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 -
lighthearted cs drama
The grace hopper conference is supposed to be for women and gender minorities. Since they have recruiters there, the job market is tight, and there's no explicit policy against men showing up, men have been showing up. It looks like a lot of people are unhappy about this. The csmajors sub banned discussion of it, but there are still plenty of juicy threads up; in addition to the gender wars, a lot of the guys being international students adds a 'they're taking our jobs' flair to the fire. Since it's basically impossible to gatekeep nonbinary-ness, the challenge for the organizers, if they choose to accept it, is to weed out the men without being accused of being TERFs.
They won’t accept it. They’ll trumpet their inclusion of diverse gender identities if it comes to that.
To the point of letting an obvious troll in? If Catgirl Kulak tries to get in, I don’t believe the inclusivity will last.
I’m pretty sure rule 0 at this event, like most others of its kind, is ‘you’re cancelled for offending anyone who doesn’t claim to be male’, which an obvious troll would do quite quickly. They might declare that him saying hi to a woman in an elevator is sexual assault or something, but uberwoke events have historically been quite good at expelling ridiculous trolls(often for even more ridiculous reasons).
Does the lady in the elevator make a complaint, and then people who've never met her line up on her side to enforce that complaint?
Or does the lady in the elevator make a complaint, and then her friends and allies megaphone that complaint to the entire community, in and outside, creating the impression of both internal consensus and external judgement, cementing a narrative through mass propaganda?
...Who can say in a hypothetical? It seems to me that the real-world cases I've observed have resembled the latter more than the former, though. That is to say, you're talking about a fundamentally nepotistic/tribal social process, and what makes it work isn't any sort of formal rules structure, but rather the social machine the attackers have built. If this is correct, then trolls are unlikely to have that sort of structure ready to go. They run in and try to troll, and the tight-knit activist types simply shut them down.
Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. Matt Walsh showing up to this thing will just get railroaded out by activists, and our own kulak revolt will get railroaded out rather more quickly.
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