site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   25655 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 18, 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.

I sometimes wonder whether men who marry purely for aesthetics fully grasp that children inherit genetic material from both parents. I would never marry someone intellectually deficient, simply because no offspring of mine deserves the curse of inheriting my appearance and her cognitive abilities. This woman had drawn the genetic short straw; the rest of her family consisted of high-achieving intellectuals.

I mean if her family is relatively smart probably your children will be fine as well?

I should have been more specific:

  • Her dad is a successful businessman, but not so rich that they have fuck you money.
  • Brother is a programmer? I think? Anyway, he lives abroad, works for an MNC and makes big money.
  • Mom's a housewife.

From what I could gather, the rest of her family are reasonably well off.

Anyway. Marrying someone below average in intelligence is close to a deal-breaker for me. I strongly value intelligence, at least for the sake of my future kids. I'm the kind of guy who intends to at least try and talk my future spouse into opting for embryo selection for IQ and overall disease risk. Now, if the girl in question was gorgeous and had enough money that we wouldn't have any financial concerns for life, I'd be right on that.

And, to put it bluntly, I genuinely believe I can do better. That might come across as conceited, but I still think it's true! I'm an okay looking guy, who makes decent money, live in the West (which is a big deal for Indian women), a doctor etc. I got into training relatively young, so I'll be a mid-level psychiatrist when I'm in my very early 30s, and hopefully done with career advancement by my mid 30s. As far as I can tell, I'll only get more attractive and appealing with time, my uncle, a senior shrink in his 50s, still has women all over him.

Indian women tend to at least have a kernel of pragmatism. They look at this and are almost always keen. Even right now, if I decided I wanted to get hitched, all it would take is coming home for a few weeks and hitting the apps, or just asking my family to put out feelers on my behalf.

I'm late 20s, and would likely be at my best-by mid 30s. However, I think it's better to be a dad younger than that, raising kids in the West is hard fucking work, and the more energy and health I have in me, the better. As of right now, the plan is to look for someone here (easier said than done the dating market is abysmal), and if that's not successful, consider going the arranged marriage route with semi-seriousness when I'm done with the my current stage of training.

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