"game theory of stigmatization" rough draft from SEXNET

I just sent this as a message to SEXNET (in a thread about Tail's
complaint against /r/itsafetish:
ttps://surveyanon.wordpress.com/2019/10/23/its-a-hate-sub/), but it
could be cleaned up into a proper blog post.

diff --git a/content/drafts/game-theory-of-stigmatization.md b/content/drafts/game-theory-of-stigmatization.md
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..86b98a3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/drafts/game-theory-of-stigmatization.md
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+Title: Game Theory of Stigmatization (working title)
+Date: 2020-01-01
+Category: commentary
+Tags: game theory
+Status: draft
+
+[TODO: flesh this out with more detail and make it punchier]
+
+> That is going to make the problem worse. We need to support honest autogynephiles earnestly trying to live satisfying and good lives. Don't shame them (or even try)! We need more of them.
+
+What constitutes "the problem" depends on your goals, and the best response further depends on historically contingent features of the political environment.
+
+A toy model: suppose there are three life trajectories available to AGP natal male: (1) stay in the closet and quietly live in shame forever, (2) transition but be "modest" about it (accept the two-type typology, don't try to win women's bike races, _&c._), (3) go all-in on trans activism ("Some women have penises, get over it", _&c._). Which trajectory is taken is going to be partially [influenced by incentives](http://unremediatedgender.space/2017/Dec/lesser-known-demand-curves/).
+
+"This is going to make the problem worse" expresses the concern that /r/itsafetish pushes people from (2) to (3): if the option of both acknowledging and acting on AGP is "taken off the table", then the trans-activism coalition can "offer a better deal" than quietly living in shame forever.
+
+But from the perspective of hard-core gender-critical feminists, (2) itself is _already_ a loss: they're trying to push people from (2) to (1). It might be a strategic mistake on their part (if the (2)→(3) "radicalization effect" is larger than the (2)→(1) "stigmatization effect"), but I don't think it's obvious. And if it's a mistake in the Current Year (because it's better to seek favorable terms of surrender rather than risk the victor's wrath when the war is already effectively lost), it might not have been in Current Year Minus Five, or Minus Ten, _&c._, when the coalition backing (3) was less powerful and therefore had a weaker bid.

diff --git a/notes/post_ideas.txt b/notes/post_ideas.txt
index f6d969d..1cf0fcb 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/post_ideas.txt
+++ b/notes/post_ideas.txt
@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@ On the Argumentative Form "Super-proton Things Tend to Come in Varieties"
 
 -----
 
+Game Theory of Stigmatization (need better title)
+
 Butting Heads; Or, Selective Reporting and the Tragedy of Cause Prioritization
 
 Anne Lawrence on AGP Teen Transition