drafting "Sexual Dimorphism" to closing line (with many gaps)

Okay, I figured out where and how I want to close this off! I still
have a lot of writing to do to fill in all those TODO-labeled gaps,
and a lot of editing after that, but this is a nice
skeleton—especially the pelvis.

diff --git a/content/drafts/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-in-relation-to-my-gender-problems.md b/content/drafts/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-in-relation-to-my-gender-problems.md
index 17b1d5a..f74ca9a 100644 (file)
--- a/content/drafts/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-in-relation-to-my-gender-problems.md
+++ b/content/drafts/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-in-relation-to-my-gender-problems.md
@@ -387,8 +387,14 @@ Friend of the blog Tailcalled argues that [there's no discrete typology for FtM]
 
 [TODO: But I do have enough evidence to know that the prevailing narrative _doesn't add up_. Serano's proposal makes no predictions.]
 
-Okay, so the public narrative about transness is obviously, _obviously_ false. That's a problem, because almost no matter what you want, true beliefs are more useful than false beliefs for making decisions that get you what you want. Fortunately, Yudkowsky's writing had brought together a whole community of brilliant people dedicated to refining the art of human rationality—the methods of acquiring true beliefs and using them to make decisions that get you what you want.
+Okay, so the public narrative about transness is obviously, _obviously_ false. That's a problem, because almost no matter what you want, true beliefs are more useful than false beliefs for making decisions that get you what you want.
 
-So now that I _know_ the public narrative is obviously false, and that I have the outlines of a better theory (even though I could use a lot of help pinning down the details, and )
+Fortunately, Yudkowsky's writing had brought together a whole community of brilliant people dedicated to refining the art of human rationality—the methods of acquiring true beliefs and using them to make decisions that get you what you want. So now that I _know_ the public narrative is obviously false, and that I have the outlines of a better theory (even though I could use a lot of help pinning down the details, and I don't know what the social policy implications are, because the optimal policy computation is a complicated value trade-off), all I should have to do is carefully explain why the public narrative is delusional, and then because my arguments are so much better, all the smart serious rational people will either agree with me, or at least be eager to _clarify_ exactly where they disagree and what their alternative theory is, so that we can move the state of public knowledge forward together, in order to help the great common task of optimizing the universe in accordance with humane values.
 
-Of course, this is kind of a niche topic—if you're not a male with this psychological condition, or a woman who doesn't want to share female-only spaces with them, you probably have no reason to care—but there are a _lot_ of males with this psychological condition
+Of course, this is kind of a niche topic—if you're not a male with this psychological condition, or a woman who doesn't want to share all female-only spaces with them, you probably have no reason to care—but there are a _lot_ of males with this psychological condition around here! If this whole "rationality" subculture isn't completely fake, then we should be interested in getting the correct answer in public _for ourselves_.
+
+Men who fantasize about being women do not particularly resemble actual women! We just—don't? This seems kind of obvious, really? _Telling the difference between fantasy and reality_ is kind of an important life skill?! Notwithstanding that some males might want to make use of medical interventions like surgery and hormone replacement therapy to become facsimiles of women as far as our existing technology can manage, and that a free and enlightened transhumanist Society should support that, it's probably going to be harder for people to figure out what the optimal decisions are if no one is allowed to use language like "actual women" that clearly distinguishes the original thing from imperfect facsimiles?!
+
+[TODO: make the dark-side-epistemology/Category-War case in a couple sentences without blaming anyone]
+
+My sisters! I don't hate you! I'm really jealous of you in a lot of ways, even if I'm not following the same path—not just yet, probably not in this life. But [for the protection](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SGR4GxFK7KmW7ckCB/something-to-protect) of everything we hold sacred, _you have to let me show you what you are_.

diff --git a/notes/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-notes.md b/notes/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-notes.md
index dc8079f..946a2b2 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-notes.md
+++ b/notes/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-notes.md
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ WTF transphobic garbage did I just read?? Too bad Yudkowsky can't control how cr
 
 To SneerClub—
 
-Hi SneerClub! I noticed that you've enjoyed some of my [previous](https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/fw9cng/the_lgbt_activist_machinery_instead_adapted/) [work](https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/61t94y/rationalist_tries_justifying_their_transphobia_by/), so I thought I would go ahead and proactively share this one with you, because (I'm guessing) it probably checks a lot of the boxes for top sneerable content: it's got Yudkowsky hero-worship, _and_ sexism (as many of you would define that), _and_ transphobia (as many of you would define that), _and_ weird sex stuff! (Oh, and a tiny bit of racism (as many of you would define that) at the end.)
+Hi SneerClub! I noticed that you've enjoyed some of my [previous](https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/fw9cng/the_lgbt_activist_machinery_instead_adapted/) [work](https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/61t94y/rationalist_tries_justifying_their_transphobia_by/), so I thought I would go ahead and proactively share this one with you, because (I'm guessing) it probably checks a lot of the boxes for top sneerable content: it's got Yudkowsky hero-worship, _and_ sexism (as many of you would define that), _and_ transphobia (as many of you would define that), _and_ weird sex stuff!
 
 (From _my_ perspective, I'm pouring my heart out about the most important thing in my life, but if someone else with a different perspective would only sneer, then I can only hope to have been—if only for a moment, as part of a subroutine in the optimal sneer computation—_understood_. And for that moment, I am grateful.)
 
@@ -227,11 +227,8 @@ You might ask, what do I mean by "as a first approximation"?
 
 /2018/Jan/dont-negotiate-with-terrorist-memeplexes/#a-thing-about-me
 
-Men who fantasize about being women do not particularly resemble actual women! We just—don't? This seems kind of obvious, really? _Telling the difference between fantasy and reality_ is kind of an important life skill?! 
-
 _You have to let me show you what you are_.
 
-
 > The absolute inadequacy of every single institution in the civilization of magical Britain is what happened! You cannot comprehend it, boy! I cannot comprehend it! It has to be seen and even then it cannot be believed! 
 http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/108
 
@@ -244,4 +241,12 @@ It's not a gender identity; it's a sexual orientation that's surprisingly easy t
 
 The level above "Many-worlds is obviously correct, stop being stupid" is "Racial IQ differences are obviously real; stop being stupid"
 
-https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-of-our-weapons/
\ No newline at end of file
+https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/24/guided-by-the-beauty-of-our-weapons/
+
+my pseudobisexual moments
+
+Anyway, four years later, it turns out that this whole "rationality" subculture is completely fake. The thing that convinced me of this was not _even_ the late-onset-gender-dysphoria-in-males-is-not-an-intersex-condition thesis that I was originally trying to talk about. Humans are _really complicated_: no matter how "obvious" something in psychology or social science to me, I can't write someone off entirely simply for disagreeing, because the whole domain is so complex that I always have to acknowledge that, ultimately, I could just be wrong.
+
+But in the _process_ of trying to _talk about_ this late-onset-gender-dysphoria-in-males-is-not-an-intersex-condition thesis, I noticed that my conversations kept getting _derailed_ on some variation of "The word _woman_ doesn't necessarily mean that." _That_ part of the debate, I knew I could win.
+
+[dark side epistemology, what the math actually means in the real world from "Reply to Holden"]