site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   34917 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 13, 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.

15
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Height is not actually health or fitness in today's world. Few people are literally stunted, we're just genetically short.

Height is overrated. And when I say this, I don't mean women don't care about it much which is demonstrably not true. No, what I mean is, men keep stressing too much importance on this aspect of themselves. The outcomes can be positive if they work on areas that are within their control.

My anecdote: I'm actually below average in height, but I am fit and used to be in damn good shape before the 8 hour desk job got me craving to sink back into bed the moment I get home. I did get decent game in college, quite a few interracial successes too. Despite having been an introvert all my life, I managed to be a social butterfly. I knew someone in literally every store in the suburb I lived in, hell I don't recall even once paying for my movie tickets during my time there. And I wasn't even from the country.

And then there are two of my oldest friends. One of them is 6'2", mildly overweight, very social but too shy to ask anyone out, and somewhat below average on facial features. The other is 6'0, fit, very attractive but not too social. Both of them have well paying jobs. And both are still virgins.

You say that until you get in a fight. Yes, they still happen, and should the current order weaken significantly they'll be happening a lot more. Women are smart to select a man who is physically capable of at least standing up for himself and his family.

And equally you can say tall height isn't bad but then you get into a room with low doorways and bump your head, causing great pain/needing hospital trips in the very worst case.

If anything bumping heads is a lot more common than fights these days so the expected cost from both situations is probably the same. Plus why would you ever willingly get into a fight these days, willingly risking harm to yourself is idiotic, not brave, and in modern society pretty much every situation has a flight option available to you.

Agreed, but there's only so much to be done about such strongly evolved instincts. Money and abs still work fine as honest signals in the modern world though.

Being unable to reach the top of the fridge is an evolutionary dead end.

That's an extreme example though. A 5'6" guy can reach most places he'd have to realistically reach, with more difficulty obviously.

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