site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   25230 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 30, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"gender identity" has essentially zero predictive power

It does have predictive power, just in a different way than biological sex.

What predictive power does it have? What additional information about a person does knowing their "gender identity" provide?

@benjaminikuta is trivially correct here, though. Someone with a 'gender identity' of female is going to wear feminine clothing more, more likely to fuck guys, etc. I agree with you that the causal pathways for biological female vs trans female doing those things are different, but there are clearly characteristics that many trans women share with cis women and not with cis men.

there are clearly characteristics that many trans women share with cis women and not with cis men.

And with other trans women

more likely to fuck guys

Is even that true, though? Would we hear so much about the "cotton ceiling" if only a tiny proportion of trans women were "lesbians" (i.e. straight men with extra steps)? Genuinely asking, don't know the answer.

Trans women are a lot more interested in men than cis men. I'm ... not entirely sure what the actual percentages of interest in cis men vs cis women are, wasn't able to find a survey, and I don't really expect the trans individuals i'm friends with's experiences to generalize at all.

I found this survey from 2011, which surveyed 6,450 transgender or gender non-conforming people in the US and dependent territories. On page 35 there's a pie chart showing the sexualities of the MtF respondents. 29% described themselves as gay/lesbian/same-gender attracted, 31% as bisexual, and 23% as heterosexual. (I have no idea what "queer" means in this context.) I'm interpreting "heterosexual MtF" to mean "a trans woman who is exclusively attracted to cis men", and "lesbian MtF" to mean "a trans women who is exclusively attracted to cis women", but I wouldn't be remotely surprised if even some of the survey respondents were confused by the wording of the question and gave an answer they didn't intend.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, at least 60% of American trans women are attracted to cis women and at least 54% are attracted to cis men. So while you're correct that trans women are vastly more likely to be interested in having sex with cis men than cis men are, it's not like the sexuality demographics of trans women are identical to cis women. The overwhelming majority (something like 86%) of cis women are exclusively attracted to cis men, whereas only a quarter of trans women (as of 2011) are.

Ideology, style of dress, voice, hormones, etc

Everything is correlated. You should be surprised if it's not.

It tells you their politics.

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