site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   25584 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 7, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sure enough, she did try killing herself.

No she didn't. She's a nurse who made some cat scratches across the road and then threw herself out of a second floor window. Very obviously a fake attempt to provide cover for her triple homicide. The only thing she didn't plan was actually hurting herself in the fall.

Is it not reasonable that because her home was two stories, she just flung herself out of the highest window she had immediate access to?

Seems hard to blame her for not jumping out of a four story or eight story window like you say when she had no access to that.

That doesn't really matter. If she had easy access to a much higher window and chose the 2nd floor one, then that would be strong evidence of faking it. But you can find her address easily. The house is literally on Zillow. The only second floor windows I see drop onto grass. I literally used to jump out of those for fun when I was a kid.

The point is, that drop is rather implausible as a method of suicide when you could have just turned your knife 90 degrees, like most adults and damn sure every nurse knows.

The house is literally on Zillow.

I wonder what the discount (premium?) on a murder house is.

But yes, the window to the lawn was her way for suicide? As a nurse she surely could have gotten something to inject or why not some old fashioned hanging.

But yes, the window to the lawn was her way for suicide?

It had to have been, right? The only other windows are over top of that first floor roof.

We briefly rented a murder house growing up. It was considerably under the going rate at the time - cheap enough that we could afford to live there.

People survive falls from that high often enough. It’s doesn’t usually result in death, and doesn’t even always result in paralysis. It’s seems to assume a lot that a person who was a nurse and knows how to actually kill herself is just not doing that well, especially given that a lot of common household chemicals could easily be fatal. Heck, I’d be willing to bet an OD of the right drugs in the average medicine cabinet would be pretty lethal, especially in combination.

I have no firm opinion as to whether she intended to survive, but the argument in your comment seems self-contradictory. Surely her medical expertise wasn't worth that much if she failed to foresee that the fall could paralyze her.

Four story fall seems to be the 50% fatality point. Eight story fall is 90%. I would guess that a two story fall has a fatality rate well below 25%. The bigger flag is the wrist-slitting. She used a huge kitchen knife and managed to only give herself minor wounds going the wrong way. You'd think that if a nurse knows anything, it's where the wrist veins are.

I would hazard a guess that the majority of healthcare workers have encountered a patient who experienced life altering injury, paralysis, and even death from a fall of two stories or less.

It's not certain, but it can easily and obviously be quite bad.

She used a huge kitchen knife and managed to only give herself minor wounds going the wrong way.

Side to side for attention, up and down for results. And honestly, yeah, that's a lot more damning than anything else as a consequence (and reflects even more poorly on a jury that had other persons with the same kind of medical expertise).

One might argue that slashing yourself that way requires you to do something actively painful to yourself, while more passive methods are arguably preferred since the invocation of potential energy (gravitational, chemical) or toxicity doesn't actually hurt by themselves.

But the fact remains that she injured herself in the "the adults will know I was serious" way, not the way that actually kills you; one would expect an economy of pain commensurate with actual results from someone who was serious about it working.

It's not like she can argue she didn't consider asphyxiation as a method, of course.

She jumped from a second story window, right? Breaking a spine from a second-story window jump seems unusual to me – although I am not sure if it was a lawn or, say, concrete, and exactly how high it was, and exactly how she jumped. I think most people in their thirties could probably walk away from a 15-foot jump onto soft soil. A 20-foot jump onto concrete is a different story.

How did she land is the bigger variable, I think.

Yeah even onto concrete it seems like a "correct" landing would preserve your spine.

I think the ground was frozen so acted like concrete

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