X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=content%2F2018%2Funtitled-metablogging-26-december-2018.md;h=bf42efcd17ed40bec8926009f42b0abcec666fa0;hb=ee42bec2ebfab650a87e8d546d81cd675ade472f;hp=87fff2af0c0ef581a8a40cd870613afa19284633;hpb=d6ec19b461540405ca44233992bee7a111d56006;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git diff --git a/content/2018/untitled-metablogging-26-december-2018.md b/content/2018/untitled-metablogging-26-december-2018.md index 87fff2a..bf42efc 100644 --- a/content/2018/untitled-metablogging-26-december-2018.md +++ b/content/2018/untitled-metablogging-26-december-2018.md @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ I'm not perfect, but I think I'm _pretty good_. Even if I don't agree with someo And somehow it _doesn't land_. It's like talking to a tape recorder that just endlessly repeats, "Ha-ha! [I can define a word any way I want](http://lesswrong.com/lw/od/37_ways_that_words_can_be_wrong/)! You can't use that concept unless you can provide explicit necessary-and-sufficient conditions to classify a series of ever-more obscure and contrived edge cases!" -Although I do have a couple favorite edge cases of my own. I generally prefer not to involve named individuals in arguments, even public figures: it's unclassy. But having nothing left, I pull out a [photograph of Danielle Muscato](http://daniellemuscato.startlogic.com/uploads/3/4/9/3/34938114/2249042_orig.jpg). "Look," I say. "This is a photograph of a man. You can see it, too, right? Right?" +Although I do have a couple favorite edge cases of my own. I generally prefer not to involve named individuals in arguments, even public figures: it's unclassy. But having nothing left, I pull out a [photograph of Danielle Muscato](http://daniellemuscato.startlogic.com/uploads/3/4/9/3/34938114/2249042_orig.jpg). "Look," I say. "This is a photograph of a man. You can see it, too, right? Right?" And they say, "It's possible to be mistaken about cis people's genders, too."