site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   14631 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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He brought a girl over of her own will, she got cold feet while he was stripping off his clothes, but she didn't say so.

Which means he transgressed by ignoring or not noticing her "cold feet," and thus failed to get affirmative consent. From Wikipedia:

This is the approach endorsed by colleges and universities in the U.S.,[62] who describe consent as an "affirmative, unambiguous, and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed-upon sexual activity."

From the University of Sydney, in Australia (so this isn't just an American thing):

If it's not an enthusiastic yes, it's a no

…

If you’re engaging in romantic or sexual activity, you need consent every time. Consent must be informed, voluntary and active, meaning that, through an expression of clear physical and verbal actions, a person has indicated permission to engage in romantic or sexual activity. It is critical that you pay attention to and respect the other people’s verbal and physical signals of agreement, and you should expect others to do the same.

…

The Commonwealth Consent Policy Framework: Promoting Healthy Sexual Relationships and Consent Among Young People (669 KB) establishes a clear, consistent and evidence-based definition of consent, with five core concepts underpinning the messaging.

…

Affirmative and communicated

Consent is clearly communicated, and sexual partners are actively checking for consent verbally and non-verbally.

Consent is never implied or assumed. Silence, freezing, the absence of a ‘no’, appearing disengaged or a lack of any apparent discomfort, hesitation or resistance, does not imply consent.

[Bold emphasis added]

(And you can read more on the Australian Government's new national consent framework, introduced January 2024, here.)

And from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN, the US's largest anti-sexual violence organization, operators of the National Sexual Assault Hotline.):

Consent isn’t just a one-time check-in. It’s an ongoing conversation. You need consent every time, for every type of activity. Just because someone said yes in the past doesn’t mean they’re saying yes now. Just because someone agreed to one thing doesn’t mean they’re okay with everything.

…

How to Practice Consent

  • Ask, “Is this okay?” before moving forward
  • Listen and respond to your partner’s words and body language
  • Respect a “no”—even if it’s said quietly, indirectly, or nonverbally
  • Check in as things progress; don’t assume it’s fine to keep going

You also have the right to change your mind. Consent can be withdrawn at any time, even in the middle of an activity. If something doesn’t feel right, you can speak up—or use nonverbal signals like freezing, pulling away, or going silent. Partners should watch for these signs and stop immediately if anything seems off.

Enthusiastic consent means seeking out a clear, positive “yes”—not just the absence of “no.” This model encourages partners to look for active participation, mutual excitement, and ongoing check-ins throughout an intimate experience.

…

What Consent Is Not

Understanding what doesn’t count as consent is just as important. These are red flags that show consent is not present:

…

  • Taking silence or lack of resistance as agreement

Consent should never be assumed. It must be given clearly, freely, and enthusiastically.

[Bold in original]

Note the "partners should watch for these signs and stop immediately if anything seems off" part. Our male character clearly didn't do that. She did not give unambiguous, enthusiastic, and ongoing consent.

Barring the most partisan of gender warriors, nobody would consider that coercive.

Only if you consider "the most partisan of gender warriors" to include (but not limited to) most universities in the Anglosphere, the Australian government, institutions like RAINN (which have non-trivial sway over the American legal system's approaches to these issues), nearly the entirety of Tumblr (IME), and a growing fraction of Western youth among at least the upper-middle-class, maybe.

Jesus, what is this, the sexual code for robots? I always saw sex as something raw, animalistic, spontaneous. Wrestling and overpowering with even some violence if that's what she's into.

Jesus, what is this, the sexual code for robots?

Seriously, though, I'd argue that it's just the inevitable conclusion of the "consent model of sexual ethics" (particularly in combination with the natural human instinct to protect women in particular), and of Western society's attitude on these issues for the last century or so. (People talk a lot about the "sexual revolution" of the 1960s, and forget the possibly bigger one in the 1920s.)

Personally, I hope Blue Tribe liberals keep embracing and promoting these norms as thoroughly and widely as they can.

the sexual code for robots?

It's just a blatant attempt (and a successful one) to criminalize any sex anyone would actually want.

If you view women purely as sex workers/providers, a point on which feminists/progressives and traditionalists already agree, this makes sense, since "only criminalize buying" is the ultimate veto over any action the buyer makes in the future. Get famous after 50 years and think they didn't pay enough? Believe it or not, straight to jail.

What, you thought the Junior Anti-Sex League was fiction?

It's literally the same law we use for AoC violations, just with a fig leaf over the whole "well, technically women can consent, so stop complaining, won't you Think of the Children?". Again, that's also by design.

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