I realize it wasn't personal—no one _consciously_ thinking "I'm going to trick autogynpehilic men into cutting their dicks off", but
the most recent pronoun update
-https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228
+https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228
> I would not know how to write a different viewpoint as a sympathetic character.
[...]
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wqmmv6NraYv4Xoeyj/conversation-halters
> anything that people are motivated to argue about is not arbitrary. It is being controlled by invisible criteria of evaluation, it has connotations with consequences
+
+If Scott Alexander's "The Categories Were Made For Man ..." had never been published, would we still be talking about dolphins and trees in the same way?
+
+Nate on dolphins (June 2021)—a dogwhistle??
+https://twitter.com/So8res/status/1401670792409014273
+Yudkowsky retweeted Nate on dolphins—
+https://archive.is/Ecsca
+
+my rationalist community has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my community's name
+
+cite to "Not Especially Related to Transgender"
+https://twitter.com/fortenforge/status/1402057829142302721
+
+"Hero Licensing": to provide an earnest-token of all the techniques I couldn't show
+
+uncritically (uncharacteristically uncritically) taking the newly-ascendant gender-identity theory for granted ("lots of women wouldn't be particularly disturbed if they had a male body; the ones we know as 'trans' are just the ones with unusually strong female gender identities"), without considering the obvious-in-retrospect hypothesis that "guy who speculates about his female analogue on a transhumanist mailing list in 2004" and "guy who thinks he might be a trans women in Berkeley 2016" are the same guy.