site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   27958 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 13, 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.

Anyway, "this girl is fully retarded" is hardly worth clutching pearls over... maybe imitation pearls?

Remember a little while back when there were finger-wagging lists of words that were no-no because they were ableist, including describing things as "things are insane round here" or "we're crazy busy this week"?

So terms like 'retarded' are no-no because slurs and because 'excuse me, my brother is retarded, how dare you?' as per this article ("When someone casually says, “she’s so crazy” in an off-handed way, they could be talking about someone like my mom.")

Amusing that that list omits words like "stupid," "dumb," "blind," "lame," and "crippled."

That was one of the record-scratch moments that turned me, back in the day. Getting told I was ableist for saying something (not even a person!) was stupid.

If adopted, it certainly would make reading the Gospel at Sunday Mass a lot of fun 🤣

"4 Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and observe: 5 the blind persons of low vision see, the lame persons with a mobility impairment walk, lepers those who are in need of dermatological services are cleansed receive appropriate medical care, the deaf persons with a hearing impairment hear, the dead are raised, and the destitute people whose incomes are below the federal poverty threshold hear the good news are empowered by targeted aid regarding their circumstances. 6 How blessed is anyone who is not offended by me does not commit microaggressions by the use of ableist language!”

I'm aware of why a lot of leftists object to the term. I'm just not sure why anyone to the right of Tim Walz should care. It's not like that n-word which indelibly stains the soul of any white person who dares to utter or type it (not sure if the hard-r is required, gotta be safe); they're only allowed one of those at most.

It might be a microaggression, the more up-to-date please fill me in on whether microaggressions are still the equivalent of burning someone at the stake or if we've moved on to trans genocide instead as the most heinous of crimes?

Trans genocide is caused by microaggressions (and macroaggressions as well). If you accidentally call a transwoman who identifies as "xe/xer" a "he," then that can worsen xer dysphoria, resulting in xer's mood being slightly more negative than otherwise, which could be the difference maker in crossing the threshold to successfully acting on suicide from just thinking about/play-acting it, which would mean that xer death would be entirely the fault of every individual who committed a microaggression against xer with respect to xer gender identity.

It could also discourage trans-curious youths away from going forward with a transition and instead embracing their original sex and trying their best to live a happy life within it, because they would observe how trans people tend to have convinced their brains to feel wronged when someone else does something with entirely good intentions. This would mean one less trans-curious person becoming trans, which is another form of genocide than just killing the already-trans.

More to the point, there's no rational or consistent hierarchy of heinousness of crimes in this worldview. Rationality and logical consistency (not to mention hierarchy) are inventions of White Supremacy and Patriarchy for the purpose of oppressing minorities and women. Any crime is the most heinous if it's useful to you if everyone else believes that it's the most heinous thing ever, and the vice versa applies as well.

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