site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6d ago (text post)   19579 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 20, 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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If Penelope was much older than 40 then it wouldn't make sense for her to have so many suitors.

Typically when this is acknowledged it's explained in one of two ways:

  1. People lasted longer then, among the heroes it wouldn't be unusual for her to still be beautiful and fertile at 40 or 50

  2. This is precisely what makes the suitors evil, that Penelope is old/infertile, their intention is purely negative, to marry her and become king of Ithaca, but not to produce anything.

People lasted longer then, among the heroes it wouldn't be unusual for her to still be beautiful and fertile at 40 or 50

What is the mechanism of action here? They didn't have sunscreen or dentists

The mechanism would be that it was in the Mythical Heroic Age between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age.

Olive oil.

They didn't have sunscreen or dentists

Dentists aren't as important when tooth decay is almost a non-issue due to the limited quantities of sugar in one's diet.

Magic? Idk similar to whatever mechanism by which the heroes in the Iliad frequently toss large stones at each other "such as would take five men to lift in these degenerate times."

It's pretty well attested in mythology from China to Israel that the earlier generations of humans were longer lived and generally better than the modern breed.

The reason for this belief is particularly funny in hindsight. The Ancient Greeks had enough rudimentary archaeology to know that the civilisation whose ruins they were building in used bronze for metal tools and weapons by default. Now bronze is a lot more expensive than iron, so the Greeks naturally thought that a society that routinely used bronze must be richer than one which normally uses iron - rather than the truth, which is that they lacked iron smelting technology, and therefore had a lot less metal altogether because if they couldn't afford bronze they went without. So once you have established that you are living in the Iron Age, which is poorer than the lost Bronze Age, you assume that humanity is in decline and the Bronze Age was preceded by a Silver Age and a Golden Age when gods walked among us.

Whereas actually humanity was on the ascendent, and the Bronze Age was preceded by the Stone Age.

Weird, I haven't seen an unreconstructed "Ancient people's believed myths because they were just so fucking stupid" just-so story in the wild in a long time. Because that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Alternatively you have the "Greek Dark Ages" explanation, that there was a distinct and observable reduction in level of organization and civilization in Greece between the collapse of the Mycenaeans and the rise of the Polis, and that the myths stem from shepherds living among ruins they couldn't build, seeing script they couldn't read or write, knowing these kings fought wars with chariots.

Or the Jungian Ishmael explanation, that the universal myths of Golden Ages and great long-lived heroes of the past are archetypal stories of the distinct downshift in health, lifespan, and quality of life that resulted from the shift to agriculture. It is agricultural humanity's preserved ancestral memory of older nomadic peoples who were taller, stronger, tougher, and longer lived than the early agriculturalists.

Or you could just say that nostalgia for a lost golden age is a universal of human society, present even in those times and places that we call Golden Ages now, and the narrative of infinite human progress is an oddity of the Enlightenment period lasting until WWI, briefly lit and quickly extinguished.

But no, it's definitely just a weird quirk of metallurgy and the myths are stupid because ancient humans were stupid.

Or the Jungian Ishmael explanation

I prefer to think that the collective unconscious is accurately remembering Atlantis.

Oh neat I didn't know that - thanks for sharing

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