outlining for "I Mean, Yes, I Agree that Man"

diff --git a/content/drafts/i-mean-yes-i-agree-that-man-should-allocate-some-more-categories-but.md b/content/drafts/i-mean-yes-i-agree-that-man-should-allocate-some-more-categories-but.md
index c1f101f..fdaede1 100644 (file)
--- a/content/drafts/i-mean-yes-i-agree-that-man-should-allocate-some-more-categories-but.md
+++ b/content/drafts/i-mean-yes-i-agree-that-man-should-allocate-some-more-categories-but.md
@@ -8,14 +8,23 @@ This post is a reply to [friend of the blog](/tag/ozy/) Ozymandias's [reply](TOD
 
 After summarizing the discussion so far, Ozy
 
-> Saotome-Westlake argues for the existence of a third definition, based on psychology. He argues that (some) trans people are psychologically different from cisgender members of their identified genders: if you graph, say, how likely cisgender women are to be members of the rationalist community, and how likely transgender women are to be members of the rationalist community, these charts will not look very much like each other at all. Therefore, it makes sense to consider trans people to be members of their assigned gender at birth for some purposes.
+> Saotome-Westlake argues for the existence of a third definition, based on psychology. He argues that (some) trans people are psychologically different from cisgender members of their identified genders [...] Therefore, it makes sense to consider trans people to be members of their assigned gender at birth for some purposes.
+>
+> [...]
+>
+> So by Saotome-Westlake's argument, any group of women whose interests and personality traits, on average, observably differ from that of women as a whole ought to be classified as not actually women at all.
+> 
+> By extension, lesbians are not women.
+
+
+
+
+So, [definitions are overrated](https://www.readthesequences.com/Arguing-By-Definition). It's not that 
+
 
 [gut take, not sure where/how it belongs in the post: I have misgivings about this, because I'm not a _fan_ of psychological sexual dimorphism and it feels weird to be painted as a defender of it. But, but—if the difference is still going to _be there_ no matter how I feel about it, then that's _worth noticing_]
 
 
-> So by Saotome-Westlake’s argument, any group of women whose interests and personality traits, on average, observably differ from that of women as a whole ought to be classified as not actually women at all.
-> 
-> By extension, lesbians are not women.
 
 I do want to note that my post does (briefly) anticipate the "by that argument, lesbians aren't women" _ad absurdum_ objection. (See the few paragraphs [starting with](/2018/Feb/the-categories-were-made-for-man-to-make-predictions/#anchor-different-types-of-women-objection), "To this it might be objected that there are many different types of women [...]".)
 
@@ -43,4 +52,23 @@ maybe make this angrier—talk about a rape victim being force to describe her a
 by bringing up rapists, I might be accused of trying to play Ethnic Tension against trans women, but
 
 
-we can expect sex to be fully consensual, because there's a fallback position of no sex if one party doesn't consent: 
\ No newline at end of file
+we can expect sex to be fully consensual, because there's a fallback position of no sex if one party doesn't consent:
+
+
+-----
+
+
+I. Ozy says that my argument implies that lesbians aren't women
+  Reply: I didn't want to _define_ gender on psychology; rather, sexual dimorphism is actually real and psychology is _one_ of the implicated dimensions
+
+II. Ozy says that "people who would be contribute to the atmosphere you made this a woman-only event for."
+  Reply: bright lines and specifiability: you can get "people who contribute to the atmosphere" by picking a guest list of people you know,
+  Side note: the effect size here is greater than d=1
+
+if it sounds like I'm advocating stereotypes, well, I agree with Ozy that the solution is more categories
+
+III. Ozy argues that "look like street harrassers" is the relevant criterion; I think this is overestimating the extent to which bad male behavior is an artifact of ideology
+"has nothing to do with psychology anyway"—it has to do with _perceptions_ of psychology; bystanders can't _know_ that feminine-androphilic trans man is one of them; you could imagine an alternative world in which human physiology looked the same but there was no history of male violence, but that's not our world
+I agree that everyone deserves a place to pee; let's talk about changing rooms
+
+IV. Money analogy. I really like this analogy! I agree that money is a social convention, but what would it mean for money to be fully consensual?