+Goodhart's Lawyer (credit "Wilhelm")
+
+the ugly gray communist 90% crap superstimuli aren't a threat to the values of our ancestors, but the really well done ones, are
+I am the threat
+(the cartoons with female superheroines that make the AGP male heart melt ... but who are noticeably not drawn from the same distribution as ACTUAL WOMEN)
+
+Taking a sabbatical; I'll try to think of it as being a housewife supported by my past self of the past three years
+
+Siezing the Means of Home Production: http://archive.li/9NRrS
+
+!!Con speakers: I count 1 "they/them" woman, 9 probably-actual-women, 3 known/obvious MtF, and 3 "they/them" men (implied 16 normal men remaining (including me?!))
+
+https://abc30.com/homeless-women-harassed-in-shower-lawsuit-says/3514544/
+
+If you ever find yourself saying, "Even if Hypothesis H is true, it doesn't have any decision-relevant implications," YOU ARE RATIONALIZING! The fact that H is interesting enough for you to be considering the question at all (it's not some arbitrary trivium like the 1923th binary digit of π, or the low temperature in São Paulo on September 17, 1978) means that it must have some relevance to the things you care about. It is VANISHINGLY IMPROBABLE that your optimal decisions are going to be the SAME in worlds where H is true and worlds where H is false. The fact that you're tempted to SAY they're the same is probably because some part of you is afraid of some of the imagined consequences of H being true. But H is already true or already false! If you happen to live in a world where H is true, and you make decisions as if you lived in a world where H is false, you are thereby missing out on all the extra utility you would get if you made the H-optimal decisions instead!
+
+If you can figure out exactly what you're afraid of, maybe that will help you work out what the H-optimal decisions are. Then you'll be a better position to successfully notice which world you ACTUALLY live in. http://lesswrong.com/lw/o4/leave_a_line_of_retreat/
+
+
+"Jesse Singal is a transphobic piece of shit!"
+
+Separately, may also be worth considering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification … when deciding what merits "piece of shit" status? Who knows if some of the ppl you follow are (e.g.) autogynephilia truthers, but don't write about it under their real name because they see the reaction to Singal?
+
+"That's a suspiciously specific hypothetical."
+
+
+There were a couple of young black women ahead of me at the convenience store who I found physically attractive; I'm given to understand that there's a whole PUA literature about "day game" where you talk to random women, and whether you could have an intellectual conversation with them (across that kind of culture and IQ gap) is besides the point?? It's just so unthinkable to me
+I'm not claiming that my upbringing got the right answer
+Rather, that I'm actually incapable of thinking of other answers independent of rightness
+such that I'll never, ever get to hit that
+I can barely speak of this to anyone but you (I mean, I could, but I do have you as my designated-evil friend)
+one of them was wearing spandex pants
+never get to hit that or be that
+
+Every year, the people who are isomorphic in opinions to you become more masculine (because of everyone moving left), which means they are going to have more inferential distance on gender dysphoria.
+
+Contra affirms self-ID: https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1086351168123621376
+
+divorce court required pronouns: https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/9zgivf/peak_trans_viii_tell_your_story_here/eea6imc/
+
+
+Maybe blame my father (a Bernie Sanders supporter) for accidentally having a copy of _Atlas Shrugged_ on the family bookshelf where I could get at it when I was sixteen.