site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2mo ago (text post)   26781 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 13, 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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

On the contrary, empirically, treating them as crazy and trying to make them not-trans makes them miserable and doesn't stop them from thinking they're trans, while treating them as their preferred gender and allowing them to medically transition lets most of them lead happy, fulfilling lives. The question of whether they are their preferred gender or should merely be treated as if they were is academic.

I've yet to see any rigorous studies showing that transition is helpful in reducing objective measurements like suicide, criminality, etc .

In any case the happiness of the trans is orthogonal to whether they are delusional, and the appropriate measures society takes to limiting the delusional population from committing acts of violence.

That is not true, see elsewhere in this very thread that transition increases psychiatric morbidity. See also the 41% suicide rate of transitioners, which is not a sign of a mentally healthy population on average(after all, most depressives manage not to kill themselves).

See also the 41% suicide rate of transitioners

I will have to push back on this one. My understanding is that this figure originated in an informal survey in which they asked trans people if they had ever attempted suicide (a heterogeneous category which includes hanging oneself and being interrupted, to overdosing on sleeping pills but fully expecting to be found i.e. "cries for help"). I don't think the survey separated out people who had medically transitioned from those who had not.

My understanding is that the suicide rate among trans people is not hugely different from the general population.

That is not true, see elsewhere in this very thread that transition increases psychiatric morbidity.

Reading the study now. I'll respond to the original post later.

See also the 41% suicide rate of transitioners, which is not a sign of a mentally healthy population on average(after all, most depressives manage not to kill themselves).

Well, on this one, you're blatantly wrong. First of all, it's a suicide attempt rate. Secondly, it's for all trans people, not just transitioners – including those who weren't able or allowed to transition, due to social or other circumstances. Also, the survey this figure comes from was conducted in 2011; a lot has changed in the meantime.

On the contrary, there seems to be little to no evidence for this claim. Even Chase Strangio had to admit at the Supreme Court that there was no evidence that transitioning improved mental health outcomes.

Source?

Here.

Wow, what a cancerous website.

"What I think that is referring to is there is no evidence in the studies," Strangio replied, "that this treatment reduces completed suicide, and the reason for that is completed suicide, thankfully, and admittedly, is rare, and we're talking about a very small population of individuals with studies that don't necessarily have completed suicides within them. However, there are multiple studies, long-term, longitudinal studies, that do show that there is a reduction in suicidality, which I think is a positive outcome to this treatment."

So, there is evidence it does improve mental health (suicidality being a component thereof), just no evidence it reduces the rate of successful suicides. You will note both my comment and yours talked about mental health, not the rate of successful suicides, which, as Strangio noted, are rare.

Can you link one of those studies that isn't hopelessly confounded, such as by taking massive losses to follow-ups?

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