site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   25658 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.

Great write-up as usual. I'm surprised at how stereotypically gay these lads were, you really got lucky from an ethnographic POV.

I clarified my presence, attributing it to a combination of cultural unfamiliarity and severe myopia. FG gestured towards the numerous pride flags. I claimed to have interpreted them as generic contemporary decor. He then indicated the very large flag by the entrance, to which I could only plead a fundamental lack of situational awareness.

Wouldn't this also be affected by Pride celebration? Where I live even the burrito place will be covered in pride flags for a good two months in summer, and a big greasy burrito full of beans is probably not the kind of food you'd want as a gay man looking for a hook-up.

I was also offered, variously, two blowjobs, a rimjob, and a golden shower. I declined with gratitude. It is good to be desired. It is also good to have boundaries.

I'm grateful that no gay man has ever been this crude with me in person. At worst they've just asked me to go home with them and the rest was implied, or made suggestive innuendos.

I declined to explain how I know the sound.

You could just have said you had a gay roommate or something like that. Declining just invites more questions and idle speculation.

How often do you encounter men who are closeted or who identify as bi? FG avoids them. Too messy, too much drama, too many norm mismatches, and in his experience too much reluctance to test for STIs. Others nodded. This was not about identity policing. It was about risk management.

Closeted men is perfectly valid, but bisexuals? That's not risk management, that's bigotry (pun intended?). And they contradicted themselves anyway, they were offering to hook-up with you despite you having clearly stated you were heterosexual from the get-go, so they were hoping you were at least a little bi-curious.

But from your description of these gents I do get it in one sense. They basically want someone of that's "culturally gay" like them, for whom offering a golden shower to a stranger over a couple of drinks is normal behavior.

Sex in dark corners and in toilets tends to discourage straight tourists and is conveniently hard to legislate away without awkward free speech arguments.

As far as I know sex in a public lavatory is illegal in the UK regardless of the sex of the participants. I would assume a pub (i.e. a public house) counts? I know straight people who've had sex in a bar toilet, so there's no argument to be made that it's an exclusively homosexual act.

In any case, your talk with these gents made me understand the perspective of some more intolerant people. That "gay culture" seems to be purposefully designed to be repulsive. I understand that being a pick-me isn't helpful, and that loud gays were the ones that paved away for LGBT rights while the polite, respectful homophile movement accomplished little... but still I feel like I've had the most headway with conservatives when I explained that deep down we just want to be free to live the same lives straight people do. Popper-inhaling, incontinent, promiscuous people who go to bath houses and have sex in the corner of a bar where anybody can come in and have a drink, well, I have little defense of that beyond my general liberal principles.

still I feel like I've had the most headway with conservatives when I explained that deep down we just want to be free to live the same lives straight people do

I think the "we" is doing a lot of work here. I don't dispute that that's how you want to live your life, but I expect your desire might be quite far removed from what the median gay man wants.

they were offering to hook-up with you despite you having clearly stated you were heterosexual from the get-go

Among the gay men I've met personally, "turning" a straight man was by far the most common sexual fantasy. Many straight men have similar fantasies about "turning" lesbians.

The idea of it is hotter than the reality. I've been a couple people's "exception", as a pretty and feminine looking guy.

It's not really worth it. They don't know what they're doing.

I feel this is heavily confounded by the fact that most "fantasies" are trivially achievable by gay men!

Catching the eye of a hot stranger in a park and going at it behind at a bush? That's Tuesday?

Threesomes? Only barrier is scheduling conflict.

In a toilet? Did you bring a wet wipe?

So just about the only desire that remains even somewhat fantastical is the forbidden fruit.

That's part of it, but it's also just really common for a gay guy's first crush (and fairly common for first half-dozen crushes) to be straight guys, or closeted het-passing guys. Unless you join a LGBT org early, it's hard to avoid. That doesn't necessarily impact your tastes once you grow up a bit, but it's definitely something can throw a curveball in.

It's true. Most straight men's fantasies reside only in their heads, and there they shall remain.

I'm grateful that no gay man has ever been this crude with me in person.

Gay Scots don't beat around the bush.

If I see them again, I must ask about their opinion on kilts.

Closeted men is perfectly valid, but bisexuals? That's not risk management, that's bigotry (pun intended?).

I think that can be the case if they're applying to everyone, but a lot of people who call themselves bi are like barely bi. Heck, a lot of people who call themselves bi are basically not bisexual at all outside of "shrugs, I'd do a guy/girl if I found them attractive I guess" types who also can't name a single same sex person they've ever found attractive. I imagine a lot of them are way less comfortable with sexuality and a lot more "boring" to sleep with.

But definitely going after a straight guy to see if he's down for a lay as well comes off as an odd contradiction here.

Popper-inhaling, incontinent, promiscuous people who go to bath houses and have sex in the corner of a bar where anybody can come in and have a drink, well, I have little defense of that beyond my general liberal principles.

Eh, I think a lot of that is just because it's two men involved and they tend to be a lot more openly sexual in general. Women complain all the time in a similar manner about straight guys, so it tracks that two guys together are gonna be pretty nuts.

sex in a public lavatory is illegal in the UK

It’s very gay-coded in the UK because it’s associated with cottaging. If you complained about going to a gay bar and finding two men having sex in the loo, people would laugh at you. If you persisted they would call you a bigot.

This and the IRA (who put bombs in them) are the two reasons Britain doesn’t have nearly enough public loos.

This and the IRA (who put bombs in them) are the two reasons Britain doesn’t have nearly enough public loos.

I just had a great idea for a comedy sketch.

I will try and scoop you:

Closeted IRA member during the dying days of the Troubles

Never got laid, not interested in the revolutionary lassies

FeelsBadMan

Boss suggests bombing a big loyalist music festival

Hide bomb in anus, because it's easier that way.

Meet cutie

We're both drunk and decide to get some action in the porta-potty

Oh shit, not that hole

Mfw I become a martyr, but die a virgin

Closeted men is perfectly valid, but bisexuals? That's not risk management, that's bigotry (pun intended?).

I'm intrigued you feel that way. My understanding is that the same suspicion is even more common among trans women, and that bisexual men are seen as flaky, exploratory sorts whose bisexuality is a fig leaf, who are trans chasing, and would never be caught dead actually dating a trans woman in public. Actually, I'm intrigued in general that you've talked a lot about your concerns about dating and chasers have never come up.

There's many different kinds of bisexual men and you can't paint them all with the same brush. Some are mostly into women and occasionally will top men, some will only bottom for men but top women, some are 99% attracted to women but there's this one guy that takes their fancy, some are just hypersexual and will do anything with anyone. I've known chasers to be bisexual, straight or gay (the latter being into trans men), and I've known bisexual men who didn't want anything to do with trans women. I think trans women would avoid a lot of heartache if they stop being obsessed with dating 110% straight masculine guys and went for the guys that are fine meeting them for a coffee date in broad daylight instead.

My experience with chasers has been that they make themselves known in the first 5 minutes of conversation so it's never been an issue I guess?

I think trans women would avoid a lot of heartache if they stop being obsessed with dating 110% straight masculine guys and went for the guys that are fine meeting them for a coffee date in broad daylight instead.

Well, the complaint I've heard is that even this doesn't protect you. You might go on a nice set of public dates, but still get played by someone who's using you as an exploratory vessel for bicuriosity and isn't actually interested in a full-on relationship -- or even sex, when things get down to it. "This has been fun, but I've decided this isn't for me/I'm still exploring my sexuality" is a common type of breakup or rejection I've heard complaints about; one acquantance insisted on showing me a screenshot of the breakup text and then, sighing, said "I hate bi men."

That said, most trans women I've known or seen with a partner in public were, or wanted to be, in a relationship with another transgender person. I have no data, so maybe the reality is more complicated.

I guess there’s a big difference between a bi guy who’s secure in his bisexuality and has had relationships with both men and women, and one that’s still figuring things out. The former seems to use “pansexual” or “queer” as a label more often I’ve found? I can totally see why bicurious guys would be a problem though, and I don’t think I’d want to date one.

I’d date a trans man for sure if we’re compatible. It’s not that I’d be more attracted to one, but it makes things easier when you have a shared experience over things like dysphoria and the other person just gets it. Plus you don’t have to worry about them transitioning to a woman (which is weirdly common among men willing to openly date trans women).

To answer both your and @urquan 's question:

I know the Grindr sound because of a prank video I saw somewhere online. The prankster would clock someone as likely gay, and then play the matching notification sound standing close to them. I think they used women in some scenes, to minimize the assumption it was them. You'd see a lot of men jump and pat their pockets. Including quite a few who definitely didn't look it to my untrained eye.

Wouldn't this also be affected by Pride celebration?

Possibly. I wasn't keeping track, but since this happened literally this weekend, I guess some of the decor might have stayed up.

Closeted men is perfectly valid, but bisexuals? That's not risk management, that's bigotry (pun intended?). And they contradicted themselves anyway, they were offering to hook-up with you despite you having clearly stated you were heterosexual from the get-go, so they were hoping you were at least a little bi-curious.

The majority of the offers came before the phone gallery bit. I'm sure that FG still made more moves, but they were clearly in the "haha, just kidding. Unless...?" tier.

As far as I know sex in a public lavatory is illegal in the UK regardless of the sex of the participants. I would assume a pub (i.e. a public house) counts? I know straight people who've had sex in a bar toilet, so there's no argument to be made that it's an exclusively homosexual act.

His explanation covered both clubs and bars. I think the sex in dimly lit corners applied more to the former.

While sex in a loo might be illegal, I sincerely doubt anyone ever gets charged!

In any case, your talk with these gents made me understand the perspective of some more intolerant people. That "gay culture" seems to be purposefully designed to be repulsive. I understand that being a pick-me isn't helpful, and that loud gays were the ones that paved away for LGBT rights while the polite, respectful homophile movement accomplished little.

FG was by far the most forward. The rest of them, beyond the usual compliments and offers, seemed normal, for lack of a better word. In other contexts, I might have suspected they were gay, but I wouldn't have strong confidence in that notion. They seemed to act like anyone else out for a drink with friends.

Popper-inhaling, incontinent, promiscuous people who go to bath houses and have sex in the corner of a bar where anybody can come in and have a drink, well, I have little defense of that beyond my general liberal principles.

I am generally liberal, and I think that's enough here. If they want to do all of that, with other consenting adults, then it's none of my business! As a straight man, if I could get away with the sex bit, I'd definitely go for it. Sadly women don't seem quite so keen. Gay sexuality is male sexuality, without the constraints of needing women to indulge in it or to provide the civilizing influence.

The poppers and incontinence? Not as pleasing to my sensibilities, but I will defend their right to do as they wish.

I sincerely doubt anyone ever gets charged

George Michael excepted, although it was rather a different time.

The prankster would clock someone as likely gay, and then play the matching notification sound standing close to them. I think they used women in some scenes, to minimize the assumption it was them. You'd see a lot of men jump and pat their pockets. Including quite a few who definitely didn't look it to my untrained eye.

That's hilarious, do you have the link? Reminds me of this Jeopardy contestant who mispelled "Tinder".

I did try and look for a link before I wrote that! Unfortunately, couldn't find the exact video.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QzL-4tkCX9A

This gets the gist across, even if it's a disgusting YouTube short.

That "gay culture" seems to be purposefully designed to be repulsive.

I don't believe that it was "designed" to be anything. It's simply male sexuality in its most natural and unrestrained form.

Do you know how straight men would act if women were as DTF as men are? Hooooo boy.

I don't believe that it was "designed" to be anything. It's simply male sexuality in its most natural and unrestrained form.

Yup. Gay male sexuality is just pure-strain male sexuality, free from the fetters of women's preferences and demands.

So too is lesbian sexuality unmodified female sexuality, and lesbian bed death is a common thing.

Lesbians are interesting. They certainly have a much lower libido than men on average, which is what results in LBD, but at the same time I think they are noticeably more "aggressive" in their tastes than straight women. I recall there being a debate at Michfest in years past over whether public displays of BDSM should be allowed, or whether that would be politically compromising because it would be reinforcing patriarchal power dynamics. In the occasional conversations I've had with lesbians, they often seem to be quite self-conscious about restraining their natural desires around other women, because they don't want to violate the "rules of the sisterhood".

So I get the impression that straight female sexuality might truly be a unique phenomenon unto itself, and it has similarities with lesbian sexuality but also some notable differences.

I once saw a complaint that all the women in pornos acted like men, which seemed to me to be onto something but not quite right. Years later I finally managed to articulate it - the women in pornos act like men think they would act if they were hot women. So...

Do you know how straight men would act if women were as DTF as men are? Hooooo boy.

Basically like they do in porn.

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