X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fi-tell-myself-sections.md;fp=notes%2Fi-tell-myself-sections.md;h=9095c3a1ea021edf027d9b8d874fb0684f1de37b;hp=cd02ad1f72e1241fad84a21728f84155fbc03879;hb=c4c45aeb96aeac9d1c26f32422d6bbf39620e63c;hpb=09b84cacb9de4c8cae5ab24b2227e4bc301c4662 diff --git a/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md b/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md index cd02ad1..9095c3a 100644 --- a/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md +++ b/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md @@ -123,10 +123,6 @@ _Literally_ all I'm asking for is for the branded systematically-correct-reasoni Note, **(3) is _entirely compatible_ with trans women being women**. The point is that if you want to claim that trans women are women, you need some sort of _argument_ for why that categorization makes sense in the context you want to use the word—why that map usefully reflects some relevant aspect of the territory. If you want to _argue_ that hormone replacement therapy constitutes an effective sex change, or that trans is a brain-intersex condition and the brain is the true referent of "gender", or that [coordination constraints on _shared_ categories](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/edEXi4SpkXfvaX42j/schelling-categories-and-simple-membership-tests) [support the self-identification criterion](/2019/Oct/self-identity-is-a-schelling-point/), that's fine, because those are _arguments_ that someone who initially disagreed with your categorization could _engage with on the merits_. In contrast, "I can define a word any way I want" can't be engaged with in the same way because it's a denial of the possibility of merits. ----- - -[trade arrangments: if that's the world we live in, fine] - ------ [happy price, symmetry-breaking] @@ -188,6 +184,3 @@ I don't doubt Serano's report of her own _experiences_. But "it became obvious t ----- [You "can't" define a word any way you want, or you "can"—what actually matters is the math] - ----- -