"Someone has to and no one else will."
- 91
- 7
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I was "pleasantly" surprised how little there was: even in universe when she talked about the "patriarchy" seemed some kind of parody and the other characters replied like "are you a retard?".
Ah wow, that wasn't my take at all.
I could go on but my eyes were rolling. They sacrificed world-building and feel for these things too IMO, everything past episode 3 was like kids running around hogwarts in jeans.
Mmm... Maybe it's because I am not American and I do not notice this thing as heavily.
Those were annoying and eye-rolling but were so overt and ridiculous that I actually thought about parody. Is that Poe's law in action?
I live in a whiter than average European country: I've met only 2 black people and zero Latinos so I didn't really noticed. For me every US tv shows since the "colorblind" 90s is exotic.
Now that I noticed I agree. Catherine Zeta Jones was seriously miscast and Gomez was supposed to be only half Latino (they could have at least chose an attractive Gomez though.)
FWIW hearing that you're not American makes this click a bit. Our race fetish is stronger than anywhere else, and there's a huge focus on the treatment of natives. Honestly this isn't the thread for CW but it was stunningly obvious, and I don't think that it's meant to be a parody. This is just the state of mainstream entertainment.
Regarding CZJ.... she's so hot I didn't even think about her being miscast.
Speaking as a non-American myself, the woke themes in Wednesday are so strong that I'm still surprised that someone can not notice them. Not only is the entire plot's message very clearly "Look at how the evil pilgrims have historically persecuted natives, why is no one talking about this!" with "outcasts" being used as a stand-in for natives, there is almost constant progressive messaging about gender relations from Wednesday and only once do I remember someone even slightly pushing back against her on that (Xavier, after he saves her life and she accuses him of upholding the patriarchy through his chivalry). I feel like it's far too charitable to interpret these things as satire, woke talking points are not only sprinkled throughout the show but are in fact woven into its very narrative, and they are never really significantly contested in any way.
I will say nobody's really missing much by giving it a pass. There's other problems I have with the show, like the character writing - Wednesday is 1) an I'm-14-and-this-is-deep quote generator and 2) an incredibly atrocious and overconfident detective who is wrong almost all of the time in spite of the show's best attempts to portray her as capable. Additionally, her friends and two potential love interests somehow stick around her despite her treating everyone quite terribly for most of the show, which does not come off as realistic, but I'm getting a bit into the weeds here.
Your second paragraph exactly matches my thoughts as well. While I understand the personality is who the character is to an extent, by the end of 8 episodes there wasn't much of a reason for anyone to like her. I could have been productive or watched a good show, I would definitely call it a skip.
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
More options
Context Copy link