site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   29330 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 6, 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.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That's a pretty good argument, but I can't shake the feeling that there is something deeper to your complaint. There is an undercurrent of resentment to your position that twists the perspective you are arguing, not necessarily in your case, although that isn't to rule it out. In particular -

TIL the word for "basically white, or close enough that dark skin-fearing consumers won't raise a fuss".

Is an ironic inversion of the argument against mukokuseki in the early days of the idpol ascension, which was that mukokuseki was the word for 'Japanese but not so Japanese it upsets white people.' Either way it's white supremacy?

Maybe in the early days of idpol the white skin enjoyers were against Japanese but now it looks as if it got a big injection of "le based feminine Asian waifu" people. Either way, it's going to be the kind of people who complain that, checks list, Ghost of Yotei's protagonist does not look like a jade beauty, or Aphrodite's cheekbones too sharp 3/10, and I think that kind of grievance is retarded and annoying, and the grievance of those who want token rep of every ethnicity, gender and disability under the sun is also retarded and annoying.

Just make characters with character. Supergiants' Hestia has character, Asian Hestia doesn't, at a glance.

Ah yes, 'just make characters with character' but they can't be all eye candy, even if it's a video game, and it literally only exists for the purposes of escapism. And they can't all be white - even if it's historically accurate, even if the story takes place in a time and place where there were next to no non-white people and white people were actually racist, proper racist unlike the 'less comfortable with people who don't look like them' racism of today, the kind of racists who fought over nationality, you have to put some other races in or it's white supremacy.

As for mukokuseki, no, that's Whig history. In the early days of idpol 'the white skin enjoyers' were basically non-existent in terms of presence, especially in the anime scene. All the racists there were racist like me - at all times willing to talk to and work with and befriend and bang any other race but unwilling to self flagellate over imagined historical crimes.

That is why I am suspicious of claims Supergiant were 'just making characters' when they made a bunch of changes that all just so happen to appeal to the woke ideology. Maybe you are too young to be around for the start of this shit, but I'm not. I have seen the insidious 'just make characters with character, but also they have to follow these rules or you're cancelled' argument and the death by degrees it enables.

Also, at a glance. And yet Hestia is one of the most popular characters in that franchise, because she has character - despite being pretty. Why are progressives obsessed with looks?

Edit: accidentally hit post too early, added the last sentence.

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