site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   7647 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 19, 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.

What is the benefit of games portraying human demographics as if they were set in New York of today? You could argue that a game might go overboard with sex appeal and just look sillly, but I can't think of a game that would be improved with more of human races that did not develop it, being represented in it. In fact, the opposite is true: games that have no internal reason why racial diversity must be present in every village of 5 NPCs, still having it, for purely ideological reasons.

I do not share the visceral disgust for shades darker than white some people seem to have, and consider having them in the game to be generally an improvement in the same way having several sprites for weapons (that perform the same thing) would be.

It's a game. I don't care about unrealistic female frontline combatants or "historically accurate" racial representation (especially in the games that are not even set on Earth). I want to see many different things in it unless the game, or the particular part of it, is explicitly about everything being the same. I don't want a gaggle of generic anime waifus as a cast.

The problem is that because often diversity is done in bad faith - especially trans/blacks in historical setting people notice it. And often doesn't bring much to table.

If we're going to argue about bad faith then the chuds on xitter who are angry that a game isn't 100% white males by volume are just as guilty.

If we're going to argue about bad faith then the chuds on xitter who are angry that a game isn't 100% white males by volume are just as guilty.

I think you'll be hard-pressed to find any number of chuds arguing for that

I've found this group rating games as woke because they have a woman or a black person in a military game in Europe (or Europe-esque fantasy) more than once. I wish I was exaggerating. Some people are beyond parody.

Doesn't want women in a war game != Gets angry at any game that isn't 100% white men.

Similarly I'd bet good money that the chuds in that Steam group wouldn't like it if most of the characters in recent indie hit game Dressmaker were male.

And they'd be some of the first to complain if Capcom decided to do a remake of Resident Evil 5 and made Sheva (a black woman) ugly and/or made all of the zombies white (the game takes place in Africa). They likely would have made a similar stink if the Resident Evil 4 remake had made the rural Spaniard villager zombies into a racially diverse group of zombies (they already complained about them changing some of the lines, like Luis's line about Ashley's "ballistics").

There's some actual nuance and reasoning behind chud opposition to this stuff, not just kneejerk "anything not white or not male bad". I'm sure you could find a very small number of chuds that outright hate anything not white and male motivated by pure racism and sexism, but they are few and far between.

Simplistic dismissals like yours basically just come across as the whole "leftist discourse is pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible" meme.

And they'd be some of the first to complain if Capcom decided to do a remake of Resident Evil 5 and made Sheva (a black woman) ugly and/or made all of the zombies white (the game takes place in Africa).

They would never do that, it'd be completely counter to their ideological vector, but more importantly I highly doubt that chuds would complain too much about uglification of a non-white/asian character. Were it to happen, I'd expect the response to be mostly tongue-in-cheek commentary praising the game's increased realism.

Similarly I'd bet good money that the chuds in that Steam group wouldn't like it if most of the characters in recent indie hit game Dressmaker were male.

I again doubt that a.) this would ever happen and b.) chuds would be up in arms about Dressmaker being full of crossdressers, at least not nearly to the extent of their ire towards women in masculine contexts. This is because everyone perceives masculine occupations as cool and important and feminine occupations as lame and frivolous; the universality of this sentiment is seen in how woke pushes women into male fields and rarely/never the other way around. The debate is over whether this is due to amenable social values or an inherently malformed nature, and I can't blame woke too much for pushing the former view.

This is because everyone perceives masculine occupations as cool and important

Some male occupations.

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