site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   6446 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.

The disinvitation read to me like "Look, the last time you came to a party, you got so wasted you ended up doing ket and fucking seven guys, maybe this is not the best way for you to have fun". Then she got offended and ran off with "I was raped" to get her own back on them.

It did get out of control, but part of that was a consequence of "willingly got drunk and high and agreed to things that escalated".

Thé disinvite was at the request of her sorority, which was worried about their reputation. Sorority sisters are not supposed to do groupsex. It was probably also an attempt to cover the frat’s rear end.

Seems pretty obvious the interactions were going to be awkward when you get a bunch of people with various levels of affection for each other into a social setting after they've done a drug-fueled orgy together. And anyone else who knows about it is going to be watching to see if they decide to repeat the performance and sneak in themselves or drag their own SO away from them to make sure they don't get pulled in.

And then the looming likelihood of some attendee being like "YO KYLE IS THIS GIRL WHO SNORTED KEY OFF YOUR JUNK?" and triggering a scene.

As someone who hosted various parties at my house, WAY less raucous than a college frat, you always have to keep that calculation running in the back of your head "If X shows up, will they get offended if Y is also there, and if Y isn't there will X start talking about Y behind their back and because Z is friends with both of them do I have to do damage control if I disinvite one or both of them?"

So the sometimes easiest answer is to to disinvite the one you judge as the most likely source of problem and, if they're a reasonable person, have the apologetic discussion with them later. I didn't have to do that often (once, maybe?) but plenty of drama happens behind the scenes that I simply wasn't cued into and got informed of after the fact.

If true, that’s lowkey pretty funny: that Lucy’s sorority sisters couldn’t muster up the courage to thot-patrol her for overstepping the bounds of acceptable sororistute behavior, so they had to outsource being a meanie to the fraternity president.

Also funny is that in an alternate universe where Craig was allowed to attend the Halloween party, prance around in a slutty costume for a few hours before snorting some ketamine off cock and fucking and sucking some number of Chi Phi bros, we would have never heard of Lucy Craig, nor the Cornell 7, and Delta Delta Delta would have one less “Tri Delt? Who hasn’t” data point against them. Streisand Effect: Multiverse edition.

Also funny is that in an alternate universe where Craig was allowed to attend the Halloween party, prance around in a slutty costume for a few hours before snorting some ketamine off cock and fucking and sucking some number of Chi Phi bros

I read this without remembering that Craig was her surname, and thought, well, that probably would have caused a different kind of drama.

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