From bc40a57711c022bf199eb53c0a1379e8d32e64f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake" Date: Sun, 8 May 2022 11:06:19 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Sunday redemption block 3: outlining --- ...mation-for-a-more-detailed-causal-model.md | 29 +++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/drafts/the-two-type-taxonomy-is-a-useful-approximation-for-a-more-detailed-causal-model.md b/content/drafts/the-two-type-taxonomy-is-a-useful-approximation-for-a-more-detailed-causal-model.md index 9a68a96..d579ff2 100644 --- a/content/drafts/the-two-type-taxonomy-is-a-useful-approximation-for-a-more-detailed-causal-model.md +++ b/content/drafts/the-two-type-taxonomy-is-a-useful-approximation-for-a-more-detailed-causal-model.md @@ -36,16 +36,15 @@ Is a two type typology of male-to-female transsexualism a good theory? Is it "re At the high level of taxonomy—if I have to choose between a one-type and a two-type theory—then I think the two-type theory is superior. But I also think we can do better and say more about the underlying causal structure that the simple two-types story is approximating, and hopefully explain anomalous cases that look like "noise" to the simple theory. - -In the language of causal graphs - -I think I do have a pretty good guess at what's going on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_graph ] +In the language of [causal graphs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_graph) (where the arrows point from cause to effect), here's what I think is going on: ![transition causal graph](/images/transition_dag.svg) Let me explain. -[What are the reasons transitioning could possibly make sense to someone?—] +What are the reasons a male-to-female transition might seem like a good idea to someone? Why would a male be interested in living socially as a woman? + +I see three prominent reasons, depicted as the nodes [1. actually being really feminine] @@ -53,6 +52,26 @@ Let me explain. [3. cultural/ideological factors] +[Threshold model] + +[Okay, but where do the two types come from? The graph is just showing cause-and-effect, but if this were actually a Bayes net, there would be numbers representing a probability distribution, and I claim that the distribution clusters into two types] + +[The sexual orientation node increases femininity and decreases AGP, so those pathways are anti-correlated; however, the fact that straight AGP men also vary somewhat in their degree of femininity; some accounts have emphasized how masculine (even hypermasculine) AGPs are, but this seems wrong] + +[People who don't quite seem to fit the coarse taxonomy might still be explained by the graph and a threshold model] + +[Why do I believe this? All six arrows in the graph are something that I think we have a huge weight of evidence for, either formally, or just looking at the world] + +[Sexual orientation effect on femininity documented by Lippa] + +[femininity->transition would be obvious even if it weren't in th] + +[ETLE sexual orientation AGP v-structure, and effect of AGP on transition documented by Lawrence] + +[I don't have a good formal citation on cultural factors, but it seems really obvious if you've been paying attention for the last decade] + +[quantifying the two-type effect: Lippa] +[further implications: as cultural factors increase, the late-onset type becomes more of a "NOS" rather than AGP type] _(Thanks to the immortal [Tailcalled](https://surveyanon.wordpress.com/) for discussion.)_ -- 2.17.1