Tuesday's Most Active Threads

Yesterday, once again the Gaza war thread led as the most active thread. But, with less than 500 new posts, interest in the thread may be waning. The most active thread after that one was titled, "WWYD? Being asked NOT to bring a new spouse and children" and posted in the "Family Relationships" forum. This thread managed to produce 14 pages of posts in less than 24 hours. I've long been astonished that these threads produce so much interest. A significant number of them turn out to be the work of trolls — another thing that baffles me — and the rest are normally suspected of being trolls even if they aren't. I am convinced that there is a significant number of posters who simply enjoy drama regardless of whether it is real or invented. I guess there are worse passtimes, and I should hardly complain since this one earns revenue for us, but I don't understand it. In this thread, the original poster says that her brother who has children with his first wife is married to a woman who has her own children. His first family does not accept the second and has told the original poster's parents that they will not attend their traditional Thanksgiving gathering if the second family will be there. The original poster asks whether they should invite her brother without his new wife and step-kids. The original poster authored a handful of replies and then disappeared after the first couple of pages. But that didn't prevent the discussion from continuing without her. One of the most common responses was that this was not her business and she should stay out of it. Another common response was that everyone should be invited and the kids could work things out for themselves. But, even more common was for posters to offer their own stories of being in such situations. Some of these posts became subject to more discussion than the original poster's situation. The thread also provided an opportunity for a number of posters to opine on their own views of marriage. On the 13th page of the thread, a poster identifying herself as the original poster provided another response that included details about which posters had previously been speculating. Another weird phenomenon of this and other DCUM forums is posters claiming to be the original poster when they are not. In this case, I can't say whether this was the actual original poster or an imposter. But, frankly, I don't think that matters to most of those participating in the thread.

Another instance of posters appearing to simply love drama and the apparent thrill of posting is represented in the next thread that I'll discuss. Posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum, the thread was titled, "I feel like we don't talk enough that top LACs are 40%+ recruited athletes.". The entire text of the original poster's message was "can we get the NYT on this?". I guess there is some irony in the fact that the original poster created a thread to complain that we don't talk enough about liberal arts colleges recruiting athletes and then didn't talk about it. It might have been nice for the original poster to explain why this fact is worthy of being talked about or what is significant about it. For that matter, why would the New York Times be interested? Apparently we are all supposed to simply know everything that needs to be said. But, if we did know all about it, we wouldn't really need to talk about it, would we? But, none of this prevented posters from immediately engaging and creating a 12 page thread. Basically, this is part and parcel of what has really become the main tenet of the college forum: college admissions are biased and they are specifically biased against the children of whomever is posting. In subsequent posts, the original poster makes clear that she holds little value for some of the sports for which athletes are recruited. Other posters suggest that athletes lack the academic ability of the non-athlete students. Quite a few posters complain that despite the emphasis on recruiting athletes, most of these schools don't really have sports cultures. As a result, there are lots of athletic events that nobody attends. Moreover, the sports programs can't be justified as moneymakers for the schools like big time football or basketball programs can. I didn't read many posts from this thread, but I think this is another example of something about which I've previously commented. At one time, the purpose of a liberal arts education was to produce a well-rounded individual. That meant well-rounded not only in the sense of being exposed to a host of academic subjects, but also personally. Athletics was seen as an important component to one's overall development. Hence, the ideal of the student-athlete. Sports, it has been thought, teach many valuable lessons that may be as important to success in life as the writings of Plato or the paintings of Toulouse-Lautrec. But, more recently, emphasis in education has been less on being well-rounded and more toward obtaining marketable skills. STEM programs have gained popularity over liberal arts programs and, as seen in this thread, even liberal arts is being reinterpreted. The ideal of being well-rounded is being replaced with cost-benefit analysis. In my mind, the end result of this trend is the transformation of universities into little more than glorified vocational schools.

The third for today is a thread titled, "Will my Jewish child be safe on a university campus next year?" and, like the previous thread, posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. The original poster is concerned about the reaction on university campuses to the Israel-Hamas war and the failure of many universities to condemn terrorism. The original poster's primary concern is whether or not her Jewish daughter will be safe on campus. This is a nine page thread that I ended up locking after discussion of the conflict rather than the actual topic began to predominate. In the second of the two "Special Reports" I wrote about the Gaza war, I emphasized the importance of those on each side of the conflict understanding the point of view of the other, even if they didn't agree with it. This thread represents a situation where this is very much the case. One issue here is that supporters of Israel tend to see the attack on Israel by Hamas as being an isolated event much as Americans see the September 11 attack on the US. Supporters of the Palestinians, in contrast, see the attack in the context of decades of Israeli oppression of, and violence toward, Palestinians. This divide is increased by the Israeli response which is destroying Gaza and killing many innocent Palestinian civilians. Supporters of Israel view the retaliation as understandable and something that would be done by any country. Civilian deaths are viewed as unfortunate but unavoidable. In contrast, supporters of the Palestinians see little difference between the violence being used to kill Palestinians and the original Hamas attack. These strongly converging views have left anyone, including universities, who wishes to comment on the situation in a precarious position. Condemn the Hamas attack and nothing more and you are accused of supporting genocide and ignoring Israeli oppression. Condemn both Hamas and the Israeli response and you are accused of supporting terrorism or holding Israel to an unequal standard. It's no wonder that many have chosen to remain silent. Activism on campus can be seen through a similar prism. The student demonstrations that have received the most publicity have tended to support the Palestinians. I have no idea how wide-spread such support is on campuses, but certainly the impression is that campuses are currently quite hostile to Israel and in favor of the Palestinians. Those demonstrating insist that they are not supporting Hamas, but rather Palestinian civilians. But, a few well-publicized cases have gone well beyond that position and clearly offered solidarity for "the resistance". Moreover, the chosen slogan of "Free Palestine from the River to the Sea" is ill-conceived and, despite protestations otherwise, easily interpreted as calling for the elimination of Israel. However, even in the most extreme cases, these protesters will argue that they are opposing Israel, not Jews. Indeed, Jewish students are often among those demonstrating and some pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been organized by Jewish groups. Still, it is no wonder that Jewish students, especially those supportive of Israel, would find this to be a hostile environment. Whether this is also a dangerous environment is another question, but the concern is understandable. It is easy enough to say to Jewish parents that they should distinguish pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel sentiments from anti-Semitism and that the first is not a threat to their children, but that is asking a lot. These parents are facing justifiable concerns and, regardless of our views on the conflict, deserve sympathy and understanding.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum and titled, "Are we at the nascent stages of WWIII?". This is the third thread today that I think shows that some posters simply enjoy drama. For years there have been posters starting threads about a coming civil war in America, the imminent collapse of society, or now, a world war. These posters simply insist on fixating on the worst possible development, almost seeming to relish it. I have frequently removed or otherwise discouraged such threads because I often find them based on misinformation and/or a lack of understanding of history and current events. Moreover, I have a concern, perhaps based more in superstition than reality, that talking about this sort of thing can contribute to its becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Specially with regard to this thread, it took very little reading before I tossed my hands up in resignation. I simply don't see the thread as worth my while to read. Like most threads in the Political forum, it quickly devolved to partisan bickering with supporters of former President Donald Trump arguing that he kept the world peaceful and supporters of President Joe Biden defending his record. If you are interested in that sort of bickering or simply enjoy discussing cataclysmic outcomes, this thread is for you. But, I have nothing more to say about it.