still reading the Gender Development text; and, some old evidence

[Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git] / notes / notes.txt

diff --git a/notes/notes.txt b/notes/notes.txt
index 12feaf9..151ac13 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/notes.txt
+++ b/notes/notes.txt
@@ -2828,3 +2828,16 @@ Ovarit linked to this article—and it just happens to cite Slate Star Codex in
 https://web.archive.org/web/20210903211904/https://twitter.com/lae_laeta/status/1433880523160567808
 
 similar premise to "Dr. Equality and the Great Shift": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8kZ7M-Kwiw
+
+"To My Daughter's Therapist: You Were Wrong"
+https://archive.ph/14kOD
+
+https://wyclif.substack.com/p/biorxiv-wouldnt-host-our-paper-on
+
+"Impact Protection Potential of Mammalian Hair: Testing the Pugilism Hypothesis for the Evolution of Human Facial Hair"
+https://academic.oup.com/iob/article/2/1/obaa005/5799080
+
+autoponyphilia: http://pone.tf/
+
+Evidence of meta-attraction from "We Have Better Graphs" (2007)—
+OTOH there is no sum I would accept to become attracted to men, unless you _also_ made me a woman. (I should add that in that case I would have to meet a man who was a straight woman who made the reciprocal bargain.) So do I then have an erotic identity but _not_ a gender identity? Absurd!—but so obviously right?