site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   21853 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026

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.

As a trans person, none of the GC talking points actually matter in my daily life and it can actually be more disruptive for me to use the spaces (bathrooms, changing rooms) of my biological sex due to my appearance.

My experience is that the average person is absolutely not a sommelier when it comes to differentiating cis from even moderately passing trans people. If you look enough like a woman, you’ll get called ma’am by service workers and you’ll get weird looks if you try to use the men’s public bathroom (or even have the toilet attendant run after you to tell you you’re using the wrong bathroom). I’ve even had people be very surprised to learn that one of my friends was trans after interacting with them all day.

My understanding is that this comes under fire by the GC people Edit: I meant strict self-ID people because it means that passing is actually highly relevant to how you're treated, and a combination of late transition/no money for treatments/lack of self confidence/depression makes that seem like an oppressive obstacle. I get their point but I guess it's always been obvious to me that in the real world passing is eminently important, and the reality is that everyone's identity (on every axis) is a negotiation between them and society. My attitude's always been: I'm fine using your preferred pronouns if that makes you feel better, but can you please make an attempt to help me out?

My experience is that the average person is absolutely not a sommelier when it comes to differentiating cis from even moderately passing trans people. If you look enough like a woman, you’ll get called ma’am by service workers

I appreciate your perspective, but I will point out (probably not for the first time to you personally) that there is a difference between a service worker mistaking you for a female person, and making an educated guess based on your appearance that you are attempting to present as female, and going along with it so as to avoid causing you offence.

This is probably occasionally the case, but this has happened when I’m wearing a hoodie, jeans and trainers from the men’s section, no makeup, and generally put 0 effort in presenting as anything, with people from demographics that are not known for their LGBT friendliness (e.g. middle aged Eastern European men). And it doesn’t explain why a security guard or a passerby would make a big scene trying to redirect me to the other bathroom.

But in any case, this doesn’t mesh with the GC worldview. Either the average person is very trans friendly, or trans people can pass and be perceived as the opposite sex.

But in any case, this doesn’t mesh with the GC worldview. Either the average person is very trans friendly, or trans people can pass and be perceived as the opposite sex.

I've never disputed the existence of androgynous people, and nor has any gender-critical person I've met. Even people who aren't trans sometimes get mistaken for being members of the opposite sex (i.e. butch lesbians). I'm just saying that such people are the exception rather than the rule, and that most people are very obviously of one sex or the other. I would imagine that if I spent a lot of time in trans spaces, I would far more frequently see people complain about being "misgendered" or "clocked" or failing to pass than I would see the opposite (people celebrating how successfully they pass).

I would imagine that if I spent a lot of time in trans spaces, I would far more frequently seeing people complain about being "misgendered" or "clocked" or failing to pass than I would see the opposite (in which people celebrate how successfully they pass).

I have a decent number of trans friends and that’s not the case at all. Occasionally a funny story around passing is shared, but most of the time nobody really brings up the topic. The trans issues that come up often are problems related to healthcare (e.g. finding a good endocrinologist), or family members not accepting them. Not getting called “miss” instead of “sir” (or vice versa) when ordering takeaway.

In my experience middle-aged Eastern European men have a severely degraded man-dar partially as a consequence of lack of LGBT friendliness in the area. They call me "miss" from time to time when I'm presenting as nothing but male, on account of long hair.

It would make sense when compared with all the old-timey stories of men crossdressing as women and women crossdressing as men and that being enough to fool most people, in the world where gender presentation is hard-coded otherwise.

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