site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   27149 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 25, 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.

She doesn't look like she's even trying to be intimidating

Because girls don't know a lot about intimidation. Not even on the streets. They see what boys intimidating people looks like and and try to emulate it. Given enough time, dedication, and maturity the insecurity is dropped and girls can go pull the weave out dat hoes head without thinking it's not hard enough. Ain't no bitch need to fight like a man.

The other part that is suspicious is the length of the video. Why is it so short?

I am suspicious of all short videos. I assume she wasn't filming or calling the police, because she was breaking the law. How much earlier did the blades come out in the altercation? No idea, but doesn't look like she carries them on her person.

The Rittenhouse narrative that the media tried to drum up made no sensw from the start, it wasn't a case ofnmissing context.

The people that latched onto the narrative didn't need context. They still don't need the (truthful) context, because they already know what they want to believe. That is selfmade's point, but he is polite.

Despite sympathizing with the outrage quite a bit I fear demand for migrant rapists has already exceeded supply. The UK has only been able to openly talk about this for a few years!

Because girls don't know a lot about intimidation. Not even on the streets.

I'm saying: not even trying, not trying and failing.

I am suspicious of all short videos.

As per the link from jkf, the dude is a """digital creator""". This video is short, because that's how he wanted it, which means he's hiding something. The quotes in the paper make him sound like OJ Simpson.

I'm calling it / doubling down: the whole thing is fake. She's not Braveheart, and he's not a poor migrant targeted by racist chavettes, which is what this video was originally meant to show, but backfired. The only thing left to find out is if he's working for an NGO.

s per the link from jkf, the dude is a """digital creator"""... The only thing left to find out is if he's working for an NGO.

Thanks for the link I hadn't scrolled. Oh my. Well, if that's the case I suppose the blackpill doesn't taste so bad going down.

EDIT: It now occurs to me that one answer to "not even trying" perception: kids are awkward and do lots of things inexplicably poorly. Assuming this guy is mostly a normal pedestrian, then it's a good thing the girl, sensing discipline, acts awkwardly and doesn't commit to anything too crazy.

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