memoir: pt. 3 red team edits

[Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git] / content / 2023 / a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md

diff --git a/content/2023/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md b/content/2023/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
index 106cc45..17eed17 100644 (file)
--- a/content/2023/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
+++ b/content/2023/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md
@@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ Especially compared to normal Berkeley, I had to give the Berkeley "rationalists
 
 As an illustrative example, in an argument on Discord in January 2019, I said, "I need the phrase 'actual women' in my expressive vocabulary to talk about the phenomenon where, if transition technology were to improve, then the people we call 'trans women' would want to make use of that technology; I need language that _asymmetrically_ distinguishes between the original thing that already exists without having to try, and the artificial thing that's trying to imitate it to the limits of available technology".
 
-Kelsey Piper replied, "the people getting surgery to have bodies that do 'women' more the way they want are mostly cis women [...] I don't think 'people who'd get surgery to have the ideal female body' cuts anything at the joints."
+<a id="people-who-would-get-surgery-to-have-the-ideal-female-body"></a>Kelsey Piper replied, "the people getting surgery to have bodies that do 'women' more the way they want are mostly cis women [...] I don't think 'people who'd get surgery to have the ideal female body' cuts anything at the joints."
 
 Another woman said, "'the original thing that already exists without having to try' sounds fake to me" (to the acclaim of four "+1" emoji reactions).