site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   25702 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 11, 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.

Can you please give some specific examples about how treating women like narcissists/children works? Like specific anecdotes and stories. I've always heard that the red pill implies this interpretation, but I've never read any stories that actually show this phenomenon.

I'd say the absolute floor is to be aware of how to handle the "shit test". The fact that women are relentlessly probing your boundaries for weakness, and like children, if you give in they lose all respect for you. If you treat women like peers with mutual respect, you might foolishly give into one of these "shit test" and then you're fucked. You can literally watch them lose interest in you and check out of all future dates.

I have no theory of mind for this behavior. Red-pillology says there frankly isn't one, it's entirely biological. They don't even know they are doing it, and don't even know that's how they are reacting to it. Maybe that's a less inflammatory theory than thinking it's on purpose, maybe learned from those "How to train your man" magazines I always see at the grocery checkout and never read.

I think it’s about safety. If a woman cant absolutely feel safe around you, you are done. And one of the best ways to find out if you’re able to stick up for yourself is to try to push on the boundaries until the choice is you stick to your guns or you cave.

I can probably dredge up a few if I thought for a bit.

But women will tell it to you directly if you let them.

This video also lives rent-free in my head.

Even straight up liberal bisexual chicks will let it slip.

Also, try flipping through any given Romance book on the bestseller's list these days.

I love the recurring word "organically" here. Translation: "I didn't have to ask for this dammit."

I'm sorry I missed this entire discussion by two weeks, but I won't reanimate it now.. I'm sure it'll come around again, and I hope you can forgive me this one necropost. A lot of people in this thread could take advice from each other, but I'm entertained by the pushback you and mrvanillasky are getting on what is basically the attracting-women equivalent of Calories In/Calories Out.

Its also entertaining to me, or else I wouldn't persist so much.

I actually get where they're coming from. I was taught a narrative for 20 years that women generally dislike being told what to do, that you should be nice and unthreatening when talking to them, and that "no" unequivocally means "no" every time, rather than "CONVINCE me."

You really have to internalize rules 1 and 2 (be attractive, don't be unattractive) and then notice how if you're attractive, you are already 80% of the way to winning, you just have to play the game correctly and overcome some token amount of reluctance and 'close the deal' (for whatever "the deal" is). This means being assertive and, frankly, treating them as if they don't know what they want, and you're just the man to give it to them.

One observation that really made it click for me was "if they really want you to stop, they'll leave/avoid you." If they aren't actively packing and heading for the door, you're still in play. For some people reading actions comes naturally. For the guys who have been taught their whole lives to take women at their word, they're left VERY confused as to why ignoring their words would work so well.

How TF did this post get 5 extra upvotes?

Some users primarily browse this website, not by clicking on posts and reading the comments below those posts, but by reading the page that lists all comments in chronological order regardless of post, sometimes called the "firehose" view.

Some users primarily browse this website, not by clicking on posts and reading the comments below those posts, but by reading the page that lists all comments in chronological order regardless of post,

Absolutely unhinged way to do it, imho. I love it.

It's another trope / basic lore in RedPill forums that your "blue haired, heavily tatted, super pierced" feminist is probably into pretty rough sex / degradation / submissive kink.

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