site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7mo ago (text post)   33066 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 26, 2025

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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I know two trans women.

One transitioned in her late twenties, and gets stared at wherever she goes. Anyone can instantly tell that she’s trans from her voice and appearance, she’ll need to spend a lot of money on surgery to look remotely female, and she’s at the risk of being hate-crimed just from walking in the wrong area. She doesn’t behave very femininely, perhaps from nearly 30 years of growing up as male.

The other went on puberty blockers as a teenager, she has a normal female voice, and wherever she goes, the average person just sees a normal woman. She didn’t have to spend a single dime on facial feminisation surgery, and also seems to have fairly standard straight female sexuality (no complaints about anorgasmia) as opposed to the weird fetishistic oversexualised behaviour some later transitioners have.

Without going into any studies or the difficulty of distinguishing persistence vs desistance rates, it’s unarguable that early transitioners just fit in better in society and have less chance of being perceived as “freaks” in public based on their appearance. I don’t know if that quality of life upgrade is taken into account in any studies, but that’s enough for me to support them in a broad strokes fashion, even if I don’t necessarily agree with all the details of the modern clinical practices.

What you are saying is true, but incomplete. If someone were certain to transition, it is unarguably true that it is better for them to begin pre-puberty and be in the puberty blockers -> transition pipeline. But the important word there is if.

That is because, if someone can be happy in the body they were born in, it is also unarguably true that they be so, rather than transition at any age. Your second trans friend is certainly in a better position than your first, but even so, she has had major, irreversible chemical intervention and surgery, which has left her infertile, and unable to participate in traditional family formation. She will be on medication for the rest of her life. and, of course, even as a trans woman who passes well, she will still be subject to social stigma in some form or another for being trans. Her marriage pool, for example, will be tiny.

So the real question is: what proportion of those who transition as children would have -if prevented- either transitioned later or lived a miserable life as their birth sex? That's a counterfactual, so we can't know for sure. But, if that number is lower than 90% (so 10% would have been satisfied to live as their birth sex) , then that's a false positive rate that is probably not justifiable. However, desistance studies indicate that number could be as low as 20%. I think it plausible that there are psychological interventions that could bring that number into the low single digit percentages.

How would you feel if there were a 4 in 5 chance that your trans friend could have lived happily as a normal man?

What you are saying is true, but incomplete. If someone were certain to transition, it is unarguably true that it is better for them to begin pre-puberty and be in the puberty blockers -> transition pipeline. But the important word there is if.

To pick a nit, that's nit necessarily true. It might turn out that early puberty blockade causes issues later on (say, early onset osteoporosis and/or dementia) that the patient might in hindsight decide weren't worth the benefits of better looks while young.

That's another "if" on my part, of course, but just wanted to point out it's not unarguable.

Historical eunuchs who were castrated pre-puberty had remarkably increased lifespans (and that’s with no sex hormones, having estrogen in your system would decrease the odds of osteoporosis), so if there’s major health issues arising from puberty blockers, it would be a side effect of the particular medications, not of blocking puberty itself.

There’s also a difference between the compromise protocol of “go on puberty blockers until age 16, then start estrogen/testosterone”, and “start HRT ASAP to go through cross-sex puberty at a normal age”. The whole point of the former was to let the minor have time to decide if they want to transition or not, but that seems to have been lost in the debate.

Ok, but did historic eunuchs actually have increased lifespans or did they have higher lifespans than the low baselines of premodern societies? The latter could easily be explained by court bureaucrats having higher life expectancies than either conventional elites who need to risk childbirth and combat or commoners who, well, farming is ludicrously dangerous even today?

Here’s a LessWrong article that goes in depth about this slightly bizarre topic. It’s pretty much certain that castration makes you less likely to die from infectious diseases, cardiovascular disease, and (obviously) testicular and prostate cancer, and the benefits decrease the later it’s done.

Historical eunuchs who were castrated pre-puberty had remarkably increased lifespans (and that’s with no sex hormones, having estrogen in your system would decrease the odds of osteoporosis),

On one hand - good point, I think I was researching eunuchs at some point for a point of comparison, and came to similar conclusions. OTOH, bone density problems seem to be acknowledged by all the studies, and I've seen "what's up with all the canes" posts on trans forums. There's also questions of cancer risks, ovarian cysts, etc. etc. I don't know if the question has a simple answer.

The whole point of the former was to let the minor have time to decide if they want to transition or not, but that seems to have been lost in the debate.

Not quite. The original rationale for puberty blockers was passing, "time to choose" was a marketing strategy. It has been lost to debate when the reversibility of blockers became dubious / indefensible.

I’ve never heard “what’s up with all the canes” despite being pretty active in trans communities (I actually don’t know anybody that uses a cane or crutch), although I’m seeing that canes are popular in the broader American queer community for some reason? I do know that various disorders are more common among trans people (e.g. endometriosis, PCOS in FtMs, EDS in general) but they’re not related to puberty blockers. Delaying puberty for too long without any sex hormones is bad for bone health, that’s for sure.

Not quite. The original rationale for puberty blockers was passing, "time to choose" was a marketing strategy. It has been lost to debate when the reversibility of blockers became dubious / indefensible.

To have the best chance of passing, you should skip the 2 years of puberty blocker and just go straight into opposite-sex HRT. Once you are on estrogen or testosterone, you’re not at a higher risk of osteoporosis than cis women/men respectively, and it’s conceivable your risk could actually be lower than someone who goes through menopause. Trans women that are on only puberty blockers for a while will actually grow taller and have a barrel-like chest (the classic eunuch physique), even if they avoid masculinisation.

I’ve never heard “what’s up with all the canes” despite being pretty active in trans communities (I actually don’t know anybody that uses a cane or crutch), although I’m seeing that canes are popular in the broader American queer community for some reason?

I'm confused. By the time you reach the end of the sentence, you seem to confirm what I've said. I suppose what you mean is that the queer community in your locality has not been affected by that particular thing?

To have the best chance of passing, you should skip the 2 years of puberty blocker and just go straight into opposite-sex HRT.

I will, once again, have to comb through the 7 zillion hours of podcasts I listened to for a source, but I solemnly swear that the original rationale for puberty blockers was passing. Even if, after some experimentation, it turned out that you get better results with just going directly to hormones, I swear that this was the original rationale, as per the Dutch researchers who kicked off the trend. This will probably take longer than the other search, but I'm planting a flag here, and I will also get back to you once I found it, or have tapped out.

I accept your nit, but barring any massive unforseen consequence (e.g. common early onset alzheimers) I don't think it changes the calculus much. If you told me I had to be a trans woman, I would choose to be a pre-pubescent transitioner ten times out of ten.

I think I'd take some weird looks over having to walk with a cane before I even turn 30

no complaints about anorgasmia

You have specific detailed knowledge of their ability to orgasm? Other than myself and my wife I don't specifically know if anyone else can or cannot orgasm.

It's the same reason bodybuilders who take Gear can't get the airplane up.

Wait, really? I thought the whole point was to fly to exotic locations.

More plates = more dates dudes asking you about your training regimen

(no complaints about anorgasmia)

How would you even go about complaining about missing something you have no concept of? Orgasm is a pretty distinct thing with no real equivalence to anything you may experience earlier.

Here's a comment from then WPATH president.

“I’m unaware of an individual claiming ability to orgasm when they were blocked at Tanner 2.” Tanner stage 2 is the beginning of puberty. It can be as young as nine in girls.

I meant that she doesn’t have anorgasmia (having started puberty blockers at 14 or 15 IIRC). But in any case you can delay the puberty blockers until tanner stage 3 or 4, or use local testosterone gel on specific areas.

I know adult cis women who never had an orgasm and that are quite unhappy about it. From a cursory search it’s around 10% of women? It’s pretty easy to talk and read about it and feel like you’re missing out.

I know adult cis women who never had an orgasm and that are quite unhappy about it.

What, not even these Womanizer/Satisfyer pressure wave vibes can get them off? From what I've heard, they usually work so well the experience is almost clinical in its efficiency.

Without going into any studies or the difficulty of distinguishing persistence vs desistance rates, it’s unarguable that early transitioners just fit in better in society and have less chance of being perceived as “freaks” in public based on their appearance.

That is the genuine problem for which I do have sympathy. However, the extreme cases around transgender issues and the activist rhetoric about "not owing anyone femininity" (which seems to translate to "keeping your feminine penis and testicles and your beard") make it difficult to maintain that sympathy, as well as the push for "so this means that nine year olds should be started on the transition path because of course every child who has concerns and problems around facing into puberty is trans and not at all perhaps suffering from different anxieties and problems that need to be addressed by therapy but don't mean telling them 'it's because you're really a girl or a boy, not a boy or a girl'".

Jesse Singal gets absolutely slaughtered on Bluesky for being a Nazi fascist supporter of trans genocide for being a conventional liberal who is positive on socially liberal issues but has concerns around the whole transitioning of kids and expressed such qualms. It's a genuine question of "when should you start medical - which means puberty blockers and hormones - transitioning versus social transitioning", because going too early does involve other problems later on, but if you are not 100% behind "this never happens and if it does, it's a good thing" then you are a trans genocider.

Anxiety around starting puberty does not need therapy, though. People have had it since time immemorial. It needs talking with the same sex parent. It does not need to be taken as a serious objection.

It does not need to be taken as a serious objection.

But the well-meaning (to be as charitable as I can) jump on it as indicating dysphoria which means "this child is trans" and then we get the "if not allowed to transition, they will commit suicide"

Puberty and Gender Incongruence
• There can be huge psychological stress: self-harm/suicidal ideation due to incongruence between the developing body and internal feelings and body image; e.g. periods/breasts developing or facial hair/deepening voice etc...
• Additional stressors of bullying and possible family rejection
• Young people often disclose around this age, as their bodies are developing and feeling ‘different’ to the way they feel inside. This can lead to co-occurring mental health difficulties, with suicidal ideation and self-harm (Mayock et al. 2009; McNeill et al., 2013). Eating disorders with over/under eating and also young people not wanting to use the bathroom.

and schools doing things like hiding from parents that their child is socially transitioning on the rationale that "parents not supporting their trans child is abuse", though that seems to be changing at least as far as official policy is concerned due to protests and backlash:

Communicating With Families
It is still important for schools to maintain positive communication and working relationships with family members. A consortium of LGBTQ advocacy groups and educational associations produced a guide for Colorado educators that includes the following advice about working with families:

“When contacting parents or guardians of a transgender or gender nonconforming student, school personnel should use the student’s legal name and the pronoun corresponding to the student’s gender assigned at birth unless the student, parents, and or guardian has indicated otherwise... In some cases, notifying parents of the student carries risk, such as being kicked out of the home or experiencing rejection from their family. Prior to notification of the family, school staff should work closely with the student and consider the health, well-being, and safety of the student.”

Detailed guidance from the Massachusetts Department of Education also offers helpful considerations in communicating with families, particularly when a student is the target of bullying and harassment:

“School officials should use their discretion in discussing the incident and avoid sharing information that might endanger the mental or physical health and safety of the student. Where the student has not disclosed his or her sexual orientation or gender identity, expression, to his or her parents and the student believes he or she may be at risk if it is disclosed, to the extent possible, discussion should focus on facts regarding the student's involvement as a target or aggressor and on safety planning, not on information that reveals the actual or perceived gender identity or sexual orientation of the student. As in all bullying incidents, school officials should offer resources and support to the student and family.”

Sure, I was taught that if I needed to talk about puberty I could go to my parents or maybe grandparents, but to only ask my doctor straightforward physical health questions and to not bother teachers, coaches, etc with such things at all.

This seems normal politeness and boundaries and not new-style paranoia to me(after all, it would never have occurred to my parents that doctors could turn me trans- it was simply assumed that anxiety about new feelings was impolite to discuss with them). My parents did, in fact, brush off my discomfort with starting puberty and I turned out fine. The need for conversion therapy wasn’t anticipatable-seeming and it did, in any case, work.

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