site banner
ZorbaTHut  2yr ago (text post)   35983 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022

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.

26
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This one just baffles me.

FBI sting on an army officer nets an spying bust. Dog bites man, except there's a lot more not mentioned in the press release. It's culture war because the accused is the first openly trans officer in the Army. However the baffling thing is, why is an openly trans officer willing to spy for Russia which is widely known for its anti-LGBT policies.

The other odd thing about this case is the DoJ's release uses a lot of pronouns that don't don't seem to be Henry's preferred pronouns.

The fed govt. it seems can look for any excuse to indict someone. Sharing health info somehow threatens national security.

If convicted, the defendants face a maximum sentence of five years in federal prison for the conspiracy, and a maximum of 10 years in federal prison for each count of disclosing IIHI. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Usually the counts are wrapped as one, so the worst case would likely be 10 years.

However the baffling thing is, why is an openly trans officer willing to spy for Russia which is widely known for its anti-LGBT policies.

Because in spite of such polices, Russia is known for having progressive cultural elements too it (literature, chess, ballet, figure skating ,etc.) Sans Putin, it's not that conservative of a country.

Releasing personally identifiable health information is a big deal for civilian doctors, including loss of medical license at the extreme end. I'm sure the army takes a similarly dim view of it. Going out of your way to try and contact the Russian embassy to become a spy, then committing a crime to prove your commitment to future treason is a far cry from the feds "looking for any excuse to indict someone". When the FBI goes on a fishing expedition with 80 IQ ne'er-do-wells, sure, but I'd hope a pair of married doctors would have enough spare brain cells between them to know what they're getting into.

Releasing personally identifiable health information is a big deal

So why is this so sacred, anyway? Medical privacy has always seemed like a moderately cruel joke to me, considering that one's secrets are kept with the uttermost strength away from anybody who couldn't do much to harm a person with them, anyway, but delivered right into the hands of the organizations who hold a person's life in their hands already. Considering how many rights and privileges a person can lose for getting treatment for mental health problems (crucially: for getting treatment;) fighting so hard to protect people from lesser humiliations seems perverse.

People don't want random people knowing they have AIDS, or dick fungus, or chronically shit their pants as a kid, or what have you. All kinds of reasons.

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