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 -
How about this variant? "Oh, but we don't mean punish the mother - she's been fooled by a billion dollar industry and a corrupt culture into believing it’s not murder, it’s her right and freedom as a woman and also her only way out of poverty."
It’s a scenario which has one equivalent, which is conveniently its culture war inverse: "Oh, but we don't mean punish the soldier - he's been fooled by a trillion dollar industry and a corrupt culture into believing it’s not murder, it’s his patriotic honor and duty as a man and also his only way out of poverty."
I don't think the equivalence to soldiers is convincing. Even anti-war activists generally do not hold soldiers responsible for being sent to fight by their country - but they can be held responsible for specific war crimes.
"Women have been fooled by a billion-dollar industry into believing that murdering babies is okay" - okay, but once you cripple that industry and make it illegal, why wouldn't you prosecute them? How is this different from saying gang bangers saw no other way out of their environment and therefore shouldn't be prosecuted, we should only go after, say, the cartels?
Your answers are typical, and they all boil down to not holding women responsible in the same way you'd hold them responsible for strangling a baby in its crib.
Soldiers are not blamed for killing specific enemy soldiers.
Being held not responsible for "specific war crimes" would be like not being held responsible for abortions that are morally repugnant for additional reasons than normal.
More options
Context Copy link
At that point, I’d consider it, because at that point, it’s legally considered murder with conspiracy to murder, and they’d know it without excuse. I’d gladly go after PP for RICO today and the abortion providers for conspiracy to murder right now, with impeachment for any legislator voting down a single-issue “born-alive” bill.
I’ve met two women who murdered their child in the womb far past the “kid has an active brain” stage, one a wife on reddit for economic reasons and one a single IRL for emotional reasons (her ex was revealed to be a jerk and she wasn’t ready for single motherhood). Neither considered the child a real person yet. Would I treat them like baby stranglers at worst or concentration camp guards at Nuremberg at best? The first, yes, the second, no. The cognitive dissonance would be too shattering for her and send her to suicide.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link