site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   13617 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 3, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I would find the "Waifu Importation Bill" hilarious, but how exactly would they ensure "attractive and fertile"? Will there be a panel judging their attractiveness (no doubt hosted by the President himself), rejecting anyone who scores below a 6?

Of course it would also be hilarious to see this backfire when a flood of Muslim women arrives completely on board with the "get married and have at least two children" plan.

Of course it would also be hilarious to see this backfire when a flood of Muslim women arrives completely on board with the "get married and have at least two children" plan.

How is that "backfiring"?

I think the implication is that they arrive and marry Muslim men, have Muslim kids and engage in demographic replacement of the native western population.

A real monkey's paw.

Unless this idea includes legalizing polygamy, it's probably not going to be an issue.

I would find the "Waifu Importation Bill" hilarious, but how exactly would they ensure "attractive and fertile"?

Presumably by market forces, if you're making it easier to bring in your fiancee. A guy isn't going to bring in a woman he doesn't want to sleep with. Fertile is kind of a black box, but there's no reason to think it wouldn't lead to more children, especially if you tie citizenship to children. Maybe a structure where green cards are easy to get for your gf, and your gf gets citizenship once you have kids?

I do think a very easy button to press is the au pair program. Make it mega easy and cheap to import girls between the age of 17 and 30 who want to do childcare. Besides the help they'd give current parents, it's a pretty good bet that twenty-somethings who like kids enough to nanny wouldn't mind having a few.

These programs would be obviously good, would increase immigration (which Democrats are bad at saying is ever bad), and are easy to bias on sex (au pair's are female, make citizenship for mother's of children but not fathers). Trump is at his best when he gets to the left of the Dems, they tie themselves in knots and look like fools.

Of course it would also be hilarious to see this backfire when a flood of Muslim women arrives completely on board with the "get married and have at least two children" plan.

Who's afraid of big bad burqa? A flood of pretty Persian or Lebanese girls with engineering degrees who want to marry a soulful white boy and raise kids here doesn't offend me one bit. I may be biased...

Will there be a panel judging their attractiveness (no doubt hosted by the President himself), rejecting anyone who scores below a 6?

I would watch that tv show.

I would find the "Waifu Importation Bill" hilarious, but how exactly would they ensure "attractive and fertile"? Will there be a panel judging their attractiveness (no doubt hosted by the President himself), rejecting anyone who scores below a 6?

That's the beauty of male sexual preference; men find 80%+ of fertile-age females attractive. Simply setting a limit between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five would ensure that the supermajority of women imported under this program would be attractive with no other filter needed.

That's the beauty of male sexual preference; men find 80%+ of fertile-age females attractive.

More than 20% of fertile-age females in the US, at least, are obese, so I question whatever survey you're using this time. Or did it classify "would fuck" the same as "attractive"?

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