Tuesday's Most Active Threads

The most active topic yesterday was titled "Son pledging there’s definitely hazing" and posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. The original poster says that she is a nervous wreck because her son has described "pretty bad" hazing during his pledging for a fraternity. I am not completely confident that this post is totally legitimate. The original poster is very sparse with any sort of details and while she asks for advice, doesn't really seem very interested in any that is offered. Several of the posters who responded suggested contacting the university's administration to report the hazing and many warned of the dangers hazing presents. Others advised the original poster to stay out of it because her son is old enough to make his own decisions in such matters. This led to some discussion of the mental development of 18 years olds. A few responses suggested joining ROTC which posters argued offers some of the same camaraderie of frats and any physical stress would be for a good cause. The thread is full of horror stories about fraternities and warnings to steer clear of them. On the other hand, responders argued that the original poster's son should simply try a different frat that might offer a better pledging experience.

The second most active thread yesterday was posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. Titled, "My friend seems surprised her ex is thriving domestically", the original poster describes a friend who, after being miserable for several years in a bad marriage got divorced, only to become even more miserable while her ex-husband's life seems to be going well. The original poster asks for advice about how best to support the friend. The thread takes a sort of unexpected turn when the original poster turns out to be a man who has been friends with the woman since college (or so the poster claims). Many posters don't accept this explanation as fact and the potential identity of the original poster is debated throughout the thread. Posters in the DCUM relationship forum are often stereotyped as bitter divorced women. That is not accurate, though anyone wanting to make that argument could find plenty of supporting evidence within this thread. One poster who is clearly hung-up on her resentment for her soon-to-be-ex-husband does her best to hijack the thread. Many posters criticize the original poster due to his perception that his friend's husband was not as bad during the marriage as his friend describes. Any shortcomings that the original poster's friend alleged of her now ex-husband are accepted as fact and the original poster is urged to acknowledge them as such. At risk of being criticized for my own gender biases, I think this thread illustrates a basic difference in communications styles between men and women. Men tend to reflexively focus on offering solutions while women prefer to offer support. Of course, this is not always true and this is far from a rule, more like a simple observation. But, the pattern is very clear in this thread. The original poster is eager to identify what he can say that will stop his friend from being miserable. Those responding, at least those who are not attacking the original poster or complaining about their own husbands, advise him to simply commiserate and be supportive. As one posters says, "You just listen to her!"

The third thread from yesterday was titled, "ANOTHER mass shooting in California" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. There have been so many shootings lately that I had to read the post in order to know which one this is about. It turns out that it was about the shooting in Half Moon Bay, California in which seven people were killed. With mass shootings being such a common occurrence, the response on DCUM is very predictable and almost entirely dependent upon the respondent's political leanings. Liberals tend to focus on gun control so every shooting becomes another argument in favor of gun laws. Conservatives generally don't want to touch guns, so they focus on mental health. There is always a poster or two who show up to point out that the shooter was male and that this is a male issue. I'm not sure what we are supposed to do with that knowledge and that is never explained. Much of this thread is devoted to arguing over whether this is an uniquely American problem and the guns laws of other countries are compared and contrasted. The pro-gun crowd is eager to point to countries in which guns are widespread but mass shootings are rare. The reasons that situation does not prevail in the US are hotly debated. One poster argued that Israel has a lot of guns but doesn't have mass shootings. That is shockingly uninformed. While Israel's record is not comparable to that of the US, it has plenty of mass shootings. Many, but not all of which, are politically motivated. At any rate, the way things are going I should probably just make a copy of this thread because within a few days there will likely be another mass shooting and rather than have posters post the same things again, I can just repost this thread with another title and save everyone the effort.

The final thread at which I'll look was posted in the "Metropolitan DC Local Politics" forum. Titled, "Arlington 'missing middle'", the original poster posted excerpts from an Arlington Patch article quoting opponents to a zoning plan that has been dubbed the "Missing Middle" because it is aimed at increasing the availability of middle class housing. The opponents argue that the zoning proposal will have the opposite effect and lead to more expensive housing. I was going to write that nobody disputes that Arlington has a housing affordability issue, but, indeed, one poster disputes exactly that, claiming that there are plenty of affordable houses. That poster aside, this discusion is similar to those taking place all over the DC metro region. The cost of housing has skyrocketed and is rapidly getting out of reach for many people. In recent days, two of the "most active" threads that I've discussed have been about exactly that. The current thinking among urban planners is that the best solution is to increase density of housing. Increased density means greater supply and greater supply should result in reduced prices. Opponents to increased density point out that developers are not planning to replace single family homes with inexpensive multi-unit dwellings, but rather with costly offerings aimed at maximizing their profit. This assumes that there is a sufficient supply of buyers for expensive condominiums to exhaust the predicted supply. Otherwise the new units will either sit empty or see price reductions. Opponents also argue that county roads and schools are not prepared to handle increased density. I think part of what is driving these housing threads is that many parts of the US, especially the DC metro area, are undergoing transition from what have been traditional suburban housing trends to more urban housing styles. Those hoping to buy homes in DC's close in suburbs and even parts of DC itself once aspired for single family homes with a yard. Increasingly, that dream is unattainable and the market is reorienting toward mult-unit developments. This not only leads to disappointed home buyers, but creates fear among existing SFH owners wary of huge buildings sprouting up next to their homes. The result is the type of zoning hearing described in the original post of this thread.