site banner
PaperclipPerfector  12d ago (text post)   26234 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Why are you reviving a week-old thread?

I was reading over the thread again when I had a burst of inspiration; I thought it would be a shame to let it go to waste, but it wasn't long enough for a top level post. Better to put it out now; I expect I'll have a chance to use it again later.

All your answers are straw men, and they begin with the word "entitled."

Children are entitled to be cared for by their parents. Citizens are entitled to certain rights.

Beyond that, nobody is entitled to much of anything. You have to earn what you want in life. That is the human condition. You have to earn food. You have to earn shelter. You have to earn sex.

Nobody is entitled to a wife, a husband, a relationship. Because entitled implies someone else is obligated to give it to you.

Saying you are entitled to a "mid" as you put it implies that somewhere out there is a woman who is obligated to fuck you, and you exclusively. Who is she? How are we to locate her? By what means do you propose this involuntary fuckable be provided to you?

I believe that there should be a chicken in every pot. That does not mean I want the government to assign each worker a chicken, and set quotas for the raising thereof, and nationalize the means of production to make it happen, because we have run that experiment for 70 years in half the world and every time it ends in disaster. Rather, it means I want the government to create the economic conditions that allow each man to buy his own damn chicken. And that starts with the government just not doing everything in its power to obstruct the commerce of chickens, such as preventing shop owners from lynching shoplifters or setting price ceilings on the true price of chickens.

Likewise, I believe that every worker should have a wife, that does not mean I want a government mandated gf. It means I want the government to create the conditions where every productive man can find his own damn wife. And that starts with the government not doing everything humanly possible to undermine the institution of marriage, such as stealing from working men to provide welfare to single mothers, or rewarding wives who break up the marriage with half of their husband's assets, or locking up the man who murders his woman's lover in a fit of rage. When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

("Every man" is a bit of an exaggeration; just as the correct number of collapsed buildings is not zero, because that means you are overbuilding your houses and spending too much money in construction, the correct number of incels is not zero. But, to paraphrase Kevin Dolan, marriage and reproduction should be normal and typical; the supermajority of working men who want a wife should be able to get one while she is still young and virginal, and involuntary bachelorhood should be an unusual tragedy.)

Patriarchy, you say? But even under patriarchy, you'd have to impress some girl's father enough to be willing to give her to you. Even if you want to DreadJimmax and say women are property, you are just transferring the obligation upwards: somewhere out there is a man who's obligated to give you his daughter to fuck.

Also note that under most real-world patriarchies, fathers still tended to have some affection for their daughters and would not give them to a man who truly repulsed her and seemed likely to make her miserable. And those patriarchies that do treat women as literal commodity goods in that fashion are pretty fucking miserable places to live for everyone!

If we ration women to one per men, which is part of the plan, then at some point fathers have to look at their aging daughters and make a decision between picking one of their suitors and spinsterdom. When women are allowed to make the decision themselves, they either oopsie into single motherdom while fucking men who have no intention of committing to them, or, if use birth control religiously and willing abort any accidents, end up as childless catladies. At best, they might snag a beta in their last fertile years and have 1-2 kids. I trust fathers to make a better choice, sooner, and without attendant promiscuity. Not to repulsive man, unless the daughter herself is repulsive, but to an average man. And if the daughter finds him repulsive, it is herself who is being spoiled and unreasonable.

According to the chicken analogy, every man should be free to buy as many chickens as he can afford. Rationing them at one-per is the kind of thing that has been tried for 70 years and ended in disaster.

Capitalism everywhere except for the bedroom.

If your proposition is that we factory-farm the fairer sex such that every man is free to go through a hundred a year, I think Margaret Atwood wrote a book about that...

Ultimately, the sex ratio is what it is. Chicken consumption is not zero-sum in the same way.

If your proposition is that we factory-farm the fairer sex such that every man is free to go through a hundred a year

Being free to buy a chicken does not mean there must be enough stock available at all times. If the chicken are scarce, the price will simply be higher.

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