site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   1655 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for April 27, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Assume that the Congress decides to impose universal age of consent in all states. And pull from their ass the authority to do it. What do you think the current culture war coalitions and factions will push for and will it create intracoallition splits.

Hardline Religious conservatives hard - 21 with exception for marriage
Moderate Religous conservatives - 18
Centrists/liberals - they will look at Europe and see that the world didn't ended and probably say that it is 16 with romeo and juliet clause
Feminists - probably a split here - some will push for maximum, other for 16
Andrew tate fans - hard 14
Anime fans - soft 14
LGBTQ+ - a spectrum based on the how activist they are ranging from 16 to 12.

No idea about how will it go based on race and income

Nobody will be willing to advocate for anything other than 18 with a shotgun wedding exception, most like.

Right now yeah, but as things are I can see some frustrations that might be able to set the stage for future agitation to finally stop the advancing postponement of adulthood. (By the time my sister felt "ready" to have kids she was pressing up against a geriatric pregnancy.) Right now the biggest rhetorical weapon against young adults is this idea that your brain isn't finished developing until 25.

Maybe more research discovers that this delayed development is of no real use. Maybe we recognize that most things we ask adults to take responsibility for do not require that your brain reach some state we can only even notice with brain scans. Maybe we suddenly remember that, oh, not long after 25 your brain starts un-developing and we don't gradually strip legal privileges of people as they age (unless it causes the failure of some qualification, e.g. driver's license, but age will not per se disqualify you!).

not long after 25 your brain starts un-developing

I think treating it as any kind of unary scalar variable is just wrong. Yes, young brains may be more agile, but that's not the only metric that matters. E.g. kids are awesome at learning new stuff, especially stuff like languages, but their brains are a disaster (from adult's perspective) in many other regards. I don't think there is also an objective metric for this possible - it is rooted very deep in the culture. You can't just treat an outcome of several layers of cultural trends as a free parameter that you could move around at will, this will get you a lot of angry people who would (somewhat deservedly) think you're messing with the basic foundations of their world view just out of pure satanic contrarianism.

Right now the biggest rhetorical weapon against young adults is this idea that your brain isn't finished developing until 25.

Uh, no it’s not. I’m sure it gets cited in the occasional thinkpiece, but how much does that translate into zoomers’ decisions? Have you ever seen an adult say, “sorry, I can’t, my brain isn’t developed enough”?

Today’s twentysomethings are getting out of college with alarming debt and questionable prospects. They’re looking at rampant inflation of credentials, let alone prices. Cars are expensive. Housing ie worse. Insurance is fucked. There is a sense that someone is benefiting and they know it can’t be them.

COVID-era remote school and work derailed their social lives. Social media, a poor surrogate at the best of times, metastasized into something actively discouraging. They are constantly reminded that the world is struggling, with the people in charge malicious and/or incapable. No matter what they believe, they are reassured that half the country hates them and will dismantle anything they like on principle.

Given a choice, more of them are choosing to hunker down and hope for better times.

but how much does that translate into zoomers’ decisions? Have you ever seen an adult say, “sorry, I can’t, my brain isn’t developed enough”?

Uh, yes it is. It's a very common sentiment. "My brain isn't developed how can I be expected to pick what I'll do for a living for the rest of my life?" "My brain isn't even finished developing why can I be drafted into combat?" (in your time this probably referenced legal drinking age in place of a reference to brain development). I've heard it used in stand-up comic bits. I don't have examples handy because I legitimately thought this wouldn't be denied, but you're just wrong here in my experience.

Uh, no it’s not. I’m sure it gets cited in the occasional thinkpiece, but how much does that translate into zoomers’ decisions? Have you ever seen an adult say, “sorry, I can’t, my brain isn’t developed enough”?

I have heard over-25s and under-25s alike all state this, and the problem with the over-25s who are also parents is that their kids hear that and take this seriously... and then, just as you'd expect, they proceed to shut the fuck down and never amount to anything (creating the "incompetent, risk-averse youths" problem).

And you know what? If I spent my entire fucking life having adults (and their power structures) scream the exact functional equivalent of "YOU STUPID NIGGER!"[1] at me I'd actually think the target's response of "everything out there is dangerous and Not For Children, so time to lie flat" is completely and eminently reasonable!

Besides, delaying [personality changes that are supposed to happen at] puberty has no consequences whatsoever, right? Just give them the [sociological] puberty blockers and they'll turn out well-adjusted, I'm sure.

[1] Too much melanin hormones in the brain just makes them inferior, end of story. We have a lot of scientific literature backing it up- it's not discrimination if they actually are inferior, after all.

Eighteen is the compromise between ‘c’mon now, teenagers obviously need the guidance of their elders’ and ‘they can’t stay kids forever’ we’ve already settled on as a society. Is it intrinsically better than 16? Only by already being established. For that reason I don’t see that changing.

Eighteen was not an organic compromise as you imply it was. It was borne of the top-down imposition of California's own culture, where the age is 18, through its worldwide reach in media. Arkansas's age of consent is 16 and could just as easily convince you that 16 was "the compromise" if we let them control what the world watched in its living rooms for several decades.

Yes, I just said that 16 as the generally agreed upon compromise is not clearly worse than 18. It simply happens that one is generally agreed upon and the other is not. But, well, something has to be generally agreed upon.

What I responded to:

Nobody will be willing to advocate for anything other than 18

I explained why I thought maybe that could change one day. To which you respond no, it won't change. To which I disagreed. I don't dispute here that "something has to be generally agreed upon."

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats