you think of a better test to see if an actress is willing to do what the director asks her to?

This goes back to the OP's original observation about the principal-agent problem. Film is a collaborative medium; while it might be in the director's interest to have an actress who does whatever he or she says, it is not necessarily in the interests of the producers of the film.

it is not necessarily in the interests of the producers of the film.

This is why producers are the ones who run the casting couch, presumably. It is their money on the line, so they make the decision.

As Wikipedia says:

Predominantly male casting directors and film producers use the casting couch to extract sex from aspiring actors in Hollywood, Bollywood,[3][4] Broadway, and other segments of the industry.

Neither [3] nor [4] give any evidence for the claim "Predominantly". If there is a female producer or casting director using the couch, she is flying under the radar.

This is why producers are the ones who run the casting couch, presumably. It is their money on the line, so they make the decision.

I am talking about the production company .

Weinstein was the co-owner (with his brother) and founder of Miramax, the production company that made Sex, Lies, and Videotape, Pulp Fiction, Heavenly Creatures, Flirting with Disaster, and Shakespeare in Love. It was his money on the line.

I am talking** in general**, not specifically re Weinstein. The casting couch existed long before Weinstein was born. Plus, Miramax was owned by Disney for much of the time inquestion.

Producers are the usual people to run a casting couch, and they normally own a large part of the production company.

The casting couch was more common under the studio system, but I do not know if the movie moguls were the ones on top at the time: They were Louis B. Mayer at MGM, Jack L. Warner at Warner Bros., Adolph Zukor at Paramount, William Fox and Darryl F. Zanuck (at 20th Century Fox from 1935), Carl Laemmle at Universal, and Harry Cohn at Columbia.

If someone has to have sex with the new young starlets, I imagine the job, like most difficult things, is past off to the guy in charge. If you want something done, ask a busy person.

More comments