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 -
Part of the problem is that the most visible people are the crazy extremely online types. Is Sam Brinton looking like such a great role model for nonbinary representation now? But these are the cases that most people hear about, because they get the most publicity.
And the crazy extremely online types are the ones with the most niche, extreme, and bizarre demands, and are not representative of the majority of trans people. But because nobody is willing to stand up and say "Yeah, this person is crazy extremely online, please ignore" because that would be bigotry and transphobia and policing and all the rest of it, then they aren't challenged and the tone of the debate is then set for ordinary people that "They want to dress up like clowns and teach three year olds that they're trans and secretly give hormones to underage kids".
Rowing back on the most extreme outliers by trans groups (and before anyone jumps in with "there is no one body that speaks for all trans people", there sure are a lot of bodies calling themselves Trans This and LGBT That willing to give media interviews on every topic when asked) would do more for calming down the debate than all the scolding about "that never happens, and if it does, it's a good thing".
Sure, I used the Westboro Baptist Church as a cudgel against Christians back in the day, I know the drill.
But, you know. I was like 20 at the time and didn't really understand how to argue honestly and fairly, but that was a scummy and dishonest tactic when I used it back then. It still is now.
But other Christians are willing to say "the Westboro Baptist Church is crazy and we don't believe what they are saying is true". This doesn't happen for trans issues.
Would you know if it does happen? How much time do you spend hanging out with trans activists, how sure are you that your media channels would promote examples of them being reasonable and moderate to your attention? Our media isn't designed for highlighting people being moderate and reasonable in full generality, let alone on adversarial culture war issues.
As someone who does hang out in those spaces some of the time, I can say that there is nothing like consensus among the trans community and trans activists on most of this stuff, denouncing others for making the cause look bad and being extreme/cringe is common, etc. It is true that this happens more within those like-minded spaces than in press releases, I suppose; in the middle of the culture war battle with bills on the ballot in many states, there is a lot of circling the wagons and presenting a unified front. I think Christians had a much more secure position from which to denounce their own members, and used it, which is good. But I don't think it's as completely one-sided as you may think.
I've listened in IRL on the clique of trannies, non-binaries, and tranny-hags that infested a local bar's drop-in RPG night. A 3-minute sample got them calling some neighbor of theirs a disgusting bigot, and something to do with freeing palestine. Their games are also fuckawful. It drove all the non-terrible players to come on a different night.
Not exactly damning airtight evidence, just funny that I walk in on them right at that point. They...failed to win me over.
This was very unexpected to me. The last time somebody was modded for saying "trannies" was more than a year ago, despite many people having used the word.
Moreover just 7 days ago the @self_made_human said (while mod-hatted)
(To be clear, I like the "write like everyone is reading" rule and wish it were actually enforced, and do think using pejorative is just needless heat. I'm just surprised there's a mod who actually seems to agree)
Emphasis added.
Moderators aren't perfectly consistent, we're human too. While we attempt to build internal consensus for any major decisions, especially bans, something as minor as a warning doesn't usually warrant further discussion.
Calling people trannies is hardly the only inflammatory wording Skulldrinker made, I think "tranny-hags" is probably even worse.
In this case, I think what @raggedy_anthem said is perfectly consistent with what I did, and even if it wasn't, minor variation in what each mod considers unacceptable are to be expected. If it was a ban, especially a lengthy one, I would personally say it wasn't warranted, at least in internal discussion, but here I stand with her.
I don’t think your explanations contradict the mod-hating of your irrespective (?) comments.
I do think your explanations contradict each other’s explanations. I expect if a post that calls people trannies and also makes the 10,000th run-of-the-mill advocacy for conservative values, @raggedy_anthem will mod it and you will not.
That’s fine, I’m not looking for perfect consistency between mods, I was just remarking that this seems like a change in direction to our moderation.
As somebody who thinks it’s mind numbingly obvious “the foundation” has only eroded since we were founded, I’m just happy there’s a mod willing to up civility standards, since I’ve long been clear that I think that’s a requirement for the foundation, since shit-flinging is detrimental to minority views.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link