site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   18776 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 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.

That indeed sometimes happens, as I lampshaded with my consideration of "men exaggerating." What also happens is men hating on the experiences of other men to protect their own egos and the Wonderfulness of women.

Sneer noted, but I am neither jealous of your sexual experiences nor trying to protect the Wonderfulness of women. You are kind of like early Kulak, in that I am not sure how seriously to take you and whether you are just playing a character in preparation for taking your act on the road (to Twitter).

I'm aware of such white-washing attempts to salvage women's rape fantasies, even if the white-washed version still lies outside the Overton window in popular discourse.

I don't think the "white-washed version" (that women fantasize about being dominated and ravished by a man they were already attracted to) is outside the Overton window in popular discourse. It is outside the range of acceptable discourse in feminist circles, but we weren't talking about those, were we? The Rhett Butler/Scarlett Ohara staircase scene is something everyone instinctively understands even if feminists call it rape.

...fantasize about it so strongly and frequently that they admit it in a study. I don't doubt there's a non-zero number of women who don't have rape fantasies. However, seeing as light-BDSM is well, lighter, than rape—the 31% to 62% is a floor for the proportion of women who are turned on by light-BDSM (or heavier).

I don't know what the actual percentage is and how each individual woman would qualify what she is turned on by. What I am disputing is the extrapolation you are making, from "most women like being dominated and get turned on by a little rough play" to "women like being raped."

It's not a serious question at all, just a loaded one to smuggle in "whine" and "yourself facing charges" as if guilt is presupposed and any defense unmerited and illegitimate.

No, it was a serious question. Granted, I don't think you're serious, and no, I don't believe your claims that you go straight for choking, spitting and smacking and every woman likes it.

Serious question: if you kissed some woman who turned out to be very much not into that, what would you do? Whine about how bitches lie and entrap men when you find yourself facing charges?

Sure, I'll give you a serious answer. If I am kissing a woman who didn't want to be kissed, I've made a pretty serious error in judgment. Supposing I tried the Humphrey Bogart "forceful kiss" and miscalculated, if I were then facing charges, either I done fucked up (how do you try to a kiss a woman who is so not into it that she presses charges?) or I should stay away from BPD chicks. Would I whine about it? Well, I'd probably feel pretty disgruntled about trying to stick my dick in crazy and it backfiring, but you can simultaneously acknowledge that women aren't all wonderful and also that you should probably be pretty sure someone you kiss (or choke or spit on or beat) will be into 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