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 -
Because slavery is done for the interests of the slaveowner and at least in theory, authoritarian parents are acting for the long term benefit of the children. And even callous authoritarian parents are not going to be as callous as slaveowners.
Kids are not, generally, capable of understanding the distinction.
Reproduction is done for the interests of the parent.
No, I think they understand the distinction perfectly (in that there is none). "Slavery" might be a loaded term (parents and adults more generally will take reflexive offense to children calling it this, even if you ignored that it's an insult to their legitimacy on its face because it is loaded, something children also are well aware of), but in their defense it is a perfectly accurate description of the situation.
[Mistake-theory description of biological reality below]
Children are, by their nature, property; something they have in common with women. Scalable primary resource extraction is difficult to impossible to establish for them. Thus, sons work for you until they become too large to physically dominate (which is the definition of "adulthood" for men), daughters you sell at physical maturity (the definition of "adulthood" for women) to the highest bidder (they're a net loss otherwise), and your wife is such a purchase.
Now, this isn't to say that some fathers treat that property very well- as if they didn't own it, almost (and property that has 2 legs needs to be motivated pretty strongly to stick around; you can do that through love or fear, fear is easier and always your fallback option as a father but it's less productive in the long run so generally worth putting in the effort to not do that)- but that doesn't make the balance of power any different and selfishness on the part of the parent (or the surrounding society- like Asian nations and their ludicrous education systems, or certain US states where the State will punish you if you're let outside) will always push that balance towards fear.
Really, at the end of the day, we're just haggling over the price. For example, something that can break this reality is if scalable primary resource extraction in terms of a man's body is completely obviated by mechanization/technology/market forces- if that happens, the bride price goes to infinity, and with that men can no longer meaningfully own women. This happened to children at the same time for the same reasons, so you had a lot of effectively-emancipated "teenagers"... until the Great Depression put a so-far-permanent end to that (with a slight rebound for them around the '60s).
Chains that set lightly upon you are still chains; what harm does noticing them do?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why would the knowledge that a parent has been acting for longterm benefit increase a person’s internal motivation regarding longterm planning and delayed gratification?
But there are no shortage of high performing Asians who genuinely feel that their parents were callous in their adolescence, showing no love, driving them like a slave.
When they say they were driven like a slave that's metaphorical. It isn't actually the same thing as being driven like a real slave.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link