site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   2378 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for August 21, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Since when has "people want to do thing" ever been a guarantee of "thing is legal?" People want to steal stuff, stealing stuff is illegal. People want to be violent, violence is illegal. People want to do cocaine, cocaine is illegal.

We make things illegal because they have negative externalities and harm people, not because people don't want to do them.

People want to steal stuff, stealing stuff is illegal. People want to be violent, violence is illegal. People want to do cocaine, cocaine is illegal.

Not a majority of people...

Since when has "people want to do thing" ever been a guarantee of "thing is legal?"

When you live in a democracy, if 51% of people want something to be legal it will be legal.

We make things illegal because they have negative externalities and harm people, not because people don't want to do them.

Ah. So you think the majority of men might be «guilty ephebophiles». The problem is the age of consent is centered around Hamiltonian spite and not harms since being in a consensual relationship does not actually harm a teenager.

In fact I'll provide you with some example:

Stealing but the majority of voters want it: legal in the form of taxation and wealth redistribution.

Violence but the majority of voters want it: spanking children, state violence.

Harmful drug but the majority of voters want it: alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, amphetamine for children.

Harmful sex but the majority of voters want it: adultery, gay butt sex.

Did you just forget that adult women also get a vote, or what?

No, that seems consistent with my point? Unless you don't think women are people or a part of society.

Your whole point seems to be "men clearly don't generally want this that much, or it would be legal". But even at this facile level of reasoning about how social norms and democracy work, women are in fact half of society and the electorate.

Good point. So your model is what exactly? All or almost all men are ephebophiles, and all or almost all women oppose this? What percent do you think? I just haven't seen strong evidence of sex polarization on this topic, in data, so I wasn't thinking of a massive gender effect size when reasoning.

Most men are ephebophiles, some women oppose this out of naked self-interest, most women oppose it out of a tendency towards groupthink, women have extreme social leverage over men, and there's a baptists-and-bootleggers coalition between feminists in the muck of the groupthink and conservative parents who have no personal interest in finding a partner but do have an interest in marginally protecting their daughters' chastity.

How do you know these things? Interesting hypotheses, although I have seen data to the contrary ... in particular I have seen data indicating most men prefer women over 20. More interesting to me is your model of woman's social leverage and groupthinking. What are you basing that on? You sound very sure of yourself there with all these details. How do you know these things? It sounds like a compelling model to me, basically that the age of consent is high because of spiteful women and bad parents. The groupthink part could be correct but I want to be careful about not assuming too much and making excuses for people's actions. Ultimately each individual is responsible for their own beliefs and actions. While they will be influenced by the input of others, this is only ever partial, and they are still responsible for how they respond to peer influence. And furthermore the average direction of peer influence should precede peer influence, naturally.

Most data I'm familiar with on female attractiveness shows a peak in the mid-teens, despite a strong social desirability bias to the contrary (which I think readily explains the minority of exceptions). Moreover the historic and current reasoning behind the age of consent is well-documented; you can just go out and look at what rhetoric is raised in its defense, who supports it and why. Your model, conversely, is completely alien to me; I'm not sure how one winds up imagining a world where men selected an age of consent based on what they find attractive.

More comments

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