site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 25, 2024

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.

7
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't get why a campus should want to police free speech at all.

Because, among other reasons, Title IX requires it, or so the theory goes. Allowing speech (including speech by other students) which is discriminatory as to gender sex is said to violate Title IX's guarantee:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

I have no idea if the theory has been put forth that baldly and directly tested in court, but there's a lot of lawyers, administrators, and regulators who believe it.

And of course, once you've opened the door to speech regulation, there's always more that can be added.

This feels like a stretch.

Central examples of being subject to discrimination on the basis of sex would be:

  • Requiring different SAT scores for enrollment for male and female students
  • Requiring one sex to take extra coursework
  • Having different grading curves (e.g. for sports achievements) for both sexes (Minimally discriminatory grading curves would at least try to model the dependence of testosterone, size, weight and a ton of other factors on sports outcomes and then adjust for that instead of just treating the prepubescent nerd on the same scale as a jock who is halfway through puberty because they both have testicles.)

Someone who happens to be on campus saying someone mean about people who share the sex of a student seems like as non-central as you can possibly get.

Sure it's a stretch. But the people administering these regulations want to make that stretch, so they do, and there's no one to gainsay them.