site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   9459 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 1, 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.

To be fair, I had a boomer coworker who claimed to be a vegetarian despite eating fish ("I consider fish to be vegetables").

Is it @thejdizzler who's vegan except for oysters?

so there's presumably a variety of reasons that meat eaters call themselves vegetarians besides virtue signalling.

Regardless of their motivations, calling yourself vegetarian when you eat meat is simply a misuse of the word, surely?

I've also said here that I describe myself as a vegetarian, despite eating bivalves (and roadkill, and caviar, and etc...)

It's just much less work to do that than explain to a restaurant the exact things I do eat. There is a word--ostrovegan--that kind of describes it, but most people would be confused by it, as it's obscure enough to be overly precious.

That's just communicating dietary requirements, though, in the not especially common scenario when I need to. I wouldn't say I identify as any particular terms associated with dietary restrictions.

despite eating bivalves (and roadkill, and caviar, and etc...)

Really burying the lede there.

I salvaged a deer and pretty much every vegetarian I know said they would eat it. Most didn't know you could legally (it depends on the state) salvage roadkill and thought it was pretty cool. In my case I also dispatched it, so time from death to fridge was faster than most harvested deer.

Minor culture war angle: A Muslim guy had "called dibs" on the deer and didn't want me to kill it because then it wouldn't be halal. Said he had his brother on the phone and he was going to come butcher it. The deer was suffering greatly and I said if his brother wasn't almost here I was going to kill it. He wouldn't tell me how far away his brother was. Heard him derogatorily call me a cowboy between whatever he was speaking. I'm not nearly that cool.

Bewarned- in most of the bigger states this is deer poaching. If you hit a deer with your car, you're supposed to call a police officer to come dispatch it humanely.

In practice, you may not get caught, and the main penalty(loss of hunting license) is irrelevant to non-hunters. But it is de jure illegal.

It's worth checking your state laws for sure, cause I know in Wisconsin at least it's perfectly legal. In fact, you're even entitled to take the carcass if you didn't hit it with your car - the driver who hit it has dibs, but after that whoever comes across it can take it if they want.

It strongly depends on the state. If you would actually like to do this, your state fish and game or wildlife department likely has it in an FAQ on their website. Texas hard bans private harvest of animals hit by a car- you're supposed to make a police report for it to be disposed of, either fed to the lions at the zoo or thrown in the landfill depending on how quickly they get to it.

I just looked up Pennsylvania's laws regarding large roadkill and things are more complicated than most people realize. If the deer appears to be dead you're supposed to call PennDOT (if on a state road) or the Game Commission (if on a local road) to remove the animal. If it's alive and hasn't moved from the road or poses a safety risk you're supposed to call the local police, who may in turn have the game commission dispatch it. If it's dead you can take it, but you have to report it to the Game Commission within 24 to get a permit number for it. I'm guessing that this is so people who get reported for having a deer without tags won't get busted for poaching.

In Texas there's a hard ban on harvesting roadkill, for poaching-prevention reasons. But in Oklahoma you can call a game warden who can issue a special tag. It varies a lot.

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