Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
PaperclipPerfector
							
            
						 2mo ago
						(text post)
						
						  1000 thread views
					Transnational Thursday for September 4, 2025
- 26
 - 4
 
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
- Courtesy
 - Content
 - Engagement
				
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
 - Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
 - Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
 - Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
 - Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
 
 - The Wildcard Rule
 - The Metarule
 
		
	
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I'm curious as to what firsthand experience convinced him this was what to spend the rest of his life on this topic; what X-pilled him?
Like JKR, did he brush up against the trans activist complex? They do seem to have this effect on people.
Yeah, I'm curious about that myself. The impression I get is that his TV career had been circling the drain for many years, to which he'd responded by becoming a sort of all-purpose keyboard warrior, taking to Twitter to attack all manner of people (including Kanye West, of all people) as "Gamergaters". At some point he fell down the gender-critical rabbit hole and here we are.
Perhaps the spiciest take I've seen on the whole matter came from Scott, in which he admitted that the spike in trans identification is probably a bad thing and it's worth trying to determine the underlying cause thereof - but then said that no one should bother trying to answer these questions because they'll end up ruining their lives in the process, like Linehan did. (Of course, a major contributing factor to Linehan's life being ruined was trans activists doing everything in their power to ruin it - Linehan claims that the police knocking on his door over tweets he'd posted was the catalyst that caused his wife to leave him. Regardless of whether that was the catalyst, it's undeniably true that the police did knock on his door because trans activists sicced them on him.)
To my mind, "this is a question worth investigating, but you shouldn't try to investigate it because bad actors will try to destroy you if you do" is a sensible position to take, if and only if you include an explicit condemnation of the bad actors trying to destroy people, which Scott doesn't.
More options
Context Copy link
The trans people went after him hard for making a very funny episode about an MtF trans person before such things were sensitive. It's both very unkind and rather touching, but in any case the trans complex went after it hard.
At the risk of impromptu psychoanalysing, Graham Linehan has always been on the winning side of the culture wars before: Father Ted affectionately but firmly took the piss out of the Catholic Church just as it was dying out in Ireland and while neither Black Books nor the IT Crowd are exactly politically correct, everyone was in no doubt that their author was basically sound politically.
Then suddenly that got turned around on him and I think it was a big shock. All that time being a feminist and so on and suddenly the winds change and he goes from being universally feted to standing with the baddies. I can imagine that being pretty shattering.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link