https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/12/radical-feminist-warned-refer-transgender-defendant-assault/
-"yeah in public we say 'cis women' but tran to tran we just say 'women,' we‘re not insane lol"
-no transsexual is like 'from a young age all i ever wanted was to be.. cis'
-https://twitter.com/theorygurl/status/1062451652836446208
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/bhulic/i_cant_do_this_any_more_i_need_to_divorce_my/
thanks for the marketing advice! I should _definitely_ take that into account if I ever decide to put more effort into "persuading people", which sounds like something that an aspiring instrumental rationalist would care about. Perhaps unfortunately, however, I'm an aspiring epistemic rationalist: all I can do is try to communicate what I actually think and feel using clear language (and standard rhetorical techniques like sarcasm, satire, &c. that people know how to interpret even if they wouldn't be clear if someone naïvely took the words literally). If other people aren't persuaded by this ... maybe they _shouldn't_ be! Maybe I can live with that!
-You _can't_ optimize your group's culture for not-talking-about-atheism without also optimizing against understanding Occam's razor; you _can't_ optimize for not questioning gender self-identity without also optimizing against understanding "A Human's Guide to Words."
-
I guess I can't argue with that, but I wish I knew what happened to my wallet
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/ray-blanchard-transgender-orthodoxy/
and basically the thing I'm trying to do with my blog is that I like our culture and I want to fight for its (renormalized) values, but it's kind of pathetic that no one can jump up a meta level and see it _as_ a culture, _as_ an ideology
as _contingent_
as contingent but in a way that it's OK to reason about out loud, rather than being wordlessly afraid that talking will break everything
+
+> Lia Thomas as the anti-Rosa Parks. Least sympathetic case imaginable, single-handedly turned public opinion against the cause.
+https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1538651344361246720
+
+Even the reviews of Nevada don't reveal the secret!!—okay, the New Yorker one sort of does ("erotic transvestite scenarios", "liking girls just in a totally impossible way")
+https://www.vulture.com/article/profile-imogen-binnie-nevada.html
+https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/06/27/the-invention-of-the-trans-novel-imogen-binnie-nevada
+
+> it doesn't feature nonbinary characters, and a similar novel written today would require them, not least for accuracy.
+(2013 was less than a decade ago!!)
+
+preference cascade is starting ...
+https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1538541182975877120
+
+[quantifying the two-type effect:
+GD occupations in study 2
+gay men are at .48 (.14); straight women at .36 (.13); straight men at .68 (.12)
+that's d=–1.61 between gay and straight men
+a gay man only needs to be 1 standard deviation (.48-.36 = 0.12) more feminine than average to be as feminine as a straight women
+whereas a straight man needs to be (.68-.36 = 0.32) 0.32/0.12=2.67 more feminine than average to be as feminine as a straight woman—that's rarer, but not impossible
+
+In percentile terms, 1-norm.cdf(1) = 0.15 of gay men are as feminine as a woman
+whereas 1-norm.cdf(2.67) = 0.003 of straight men are
+that's a likelihood ratio of 50 ... but the prior is not that far from 50:1 in the other direction! They cancel out!!]
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff