site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   23277 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 9, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Didn’t complete college and can’t do manual labor. Unless the good doctor is rubber-stamping disability for healthy young farm boys?

What work are they able to do?

There's an entire list of unskilled sedentary jobs as they appear in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles that "exist in significant numbers in the national economy". As long as someone is able to do one of these jobs, they aren't disabled (assuming they're under 50 and thus can be expected to adjust to new work). Most of these are obscure specialized jobs that involve some kind of industrial assembly that con be done entirely sitting down. An example:

Label Pinker

Tends machine equipped with pinking attachment that cuts strips of labeling material into individual labels: Positions roll of material on holder and inserts end in feeding mechanism. Turns dial to set counter for specified number of labels to be cut. Starts machine and observes cut labels to detect cutting defects. Removes defective labels and notifies machine fixer to adjust machine. Packs specified number of labels in box. May tend machine that cuts labels without pinking and be designated Label Cutter (narrow fabrics). GOE: 06.04.05 STRENGTH: S GED: R2 M1 L1 SVP: 2 DLU: 77

The relevant symbols below are that the strength is listed as sedentary, defined as:

Exerting up to 10 pounds of force occasionally (Occasionally: activity or condition exists up to 1/3 of the time) and/or a negligible amount of force frequently (Frequently: activity or condition exists from 1/3 to 2/3 of the time) to lift, carry, push, pull, or otherwise move objects, including the human body. Sedentary work involves sitting most of the time, but may involve walking or standing for brief periods of time. Jobs are sedentary if walking and standing are required only occasionally and all other sedentary criteria are met.

And the Specific Vocational Preparation is 2, meaning that for the specific job, the typical worker would be able to achieve an average level of proficiency in less than 1 month. There are a ton of jobs like this you've never heard of, though whether or not they are actually realistic options for the claimant is irrelevant. From what I recall, the law specifically states that it doesn't matter whether such a job is actually available or whether they'd actually be able to get the job if it were available. A lot of people think this is ridiculous, but it underscores the point that disability is for people who physically can't work at any job they are qualified to do, not for people who physically can't work available jobs that they have a chance of actually getting. Saying "but there aren't any jobs as a label pinker" is basically saying that the reason you don't have a job is because you can't find one, not because you can't do one.

What work are they able to do?

What about babysitting? Or cleaning people's houses?

I'm also of the opinion that most of these issues are psychosomatic, so I will admit I'm a bit biased here. Not that psychosomatic disorders don't need care and compassion, but I'm skeptical that they actually cannot ever work again.

What about babysitting? Or cleaning people's houses?

The exact jobs I've seen arguments about on here that are too low-skill and 'anyone can do them' to charge high wages so the cost of childcare is scandalous compared to the labour done.

You can't have it both ways: either that kind of labour is a job and is paid accordingly (not sky high but enough), or it's paid peanuts because "my sixteen year old niece will mind my two kids after school" and thus isn't going to support an adult (let alone one with a family).

And yeah, even for babysitting/childminding, you do need to be able to lift and bend and carry, and it's a job where you can put out your back over time.

Suggesting that disabled coal miners go into childcare might be on par with that Ben Shapiro bit about selling houses.

Well now we need to encourage more men into the industry as it's pretty much female-dominated, do you have something against equality or what? 😁

I’m ready for the Pacifier sequel where Vin Diesel takes on his toughest parenting challenge yet: the opioid epidemic.

What could possibly go wrong?

Ahh yes. Cleaning - such a gentle load on a person's back.

I'm also of the opinion that most of these issues are psychosomatic, so I will admit I'm a bit biased here.

How did you form that opinion, and how confident are you in it?

It's a bit personal, but I am quite confident in it. Read this article on Sarno if you're curious to start going down the chronic pain rabbit hole.

Which of his falsifiable claims hasn't been disproven?

Most of the claims of the mechanisms are likely not spot on I'll admit, but the 'psychological' effect is absolutely real. Make of that what you will.

Which psychological effect? Psychogenic symptoms and psychogenic relief are two very different claims. What would it take to change your mind?

My wife also had a chronic health issue for a few years before she stumbled on Sarno and it went away in 2 months by doing (basically) nothing.

Mentioned this to other friends as well and those that "tried it" had similar success stories (tiny sample but still).

So I think this is vastly underestimated. I tried starting a conversation years ago on a comment post on Scott's blog but nothing came of it iirc.

Yeah the typical rationalist mind is allergic to this sort of thing. It's a shame.

Totally willing to believe most people claiming ‘chronic pain’ are faking it for either 1) a medical marijuana scrip or 2) a disability diagnosis. That doesn’t mean they’re in good health/can take jobs with any arbitrary physical demands.

At the end of the day, blue collar laborers in their fifties are not going to be able to do much if they lose their jobs. Fake disabilities reflect the underlying reality that these people cant adjust to a new set of physical demands.

I think the point is not that they fake it but that they meme themselves into being retarded. The pain is real, the cause is not. Or something like this is the saying.

@hydroacetylene

(I legitimately don’t remember who’s a parent or not, don’t get offended) uhh, have you ever watched a toddler? There’s some picking kids up(that may not want to be) involved, and running after them and the like. And cleaning houses is similar- lots of bending over, moving things out of the way. Neither one is conducive to poor-health based physical unfitness, although they don’t need a power lifter.

How dare you??? I have 11 youngins you whippersnapper!!!

Nah, don't have kids yet. I am largely unsympathetic to people with chronic health issues as I've said elsewhere. I'll tag you.

I am largely unsympathetic to people with chronic health issues as I've said elsewhere.

Look, I do a sedentary office job as administrative support. The heaviest things I carry are a bunch of files. I use my hands and arms for typing.

And I had a upper spinal disc problem (yes it showed up on x-ray so no I wasn't imagining or pretending) that meant I had terrible pain that started in my neck, gradually went down my arm, and ended up at the knuckles every single day and night for a prolonged period of time. It genuinely felt like my arm was on fire and I couldn't sleep because of the pain. My doctor didn't put me on painkillers (no idea why, unless it was 'don't want to facilitate addiction') so I was dosing myself up with over-the-counter analgesics (I sincerely believe I may have borked my liver the amounts I was taking for relief, plus I managed through other means to source tablets containing codeine which did permit me to sleep by reducing the pain to a dull roar) and I genuinely feared I wouldn't be able to work, because the pain made it impossible to use my hands.

Fortunately, the trapped nerve or whatever eventually untrapped itself or died or something so the pain stopped.

And that was just for a damn "sit at a desk and type emails etc." job. Imagine if I was doing anything even a bit more labour-intensive requiring dexterity or strength.

So just wait until you get old enough, or over-exert yourself enough, to run into a chronic health issue then come back with the same opinion.

Sure. If they can do those things, then they’re less disabled. How do you get from there to “handouts for people who didn’t have the intelligence or wherewithal”?

Imagine a more extreme case where a guy loses his legs and, thus, his lifelong job at the widget-stomping factory. If he gets disability, it’s not because he couldn’t make it in college.

Now say a doctor asks him, “hey, do you have any skills that could get you a different job? One that doesn’t require jumping up and down?” Here a college degree would be a mitigating factor for his existing, factual disability. The handout was never for failing college. It was for not having legs.

Cashier. Delivery driver. Maybe a waiter, probably the guy in the aisle at Home Depot.

These are not ‘good jobs’ but they do pay better than disability.

I figured those were ruled out by the “back problem.”

I agree that, if they are doable, someone might well prefer them to scraping by on disability.

What I don’t get is where “IQ and wherewithal” come into it. Either the guy is able to do jobs or he’s disabled. A college degree adds some set of jobs, so it can take him out of the disabled category, but not put him in.

Cashiers and DoorDash drivers don’t do much heavy lifting, at least. Waiters it varies. The guy in the aisle at Home Depot doesn’t need to lift stuff but needs to be on his feet all day.

Plus if you genuinely have a bad back, standing on your feet all day can put strain on it which causes pain.

If anyone has ever put their back out by lifting something too heavy or the wrong way, you soon find out how every little action somehow involves the muscles of the lower back so that even trying to get out of bed is a production.

These are not ‘good jobs’ but they do pay better than disability.

More importantly, they provide actual economic value and give the employee the dignity and a forcing function to get out of bed, have a routine, socialize, et cetera. Work is good for us. Most people on disability, from what I've seen, end up mostly rotting away via endless entertainment.

Work is good for us. Most people on disability, from what I've seen, end up mostly rotting away via endless entertainment.

What have you seen, and how confident are you that it is representative of the broader phenomena it purportedly represents?

I'm not that confident! I also believe from my own personal experiences with chronic pain though, that taking disability is not a good way out for the majority.

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