site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   18182 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

when discussing their "boobs" (the word I hear deployed most often, though maybe that is a generational thing)

This is something I've thought about a lot and talked about it with my wife. I'm very surprised how every woman I've been with has always talked about their "boobs". And my wife even refers to them primarily as boobs when talking about anatomy with my daughter. The first time I heard her say this to my daughter, I said, "please, let's use the correct term: gazongas".

Prior to dating my first real girlfriend and hearing her always refer to them as boobs, I thought that the "correct" thing to call them were breasts. I thought of boobs in the exact same category as tits, melons, and funbags.

But every woman I've been with has basically always called them boobs, and never breasts, unless they're talking to a doctor - they consider breasts to just be a clinical term. Personally, though, I see no real reason why tits should be considered crass, but boobs should be considered the correct casual language.

As for generational effects, at least my wife claims that her mom always said boobs, too.

Personally, though, I see no real reason why tits should be considered crass, but boobs should be considered the correct casual language.

Bouba(booba?)/kiki effect. "Tits" sounds harsh and therefore rude in a way that "boobs" does not.

(Generally, euphonics seems to be one of those elements of language taboos that divide people harshly: some find it obvious that some words are intrinsically offensive due to how they sound, while some find the idea to be insane and suspect the former must be arguing in bad faith. I remember having an argument here long ago about whether "troon" should be considered a neutral term for the trans, with my interlocutor insisting that the it's only disapproved because leftists don't want to let their enemies have words for things.)

whether "troon" should be considered a neutral term for the trans

It is deliberately an insult, right? Not a neutral alternative pronunciation of "trans".

A while back someone here used it as a generic term for "to go crazy and become deranged". Taking the opposite view that it happens to apply to trans people but could be used to smear anyone the writer thinks is crazy.

Generally I'd say that in English, the more germanic/Old-English something sounds, the earthier and rawer the tone. The more Romantic, the more austere and polite.

Thus troons/trans, cunt/vagina, shit/excrete, fuck/copulate, etc. Nigger/negro have the same root I know, but at least in the modern day the Latin niger is usually pronounced with i-as-in-eye, and a soft g. That may be to stop it sounding less like the slur, of course.

Generally I'd say that in English, the more germanic/Old-English something sounds, the earthier and rawer the tone. The more Romantic, the more austere and polite

How much of that is due to the romance influence being concentrated in the upper classes thanks to the Norman invasion?

Much of it, and of course because for 400 years classical education has been an indicator of the upper classes. I was being descriptive, not prescriptive.

Isn't cunt Latinate too? I think it's really more about the the sound itself; out of my quick-and-dirty list of similar slurs, few are actually Germanic (what words with that pattern even are, apart from moon?).

You would know better than I, I'm afraid, but I'm interested to learn.

I think it's really more about the the sound itself

I considered that but assumed that the association was Germanic/Anglo -> short and harsh (German tends to sound harsh to English ears) not the other way round. It's quite possible I was mistaken, and the 'nigger' pair backs up your hypothesis since obviously they are both latinate.

but at least in the modern day the Latin niger is usually pronounced with i-as-in-eye, and a soft g.

Who pronounces it this way? The classical way is /niger/, the Vatican way is /nidʒer/, if I'm not mistaken.

Perhaps nobody. I am a poor linguist. I was thinking of e.g. Nigerian.

Ah, I was thinking of Gaius Pescennius Niger.

“Troon” simply is a slur, I don’t think there’s any ambiguity there. Has nothing to do with phonetics. It’s just… that’s what it is. I don’t have a complete theory of how a word becomes a slur or what makes a word a slur, but, we can recognize them when we see them.

“Trans person” seems to work perfectly fine to me as a neutral term.

I generally say "transexual" since I think it's stupid that transgender replaced it for no real reason other than (IMO) to create more hoops for people to jump through.

I don't think you need a complete theory to recognise patterns and the effect they have on listeners. Troon works as a slur for the same reasons coon, goon and loon do, octoroon got its ending, and why the boon part of baboon is such a staple in racist terminology (the only other one that probably comes close is "chimp", with gorillas, orangutans, bonobos, gibbons and all the other well-known primates basically being unheard of), and the long tubular-mouth oo in the middle might well be a human universal gesture of mockery.

(Even the memey zoomer-coomer-doomer series of neologisms is generally at least somewhat mocking. Noob also established itself globally with that particular pronunciation, in defiance of the normal English -oo-/-yoo- distribution.)

FWIW I've heard black women called "sheboons" on 4chan for years now and my dumb brain didn't piece together thst it was derived from baboon until reading your post.

I see no real reason why tits should be considered crass

Tits/teats are animal parts. (So are 'breasts' with a side of medical textbook; men already understand this re: 'penis'.)

Tits are for cows (and before you say 'but it's not meant like that', consider what 'cowtits' means).
Chickens have breasts.

Humans have boobs. Uniquely, the word 'looks like' the object.

(For the others, 'melons' is ambiguous and bears a mandate on size; 'funbags' does that and is fundamentally unserious, as are 'gazongas' [and 'vajayjay']. 'Boobs' and 'tits' have diminutives these words lack.)

Tits/teats are animal parts.

Tits are a type of bird.

As is the booby.

So are boobies.

I enjoy bird watching over a drink in my local bar. I am particularly pleased to see great tits.

Tits was a serious mathematician.

I'm afraid I'm unfamiliar with the term cowtits.

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