site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   32831 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 20, 2023

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.

15
Top Bottom New Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

People who are married, want kids, and are trying for them - I have no problem there.

I realise I came on strong, but do the people suggesting how to fix the 'fertility problem' not realise who they sound like?

The Taliban. You are the Taliban. Stop women going to school. Train girls that their duties are to be good wives and mothers, and not outside the home. Discourage women from trying to step outside the home. Some of the wilder suggestions that women should be under the authority of their fathers and not allowed their own choice in mates, because women make bad decisions about wanting only the alpha males (or whatever).

You at least dangle economic advantage for being parents as the carrot, but there's plenty of stick there. I wanted to point out would men accept such restrictions? And if not, why think that women would? And that it takes two to tango, it was both sexes got us to the point where we are now, and it's all very well for men to talk about women not wanting to settle for Mr. Okay, to get married early, and to start having a lot of kids (though nowadays apparently four counts as "a lot"), when they're single/childless themselves.

Mote and beam, people. That's what I meant. I want marriage and motherhood to be restored to a place of respect, because I think both feminism and the views expressed often in these discussions that woman are leeches (either they don't want to marry, or a man is a fool to marry because the woman will divorce him and strip him of all he has earned) has helped destroy the idea of marriage and parenthood for both sexes.

You won't fix it by trying to shackle women to the kitchen sink, if men aren't willing to step up and take the same medicine of early marriage and early fatherhood.

You won't fix it by trying to shackle women to the kitchen sink, if men aren't willing to step up and take the same medicine of early marriage and early fatherhood.

I still am confused by your thought process. You think there are hordes of men unwilling to marry in their early 20s a girl who went to school with him either HS or college? The stats all say that 21 year old apprentice carpenter Joe can't even get a date with 21 year old hair stylist Jane. Instead she exclusively dates 28 year old attorneys in the top 10% of attractiveness, despite being average looking herself. Those 28 year old attorneys juggle 15 Janes up till Jane turns 31, then he marries 28 year old attorney and a 9.5/10 Jill and Jane is looking around wondering what went wrong. Meanwhile Joe has gone through 10 years of never getting a date.

I'm sure the Taliban are more than willing to administer that medicine, so your accusation doesn't hold up.

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