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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Last week, in its dogged commitment to a free and open internet, the UK has instituted a criminal prohibition on certain pornography in England and Wales. It is now a criminal offense to view or possess pornography that depicts "strangulation" including choking or "face sitting", incest including depictions of step siblings, and any depictions of underage roleplay. The penalty for viewing or possessing any of these categories is a prison sentence that ranges from 2-3 years. Publication of these materials has a punishment of up to 5 years in prison.
Before a conservative cheered the prohibition of pornographic materials as a buttress against the immorality of modernity I'd remind him it is worth keeping in mind the context. The UK has been on a tear the past couple decades when it comes to regulating the internet. These efforts did not go without results, culminating most recently in the Online Safety Act of 2023 which pushed an age-verification regime. The OSA is not limited to porn sites to ban minors, but also potentially hits app stores, vendors, payment intermediaries, and more that extends the tendrils of the state into the internet.
Feminists and Labour politicians who hate violence against women, think-of-the-children conservatives, Christian organizations, and Ofcom the regulatory agency which, surprisingly, tends to voice support for more regulations-- what do these constituencies all have in common? It's not the weirdest coalition to lock arms in solidarity, but it's strange bedfellows. Public choice theory stays winning. Many are saying.
I can't claim abstinence, but I am not a big fan of porn. I don't think productions involving toasters are a social good and children should not watch porn. However, what I suspect laws like this to be in practice is to function as a carve out for a censorious state with neurotic apparatchiks to punch up criminal charges whenever they feel like. The next time Tommy Robinson gets picked up for violence they can hit him with the lude pornography laws. There will be no reduction of Violence Against Women when so many report sexual choking as consensual and pleasurable.
If you peruse internet commentary on the Crime and Policing Act 2026 you will find a lot of people who agree with me. From reddit to X, everyone has criticisms that this is selective or ineffective. If you stopped there you wouldn't know that some surveys indicate the majority of Brits support the ban, if not the criminalization. To properly do this experiment Brits must go full bore with social taboos, reverse the sexual revolution, and enforce criminal statutes to that effect. Reinstitute sodomy laws. The cowards will never.
Counterpoint: not all, or not even most subcultures enabled by the internet normalize toaster-fucking or glorify anorexia.
In ages past, the choices for most were basically to adapt your behavior to the mainstream of whatever puritanical cult ran your community (which worked great if your kinks were missionary sex and churchgoing, but really capped your life satisfaction otherwise), or you tried to risk becoming an outcast by trying to find a subgroup with your interests. Even if your specific interests were just obscure rather than forbidden, good luck finding anyone who shares your niche interest.
Sure, before the internet some were living in big cities which covered a lot of niche interests, and most Westerners had access to libraries and the postal service. But for the ability to form arbitrary communities with billions of other people came with the internet.
Sometimes, these communities are terrible for their members or society, but often they are very helpful as well. Judgement differs by individual. In free societies, there is no community tsar who decides if a bunch of people are allowed to associate over their niche interest. Instead, they are allowed by default, though specific interests might still be restricted by law.
As someone with an anthropological interest in niche subcultures and oddities I do appreciate this. The fact there are grown men who are into soiling themselves in diapers is like that of a humorous freakshow. The concern I have is not for the bearded lady who found her people in a community of carnies. This must have been better for her than life as a complete outcast. My concern is that I doubt the bearded lady would have recommended the average person follow her path, and today I think there are far more average people who, without exposure, would otherwise find paths to live within the bounds of normal interests. They would find average communities for average people with an average chance of happiness and fulfillment if they didn't get stuck on the idea of toasterfucking.
Subcultures are great as refuges or islands, but normalizing them defeats their purpose (which destroys them) and they are by design not load bearing for something larger. For the outcast, the true freak, there is no other option but to live with themselves and find their people. I don't think it should be illegal to choose to indulge odd fetishes or attend the odd fetish convention, it is a freedom that probably carries a cost for individuals, our society, and culture.
I just want better-defined standards for public spaces. Took my kids to an amusement park recently and there was a group of five extremely obese adults dressed like giant babies, in diapers, trans colors and scarves everywhere.
I still don't know how to answer the questions my kids asked. But I think in my grandfather's day this sort of thing would not have stood, and I don't think we're better off having got here from there.
Am I in favor of niche spaces for aberrant people to pursue whatever it is they're on about? Mostly, yeah, and I think that sort of thing is important, especially so that the next generation of functional adults can flirt with it a bit in youth and come to understand for themselves why we don't tolerate it more generally.
But I also want to be able to take my family out without seeing that, and I'm not going to feel guilty about it.
Wait really?
Like in Texas there are places you can go to see grownups dressed like babies and acting out fetishes(gay pride parades, etc). They’re not beaten by the police or arrested. But six flags does not have gay pride behavior on a daily basis. It has it occasionally I am sûre. But I’ve never seen it- because I do not take my children to places currently hosting gay pride events(or drag queen events etc), nor do I have any desire to go myself.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link