site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 8, 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
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Abelard was castrated because he fucked around (literally, he got her pregnant) with the niece of a Very Important Guy who didn't appreciate that kind of hands-on approach to tutoring (today Abelard would be criticised for power imbalance, grooming, age gap - he was 36, she was 15-17 years of age, of his pupil). They engaged in a secret marriage in order to satisfy her uncle but kept it secret because if Abelard wanted to become a priest (to have a career in the church) clerical celibacy was becoming necessary.

Uncle was not happy about all this and took action:

Fulbert, infuriated that Heloise had been taken from his house and possibly believing that Abelard had disposed of her at Argenteuil in order to be rid of her, arranged for a band of men to break into Abelard's room one night and castrate him. In legal retribution for this vigilante attack, members of the band were punished, and Fulbert, scorned by the public, took temporary leave of his canon duties (he does not appear again in the Paris cartularies for several years).

End result is that Héloïse ends up in a convent and Abelard remains a monk, but cannot be ordained to the priesthood if he is castrated (there are rubrics around bastardy etc. and what disqualifies someone from the priesthood, including being a eunuch). This doesn't mean he can't continue to be wellknown, he already had a reputation as a theologian and was famous and continued to be, but since he couldn't be a priest this disbarred him from advancement to such offices as bishop, etc. but he did become abbot of a monastery, though his career continued to be controversial due to his alleged heretical teachings.

Truly a case of "fuck around and find out".

As for Kamala, certainly stories about her past were floating around for a long time (e.g. I saw it mentioned online that her nickname had been "Heels Up Harris") and it came to the point that Willie Brown had to issue a denial that he promoted her only because she was his girlfriend (and indeed, later she allegedly warned him off*). Being fair to Willy, yeah he pretty much did promote her because she was his girlfriend and that got her the start in political career, but he also promoted guys as well for being loyal to him. Old-school politician who rewarded his allies and loyalists when the fat spoils were to be divided upon gaining power.

I think the reason it didn't get play this time was (1) it was old news (2) the media and online media were working hard to squash any such distasteful racist and sexist attacks upon the Democratic Saviour From Evil Trump (remember all the havering over "how very dare you say she was border czar, she was no such thing, the Republicans are lying when they call her that"?)

*"Brown's romantic relationship with Alameda County deputy district attorney Kamala Harris preceded his appointment of Harris to two California state commissions in the mid-1990s. The San Francisco Chronicle called the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission patronage positions. When the appointments became a political issue in Harris's 2003 race for District Attorney, she responded: "Whether you agree or disagree with the system, I did the work". Brown's relationship with Harris gained renewed attention in early 2019 after she had become a U.S. senator and ran for president. Brown addressed the questions by publishing a piece in the San Francisco Chronicle titled "Sure, I dated Kamala Harris. So what?" He wrote that he may have "influenced" her career by appointing her to boards and supporting her run for District Attorney, but added that he had also influenced the careers of other politicians. Brown noted that the difference between Harris and other politicians he had helped was that "Harris is the only one who, after I helped her, sent word that I would be indicted if I 'so much as jaywalked' while she was D.A. That's politics for ya."