site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   3468 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 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.

Her sex was taken for granted, taken advantage of, but we do not punish that, not when it's Cornell frat bros, not when it's fuckboy ghosters, not when it's long-term live-in boyfriends who won't fucking propose.

The rage is over men's, as a collective, perceived ability to dodge consequences for sex.

I liked your post, but this is the issue. Is sex transactional or performative? If anything, the transactional understanding of sex made the Seven treat Doe the way they did: if sex is a way of transferring value from one participant to the other(s, in this case), then Doe is a sucker who was led around.

The way you defeat this is by treating sex as something that produces value for all participants. You don't have sex to get your boyfriend to commit, you don't have sex to get invited to the next party, you don't have sex to gain status.

Then why did she have all that sex? Just for the love of the game?

Yes! Don't have sex for a reason, have it for the sake of it. You don't bring a homemade frozen lasagna to a new mother because you want her to owe you a favor or because you want others to speak well of you or because it's your duty as another woman. You do it because it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling inside. If it doesn't - you don't have to bake anything, she can DoorDash whatever she wants.

High-quality rebuttal.

Is sex transactional or performative?

Neither - it is relational. Sex exists in a relationship between two parties, much like a fishing trip exists in a relationship between two buddies. This means that the rules around sex are in fact reifying the rules of the relationship. Obviously the sex, like the fishing trip, is fun; but you're expected to bring adequate beer, or take turns doing so, not scare the fish, be suitably congratulatory and never salty if your buddy gets the bigger fish (even if he does it every time!), etc. And that bears out an underlying relationship of mutual respect and consideration. For sex, I of course think that the most appropriate relationship is a loving and committed one, but I understand that it doesn't have to be, and that it's conceivable that the underlying relationship the woman wanted to have was "you bring the drugs, I bring my body, we all have a good time and are nice to each other after." Violating that relationship is the cause for this anger, as a kind of disrespect.

You don't bring a homemade frozen lasagna to a new mother because you want her to owe you a favor or because you want others to speak well of you or because it's your duty as another woman. You do it because it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling inside.

I disagree, and would say that "warm fuzzy feelings" are a bad motivation for such things. Obviously the bulk of my interactions with my family are warm and fuzzy, and I do like said feelings, but my most significant obligations come from times when I am NOT feeling warm and fuzzy, e.g. when I am arguing with my wife or the kid is screaming and I'm bone-tired, and despite all of that I need to do what it takes to restore the harmony of the household. Doing things in warm and fuzzy mode is great, but the most important characteristic of a ship is how it holds up in a storm. No, the motivation should be that you feel a personal loyalty to the relationship you are trying to preserve and that you understand that your actions are important to that relationship - this is the durable motivation in such a case.

It's fair to say that sex is almost never transactional for men whereas for the average woman it's more the norm and not the exception.

As long as it's not explicitly transactional, we'll continue to have cases like this one.

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