site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8mo ago (text post)   28935 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 7, 2023

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.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Given that obesity is sorta culture war related and in the news a lot, I figured this story would be relevant: Weight-Loss Stocks Soar After Obesity-Drug Study Spurs Investor Frenzy

Weight-loss tied stocks jumped following the update with rival Eli Lilly & Co. surging 15% to a record high. A positive outlook in Lilly’s earnings report also helped fuel the climb. Viking Therapeutics Inc., a drug developer working on a treatment similar to Novo’s Wegovy, jumped 12%. And WW International Inc. — better known as Weight Watchers — which bought a telemedicine firm that prescribes obesity medications earlier this year, soared 13%.

Novo’s Wegovy showed a 20% reduction in heart issues compared to those getting a placebo in a closely watched study. The results cheered Wall Street bulls who called it a best-case scenario. Analysts saw the benefit extending the market for Wegovy as well as Lilly’s Mounjaro and possibly removing an obstacle in insurance reimbursement.

I am more convinced than ever that these drugs are not only the future of wright loss, but similar to Paxil, is also going to a part of culture too and another tool or crutch to mitigate the downsides of modernity, except instead of social anxiety , it's too much food. We're sorta collectively inflicted this on ourselves, as victims of our own success. The pendulum if progress has swung so far towards abundance that we need modern technology just to try to undo it.

crutch to mitigate the downsides of modernity, except instead of social anxiety

Of course, the drugs seem to work like shit compared to be an authentically mentally healthy human being. I expect that Wegovy and similar drugs will wind up similar on a number of dimensions. I genuinely cannot imagine preferring a lifetime of pill popping to just riding a bike.

Really? You can’t imagine why someone might prefer not to spend time on a bike?

Cardio is boring. I’m saying this as someone who grudgingly runs 3x a week anyway, because it is valuable. Much as I choose to drive instead of carrying my groceries, I’m not opposed to a technological solution.

Just curious. Why run 3x a week instead of lifting if you hate running? Many would argue that lifting has better health benefits, and is especially better for male aesthetics.

I have an elevated heart rate and don’t want to rely on beta blockers forever.

Also, my apartment complex has treadmills and free weights, but no squat rack. I miss that in particular.

If you have any recommendations for a free-weight program, I’m all ears.

Dr Mike had some DB exercises for the lower body in one of his latest videos.

Many would argue that lifting has better health benefits

Citation? Maybe I'm lifting wrong (too few reps with too much weight?) but I never get my heart rate up for long while doing it. IIRC exercise-elevated heart rate and breathing are what most directly translate to better cardiopulmonary health and stamina, which is what has the strongest effect on healthspan and lifespan.

There are many studies which conclude that strength, as measured by grip strength, is highly correlated with life span, even for individuals under age 60.

Here's a review: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20829298/

What's your HR when doing squats? I usually got to 80%+ of my max HR when doing 5 reps at my working weight. Now, I do lighter weights and still experience elevated HR, but not to the same level.

My general understanding is that resistance work alone is enough to get someone to a decent level of cardiovascular health. Is there a lifespan benefit to being 95th percentile in resting HR or VO-2 max as opposed to 80th percentile?

I'm not @netstack, but cardiovascular and resistance training are both necessary for ideal health and performance. Even someone that's beautifully sculpted will be fitter and healthier if they mix in some running, biking, or swimming. It only takes a couple hours per week to provide a large boost.

Yes, really, I genuinely can't imagine preferring a sedentary life to a life with some chosen sport. I chose biking because I like biking, but it sure doesn't have to be biking - go swimming, do a hard trail hike, roll on a ju-jitsu mat, do Crossfit, play soccer, just pick something and do it. I cannot imagine someone experiencing the joy of fitness and mastery in a sport and saying, "no, I am too busy getting knowledge". The extent of how weird I find it is that I basically just don't believe people and think it's excuse-making for sloth.

I cannot imagine someone experiencing the joy of fitness and mastery in a sport and saying, "no, I am too busy getting knowledge".

Finally lifting to a point where I can empathise with this and the issue is that the reward is the wrong way round. Assuming someone who is unfit and bad at sports, your main experience of exercise is as a mist of childhood pain and humiliation.

You have to go through that, spending quite a lot of time and money doing something boring and painful before you start getting a reward. And if you don’t have people to help correct your form and technique you might not even get a reward at all. So it’s very easy for people either to conclude it’s not worth it right from the start; or do it for a couple weeks, conclude it’s horrible and doesn’t work, then quit, telling all their friends not to bother.

Personally I blame it on PE. If we taught it like we taught other subjects, paying even the slightest attention to children’s abilities and actually trying to improve them over time, a lot more people would be a lot more active.

Personally I blame it on PE. If we taught it like we taught other subjects, paying even the slightest attention to children’s abilities and actually trying to improve them over time, a lot more people would be a lot more active.

For all that Mottizens complain about American public schooling, I'm surprised that American PE isn't criticized more. I won't say my experience was particularly bad, but I feel like gym class is quite possibly one of the biggest pain points in American childhood.

Not just American public schools. I went to a good school in the UK and the contrast between the high quality of the lessons and the low quality of the PE was pretty stark IMO. The PE wasn't shoddy, they spent lots of money on good facilities. But we used to call it Games rather than PE and I think that highlights the disconnect for me. It was intended to let the sporty children do well at sports and win prizes for the school. There was no real interest in improving children who were in the bottom half, or in physical health as such, and the exercise was very standardised. As a below-par child you learned very quickly how to fake being able to do 20 press-ups and stay on the parts of the team that didn't require lots of running around. If they had sat down with us and explained how you get stronger / fitter, and made any attempt to do progressive training, I think a lot of people could have had big improvements.

I try to go to the gym to run every other day (or every third day), and try to mix in some HIIT here and there as well.

I hate it so much even when it’s less than 10% of my waking hours. If I could be perfectly fit without exercise, sign me the fuck up.

I’m the same way. I’ve exercised now for a while, 3x a week, lift, reformer pilates, run, and I hate all of it. I have never enjoyed exercise, I have never enjoyed the gym, the most I can say is that I feel mildly satisfied after I’m done, the same way I do if I order a salad instead of a cheeseburger and fries, maybe.

I genuinely cannot imagine preferring a lifetime of pill popping to just riding a bike.

As someone currently using semaglutide, and having lost 40 lbs with it after around 10 years of trying to lose the weight, you are severely underestimating the variance in the willpower required for people to lose weight. Of-fucking-course the healthiest choice is to never have been fat in the first place, just like it's better to never start smoking cigarettes, but once you're addicted and fat, it makes no sense at all to insist on trying (and failing) to do it without help. Semaglutide helps you make better choices and dig yourself out of the hole, sure, it might not be healthy by itself (just like nicotine patches), but it sure as shit is healthier than having a 45lb plate strapped to your back all the time.

and dig yourself out of the hole

Are you out of the hole, though? I'd happily pay for 6 months of semaglutide to lose 20 pounds, if I expected the 20 pounds to stay off, but from what I've read it sounds like you basically have to continue taking semaglutide forever if you don't want your appetite and then your equilibrium weight to shoot right back up to its pre-intervention point.

It may be that "continue taking semaglutide forever" is still healthier than "stay 40 pounds overweight forever", though, I admit.

My strategy is a month of semaglutide on, followed by three or so months off, repeat. The cycles let me keep a six pack most of the year and at times of my choosing without having to deal with the psychological effects of a deep cut. The appetite suppression lasts maybe a month after cessation for me.

Of course, this is entirely vanity oriented, and I wouldn't claim it's at all healthy compared to the alternative. Though certainly better than the last weight loss drug I was on...

I am "out of the hole" in the sense that once you've lost all the weight, you can start eating at maintenance again, which is much easier than eating at a deep deficit. So pre-semaglutide my daily maintenance calories might have been like 3500, and I was eating at like 3600, very slowly gaining weight. During semaglutide I'm eating 2300, which is a very deep deficit, made much easier due to the appetite reduction. After semaglutide, my reduced body weight will push my maintenance calories at around 3000, which will be much easier to maintain, either with discipline or with low-dose semaglutide. I think that the state of being obese does some kind of permanent damage to appetite regulation, so that anyone who has ever been significantly overweight will basically need to be on some sort of permanent diet for the rest of their lives, and there's no scenario in which they eat "naturally" and don't gain all the weight back.

I don’t really understand the judgmental tone. Few on this forum would have a problem with using adderall to enhance performance or Lipitor to reduce blood pressure. How is this different?

I do have problems with those things and think fat shaming is the solution to the obesity crisis, not yet more drugs.

I don't respect Adderall use either. That's the point, I think people would be better off fixing what's wrong with them than patching over it with drugs.

This assumes that the model of drug assistance is min(peak natural ability, current ability + drugs assistance). The actual model is max(peak natural ability, current ability + drugs assistance) Both args to the function have domain 0-infinity.

The effects are additive.

Let's say you do focussed work 9 hours a day. Respectable by all means, more than most people, nothing to patch up. But if you really want whatsoever that focus is achieving, why not take Adderall and work 12?

If you are below baseline it's a patch, if you are above, it's a boost.

Everyone I know who took adderall for performance enhancement is insanely burned out mentally and is downright awful physically by their late 30s, just fyi. YMMV but look out.

Walter, I think, is drawing the comparison precisely because he doesn't think they are different.

Exercise doesn't seem to reduce weight by much, though of course it will make you healthier overall.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/upshot/to-lose-weight-eating-less-is-far-more-important-than-exercising-more.html

"Which is more important in an internal combustion engine? Oxygen or the flammable substance?"

It's diet and exercise. You have to have both. Together.

These pills won't make people healthier. They will make people feel better about themselves. They aren't weight loss drugs, they're NextGen antidepressants. Metabolic syndrome often does not present as visible obesity. Major stomach and liver issues can go undetected for years. People will start taking these drugs and remain at a lower body weight. Then, one day, they die suddenly and any autopsy performed with reveal superfluous amounts of visceral fat, a leaking stomach, and a liver close to non-function.

Physical fitness is, among many other things, an information feedback loop. If you are in bad shape, you have been making poor health decisions. Sometimes, this can be unavoidable (late nights during crunch time at work or school, what have you). But, mostly, it's a clear indication that you're making poor, poor choices. Using something that covers up the effects of these choices does nothing to alter that decision process. I'd wager that habitual users of Wegovy etc. probably will also habitually (ab)use other substances - alcohol, narcotics, sugar, social media. This is not a road to health.

Nobody is claiming that the pills make people healthier directly.

If you are in bad shape, you have been making poor health decisions.

You are of course, correct. That's the genius of semaglutide - it's a pill that doesn't improve your health, it's a pill that improves your decisions, that leads to measurable changes in behavior that lead in turn to better health.

Then, one day, they die suddenly and any autopsy performed with reveal superfluous amounts of visceral fat, a leaking stomach, and a liver close to non-function.

On what you base this prediction?

Not OP, but I won't be surprised if these new weight loss drugs are trumpeted for a couple of years, then we find complications of some sort with them (skinny-but-unhealthy sounds plausible) and have to memory hole them like the last half dozen wonder solutions we've been sold: Fen-phen and Ephedra both seemed promising in their times but had high incidences of adverse effects showing up later.

It's diet and exercise. You have to have both. Together.

You really don't, at least for weight loss. You can lose weight from diet alone by simply eating X fewer calories. You can't really lose weight from exercise alone unless you're exercising at pro athlete/olympian levels, exercise just doesn't really burn all that many calories.

exercise just doesn't really burn all that many calories.

It does burn calories, sometimes lots of calories. The problem is that your hunger levels increase to compensate for the calories you burn.

I know people constantly insist on this, but running 50 miles per week is actually a lot of calories and isn't even half of what pros are doing. When I ramp up from my typical 40 mile/week schedule to 70+ miles per week during marathon training cycles, I will either lose weight or make a deliberate choice to eat more simple carbs and keep weight. This is even easier in cycling, where long rides are easier to pull off consistently than long runs. Unsurprisingly, the extra ~600-1000 calories per day from exercise makes it much easier to maintain homeostatic calorie intake than what sedentary people would eat; I know this because maintaining my weight required much more conscious choices before I picked up endurance sports.

Exercise presumably helps make diets sustainable. If you want to cut a deficit of say 500 calories per day then cutting out a snack and exercise is one way to tackle it.

I'd wager that habitual users of Wegovy etc. probably will also habitually (ab)use other substances - alcohol, narcotics, sugar, social media. This is not a road to health.

Ozempic reduces alcohol cravings as well, so at least that will also be less of an issue:

https://neurosciencenews.com/ozempic-alcohol-addiction-23422/

Don't take any of those class of drugs. They really fuck with your head.

I don't doubt the science on how many calories cardio burns directly, but there must be something more to it. Why do people who do a lot of exercise just never seem to be obese? Where are all the avid gym goers with double chins? Does exercise also help regulate appetite or something?

The exceptions I can think of are ones where piling on muscle is worth it even if it comes with a lot of fat.

You haven’t met my dad. Obese, pre-diabetic, dad-gut, exercises at the YMCA daily, eats 3 meals a day.

Meanwhile, I don’t exercise and I’m his mirror image.

Yeah, a lot of older guys at the gym lift, run, swim, are ostensibly doing a lot of exercise but are also very fat.

Where are all the avid gym goers with double chins?

Have you never been to Planet Fitness? /s

But seriously, I agree with the explanations by @curious_straight_ca and @hydroacetylene: people that are fat usually don't enjoy exercise.

Why do people who do a lot of exercise just never seem to be obese?

Plenty are!

Several years ago I lost quite a bit of weight by tracking my calories. I made no changes to my exercise routine which had been stable for the previous six months or so and just made sure to keep average consumed calories around 2200 kcal (maintenance level for a person my age and height). I ended up having an average 1000 kcal daily deficit for months while losing around 25 kg overall, meaning I'd been exercising ~1000 kcal worth daily for many months prior to that while having obese BMI and without any weight loss.

Exercise alone really doesn't work for weight loss for most people because they just end up increasing the number of calories eaten without even realising it.

I don't doubt the science on how many calories cardio burns directly, but there must be something more to it. Why do people who do a lot of exercise just never seem to be obese? Where are all the avid gym goers with double chins?

Most likely the causation arrow goes the other way. Obese people don't exercise because it's difficult for them to do so.

Does exercise also help regulate appetite or something?

It does absolutely. It upregulates it. Meaning that those who exercise experience more hunger. If you burn 500 calories on your exercise bike, and respond to your body's natural hunger cues, you'll tend to eat 500 more calories of food. And if you lift weights, you'll tend to increase in weight.

Every bodybuilder will tell you that fitness is made in the gym but physiques are made in the kitchen. It's very difficult to exercise yourself lean, except for at the extremes.

Exercise has many benefits, but for diet matters more than exercise for maintaining a good physique.

I can attest from personal experience that when i take a couple weeks off from the gym junk food is more appealing and when I'm really pushing myself vegetables and lean protein are delicious

Yeah, I actually lost most of my weight from diet but it feels like my regimen was most consistent and sustainable when I was also exercising. Part of it was that early on it seemed to help me fast but I've adapted past that now.

But still, if I fall off the wagon on exercise I seem to fall off with other stuff like diet. Not sure if it's the direct or only cause (there's some interaction with sleep quality but that's a cycle) but still.

It's easier to do it all sometimes.

It might work the opposite direction- exercise is horrifically uncomfortable for fat people, so they don’t do it.

Right, maybe that discomfort is also the feedback by which people are motivated to stay in shape. If I go for a cycle and feel terrible, the cycling itself won't have done much for me but it will be a wake up call for me to cut down on smoking/drinking/gaining weight (or if I'm feeling lazy, a wake up call to quite cycling).

The feedback cycle is not fitting in my damn pants. I don’t need to waste half an hour on the treadmill to tell me that. I spend that time because I want to be healthier.

by which people are motivated to stay in shape

The people who feel that way are not the target demographic. You're not the target demographic.

They're already not in shape. They don't have something they fear to lose, that's the point. Because of rising childhood obesity they may never have been in shape enough to distinguish between 'normal' and 'wakeup call'

Honestly, given that - adults who never even developed basic coping mechanisms - I'd pump this shit into the water supply if it was safe.

Why do people who do a lot of exercise just never seem to be obese

Not necessarily the only explanation but - The kind of person who is willing to do something somewhat uncomfortable for health benefits is the kind of person who will both exercise and intentionally eat less.

I genuinely cannot imagine preferring a lifetime of pill popping to just riding a bike.

More time to do actually enjoyable things instead of faffing around on a child's toy?

So you're an obese person? I'll make sure to disregard everything you post from now on.

  • -20

It's been a while since your last warning, but given that this low effort snarl is even more antagonistic than the last one, I'm kicking you into the corner for a few days. Three day ban.

Fairly sure that's a false dichotomy there.

Why get some exercise and fresh air when I could be whacking it instead?

Or working on something meaningful, spending more time with partners and children, or any number of things.

Reclaiming unenjoyable exercise time would increase productivity and enjoyment of life.

I rode a bike last weekend with my wife and child. We rode with another family and their kids. Of course all those things go together.

Just doesn't seem as fun as laser tag.

To a childless young adults, very well might not.

Exercise with your partner and children.

I can't abide repetitive tasks no matter the company.

You won't be experiencing company of any kind for too long if you avoid exercise and fresh air.

Why are gymlets so vicious when people don't share their boring obsessions?

More comments

Bikes rock. I'm back into bike riding now that my kid has the strength for hills and longer rides.

I'm ride or die for biking.

instead of faffing around on a child's toy?

Is this a jab at the Europeans who cycle to work?

No, if I wanted to do that I would have talked about how ungainly it is to arrive at your destination sweaty and/or soaked from the elements.

I just don't consider bikes to be a serious transport option in general.

how ungainly it is to arrive at your destination sweaty

Ever heard of a shower? Most offices have them. Get up, put on your exercise gear, put your office clothes in your backpack, cycle into work, take a shower and put on your work clothes. You'll likely have cut a huge amount of time out of your commute, and the morning cycle is far more invigorating and refreshing than spending 30-60 minutes in a car or on public transport (and if you live in a warm climate, being stuck in a cramped bus or train during the morning rush hour will probably result in you getting hot and sweaty anyway).

Bikes are the perfect vehicle. A decent bike costs a few hundred bucks, max, and will last you for years. If cycling in a city, traffic won't impede your progress the way it would in a car or bus (or even a motorbike). Even an only moderately fit person can cover immense distances without exhausting themselves (I'm by no means an avid distance cyclist, but am confident I could cycle 100km tomorrow without any training and without exerting myself to any great degree). Calories are your fuel, so you aren't dependent on petrol/gas infrastructure. If so inclined, you can attach panniers or a trailer to your bike to allow you to bring possessions with you that are too big for a backpack. Certain kinds of bike can ride on effectively any terrain, so you aren't dependent on roads. Virtually all repairs and maintenance can be done by anyone after one day's training, unlike modern cars which are so complex that only specialists can repair them (at great expense to the owner). There's no additional cost in GHG emissions. Bicycles take up far less space than motor vehicles: there are bicycle parking centres in Amsterdam which can comfortably fit thousands of bicycles into a space which would accommodate a few hundred cars at most. They're vastly cheaper than cars (in addition to the smaller initial outlay noted above: almost all of the maintenance and upkeep can be done yourself with only one or two specialised tools, you don't need to buy petrol/gas, you don't need insurance). And best of all, the mere act of using one improves the health of the user along multiple metrics (heart rate, blood pressure, muscle mass, life expectancy etc.).

Your comment has inspired more contempt in me than any I've read on this site in months.

Ever heard of a shower? Most offices have them.

So now not only am I leaving even earlier to compensate for my MUCH slower method of transportation, I'm having to leave even earlier again so that I can... shower at work?! I'm really struggling to see what I'm gaining here!

Bikes are the perfect vehicle.

The hardest of disagrees. They're toys for children, and not suitable for serious adults. I like being able to do a full week's shop in one day. I like being able to just nip to IKEA and come back with a new standing mirror, or cabinet, or end table or whatever else without paying their extortionate delivery costs. I like air conditioning. I like playing music and jamming along to it with my partner. I like being able to make phone calls if I need to. Most importantly, I like not looking like an absolute fool. Wearing ugly lycra, or flattening my hair into a helmet, and ugh, sweating -- these things are not for me. To say nothing of how woefully bottom heavy and thunder thighed habitual cyclists become! And even though as you note, attaching a trailer to a bike is an option, the problem is it looks absolutely ridiculous! Like something out of the olden days! The image hit from being a cyclist would be totally insurmountable to me.

Trying to get bikes considered as a serious form of transport gives off the same vibes to me as trying to get hentai to be considered a serious art form. It's fine that you like that stuff, but stop trying to normalise it.

So now not only am I leaving even earlier to compensate for my MUCH slower method of transportation

Assuming you live in an urban centre, when factoring in traffic, cycling will often end up being faster than driving or taking public transport. It takes me an hour to get to my office via public transport, but only half an hour on a bike, and that's maintaining a gentle 12 km/h (not even fast enough to break a sweat, obviating the need for a shower).

I like being able to do a full week's shop in one day.

As I said, you can do this if you attach a trailer to your bike.

I like being able to just nip to IKEA and come back

Obviously there are circumstances in which cars are preferable to bikes, but seriously - how often do you go to IKEA? I can't imagine it's more than once a month.

I like being able to make phone calls if I need to.

It isn't remotely difficult to cycle a bike with one hand and operate your phone with the other. I do it all the time.

Most importantly, I like not looking like an absolute fool. Wearing ugly lycra, or flattening my hair into a helmet, and ugh, sweating -- these things are not for me. To say nothing of how woefully bottom heavy and thunder thighed habitual cyclists become! And even though as you note, attaching a trailer to a bike is an option, the problem is it looks absolutely ridiculous!

I must say, it seems very strange for a person so aggressively averse to apparently all forms of physical exercise to be so hyper image-conscious. Sure, a slim, fit dude in fluorescent Lycra looks a little silly compared to a slim, fit dude not wearing Lycra, but neither of them looks nearly as ridiculous as an obese man huffing and puffing after walking a hundred feet. And I don't own any Lycra clothing at all.

This is a roundabout way of saying: if you get as little exercise as it sounds, you probably look like an absolute fool already, even if you're in denial about it.

stop trying to normalise it

I'm not trying to normalise it. It IS normal where I live, as in most Western nations. Only in America, seemingly, is cycling seen as this weird thing that only losers do.

Assuming you live in an urban centre, when factoring in traffic, cycling will often end up being faster than driving or taking public transport.

Big assumption. My commute is from an outlying town to a city center, a journey that takes 30 minutes by car, along mainly 60mph speed limit roads. I travel along maybe one mile of roads slower than that the entire way there, since the city's main A-road cuts directly through the center.

As I said, you can do this if you attach a trailer to your bike.

At the expense of looking like an utter tool, or a child towing their mobile lemonade stand to the next location. And having to worry about cornering too sharply and tipping the whole thing over.

Obviously there are circumstances in which cars are preferable to bikes, but seriously - how often do you go to IKEA? I can't imagine it's more than once a month.

Whenever I need something, and it's not the only store out there I'd need it for. Carrying a framed painting from an art store back on a bike would be an exercise in frustration and anxiety. Trying to carry a very heavy ornate mirror or light shade from an antiques store would be worse.

It isn't remotely difficult to cycle a bike with one hand and operate your phone with the other. I do it all the time.

And have to shout over the rushing air? It's bad enough when walking near a busy road let alone being in the middle of one.

I must say, it seems very strange for a person so aggressively averse to apparently all forms of physical exercise to be so hyper image-conscious.

Is it so completely out of the realm of possibility that a person can be slim and attractive without boring themselves half to death by doing braindead and repetitive busywork tasks constantly? My experience in the school system left me with less than zero patience for such things.

I'm not trying to normalise it. It IS normal where I live, as in most Western nations. Only in America, seemingly, is cycling seen as this weird thing that only losers do.

I'm in the UK, and among my peers it's considered a niche thing that is mainly the domain of children, eco loons or retirees. Everyone else on the road despises cyclists because they're super slow and utterly entitled.

More comments

What do Europeans have to do with the discussion? Are you under impression that Europeans ride bicycles a lot, including to work? They don’t, except of couple of places, which is no different than in US.

What do Europeans have to do with the discussion?

I just found it to be a funny unintentional marker of the same cultural gap between Americans and Europeans that starts lots of arguments here.

They don’t, except of couple of places, which is no different than in US.

The full bike sheds at my old 6:30am-start factory workplace would seem to indicate otherwise but of course that's anecdotal. Ipsos tells me that 5% of Americans cycle to work, which is on par with Britain, but half or less than half of the number who do in Spain, Italy, Norway or Belgium, a third or less of Germany, Hungary and Poland, a quarter of Sweden and one sixth the number in the Netherlands.

Yes, you are confirming what I said: Europeans don’t cycle to work a lot. Overall, maybe something like 10% does. Large majority of them drives. Sure, the split between driving and cycling is only slightly less lopsided towards driving, but whether 5% cycles or 10% is not substantial difference.

Then we're just debating the meaning of 'a lot'. A substantial minority to me still seems like a lot, a doubling or tripling compared to America seems like 'a lot more'.

They ride/walk to work far more than people in USA.

Not really, though I understand how one might get this impression if one is very online and frequents places like Reddit or HN. Most of Europe is unlike Amsterdam, and even in Netherlands, last I checked, majority of commuters drive.

Note that I wrote "far more than people in USA" not "more often than commuting by a car".

That was intentional.

I am pretty sure that in nearly all or all European countries people commute via walking/cycling at noticeably higher rate than in USA.

Yep, can't imagine it. Riding a bike is enjoyable. I cannot relate to wanting to just pop pills and get back to [enjoyable things], particularly when [enjoyable things] for most people looks a lot like staring at a screen.

There are people who will say the same about all of your proclivities. "I cannot relate to people who don't want to play football every weekend" and so on.

OK. I don't know what your point is. I can look down on the pillpoppers and they can look down on my faffing, we'll be on the same page. I can certainly relate to plenty of preferences that aren't my own (Crossfit isn't appealing to me, but that's fine, people like it), but I'm not going to pretend that I think all preferences are equally virtuous. The preference to have subsidized drugs rather than pick a sport and eat reasonably is loathsome to me.

The point is that fully generalisable sentiments that are really just subjective priorities and values differences underneath it all are not a meaningful topic of conversation. "I like thing" "Well I don't like thing" Ok great, we've achieved absolutely nothing here.

You can phrase everything like this. Oh, can't imagine people spending hours at a time contracting their muscles presumably for fun, instead of enjoying gathering new knowledge or engaging in the debates with educated people from around the world. But I can imagine, it's quite easy to understand that people have different preferences.

Obese people aren't obese because they're minmaxing their knowledge.

The number of obese people doing that is what? 7?

Reading something on the Internet is quite popular activity indeed. As is reading books that is also today involves "staring at a screen".

Reading books is very possible to do while exercising, so...

???? Give me this secret!!!

More comments

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