site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6d ago (text post)   22007 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.

It is quite fair to be livid about similarly miniscule numbers

The thing is I've been told that it's not, and I never saw you step in before. Can I count on you saying something the next time someone uses this argument?

Anyway, sure, give these people some restitution. Unlike transgender care, this is actually reversible.

The thing is I've been told that it's not, and I never saw you step in before.

I didn't have a precedent to refer to before.

Can I count on you saying something the next time someone uses this argument?

Only if it actually becomes a commonplace bipartisan argument. Otherwise I'll follow the example of other users and keep only using it when it's my side suffering the miniscule excesses.

I didn't have a precedent to refer to before.

How exactly did you run into this forum being absolutely livid about the small number of kids being transed without seeing the "come on, it's just a tiny percentage of people affected"?

Only if it actually becomes a commonplace bipartisan argument.

I literally just agreed with you, what more do you want?

How exactly did you run into this forum being absolutely livid about the small number of kids being transed without seeing the "come on, it's just a tiny percentage of people affected"?

I did see it, I mean I noticed no precedent of the "come on, it's just a tiny percentage" people having had their own tiny percentage they visibly cared about a lot.

I literally just agreed with you, what more do you want?

First, I don't recall you agreeing with me when it was about the tiny number of transed kids. Second, you appear to be one of the three principled autistically-consistent-argument-appliers among seven zillion culture warriors, so unilateral disarmament is not in my interest.

I did see it, I mean I noticed no precedent of the "come on, it's just a tiny percentage" people having had their own tiny percentage they visibly cared about a lot.

Wait, so you're not even arguing for the argument that "It is quite fair to be livid about similarly miniscule numbers" , you're just hypocrisy-policing? If that's what you're going for, are you telling me you never saw anyone being bothered about school shootings?

First, I don't recall you agreeing with me when it was about the tiny number of transed kids.

Uh... surely you must have seen one of my many top-level comments on the subject. If anything I don't remember you saying all that much about it.

Second, you appear to be one of the three principled autistically-consistent-argument-appliers among seven zillion culture warriors, so unilateral disarmament is not in my interest.

Well, if you're just pursuing your interest, why not say that from the top, instead of acting like you're bothered by a violation of a principle?

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