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 -
This seems very common in media that isn't good enough to be well liked by either men or women, or where they try to have a basically masculine plot, but with a Mary Sue lead, as though that would appeal to large segments of either sex.
This is the first I've heard of True Detective, Season 4. I generally like Fargo because it's a good mix of detective stuff, characterization, and interesting cinematography and music, along with a tiny bit of fantasy. The TD4 trailer looks like a less interesting Fargo knock off.
Fargo season 5 is actually an excruciating example of this. You've got the ruthless girlboss executive running a debt collection agency who's painted as a villain in the first few episodes but then she totally owns some male, pale, and stale bankers, reevaluates her relationship with her daughter in law, and totally redeems herself. You've got John Hamm as the sheriff who's a total caricature of a right winger. You've got repeated unbearable catchphrases ("you know that a witch hunt is not witches hunting men, right? It's men hunting women to keep them in line"). The main character is (mostly) hyper competent and just about every man in the story is incompetent or a bad guy.
Even on reddit some people come out and say that it's a bit over the top, and others shout them down and call them "triggered magats" or whatever.
However it's still rated better than season 4. I don't remember the details of season 4 but I don't remember disliking it, I don't know why it got panned in reviews.
I think I quit on Fargo midway through season 3. It's a shame because seasons 1 and 2 really were extremely good.
I didn't really like season 3 too much and gave up on season 4, but season 5 was good enough.
I agree with a lot of what sarker said above, but the main variation with the wife in this one was, I think, an acceptable single degree of freedom (and a funny variation given how they've written the wife in Movie/S1/S2). Unlike True Detective Night Country, Fargo S5 worked pretty well just because they did so many of the little things well, even if a few things including sarker's points were grating. It's also not so jarring having the other characters, men, being incompetent since the show was always based on mostly everybody being incompetent for where they've found themselves. There's one episode later on that's almost a total write-off, but it's worth checking out.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link