site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   25983 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 16, 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.

If pastors preaching chastity can get handsy, it's not the values being taught, it's the power and the hierarchy.

I think it’s just normal human sin. I don’t know the base rate, but as I recall pastors are significantly less likely to abuse children than school teachers.

That list was a weapon in the culture war. There are some progressive (by evangelical standards) people and organizations whose M.O. is to ignore base rates, ignore any exculpatory evidence, and accuse denominations or institutions of being shot through with sexual abuse, then demand checks and balances that subvert the denomination’s polity. The people they want to grant new power over doctrine and practice are consistently from the progressive wing of the denomination, and they always think that the right way to address sexual abuse is by moving the denomination closer to the broader culture.

To be clear, sex abuse in religious organizations is basically a solved problem and 'bringing in a bunch of left wing activists' isn't the solution. It's-

  1. Everyone involved loses their job in case of a coverup. Everyone who conceivably knew and didn't report gets fired, regardless of their level in the organization, regardless of peripherality, etc.
  2. Everyone is trained as a state mandated reporter.
  3. Chaperoning requirements and parental involvements have consistent policies and those policies aren't stupid. You also have common sense checks about who gets to be involved as a volunteer(eg checking sex offender registries).

Everyone is trained as a state mandated reporter.

I understand why a Catholic would draw that particular line in the sand. The bishops demanded discretion and then abused the heck out of it at the expense of the children under their care. The obvious fix is to deny them that discretion.

But this raises church-state and child welfare issues that are not theoretical. For example, spurious child welfare investigations are a real harm, and the mandatory reporter system guarantees them. (They are not on the level of clerical pederasty, for sure, but those who have been through them do not trivialize them.) Trust is another casualty: If you know a father whose temper shows too much in the discipline of his children, would you encourage him to talk to his pastor? If his pastor is a mandatory reporter, you probably shouldn’t; maybe this is less of an issue for Roman Catholics, where priests are rarely family men, but it is an issue for Protestants.

I understand why a Catholic would draw that particular line in the sand. The bishops demanded discretion and then abused the heck out of it at the expense of the children under their care. The obvious fix is to deny them that discretion.

I assume this refers to more than simply the Sacrament of Confession?

I am not sure whether you are asking about the problem or the fix, but I don't think the confessional is involved in either case. As far as I know, most states exempt the confessional from their mandatory reporter laws but not pastoral advice.

I don't think base rates are super useful for painting values differences. I'm not familiar with the numbers one way or the other, so you're probably correct about them.

But unless we're talking 10:1, or something like that, it's not indicative of "X is a trait of Y, but not of Z" so much "X is a trait of Y and Z."

Point taken.

“Values differences” is an interesting phrase, and I think the way you used it here suggests some differences in deeper underlying ideas, but I can’t quite get at them yet. I’ll think on it.

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