From 0b5fbd96d163e0075ec9573169eb1f85ccdb6a8a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake" Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 08:57:11 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] "I Tell Myself" note scraps from last night --- notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt | 3 +++ notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md | 6 +++++- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt index 61ca624..d4bebb5 100644 --- a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt +++ b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt @@ -504,3 +504,6 @@ Archive links— Extropians "changing sex is difficult" https://archive.is/En6qW The _original_ meaning of the word "woman" points to a cluster in + +No one is actually surprised in System 1; it's just that the parts of us that talk aren't supposed to believe in psychological sex differences (since before my time—and I still prefer not to believe) or physical sex (since 2015). + diff --git a/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md b/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md index 46e3184..65103d1 100644 --- a/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md +++ b/notes/i-tell-myself-sections.md @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Okay, I understand that in Berkeley 2020, that probably sounds like some kind of It seems useful to be able to _express this claim in natural language_. I can phrase the claim in more or fewer words, using a greater or lesser amount of caveats, qualifications, or polysyllabic obfuscations, depending on the audience's sensibilities and what aspects of my model I want to call attention to. But I need to be able to talk about the model _somehow_, and talking about the model becomes _more expensive_ if I'm not occasionally allowed to use the phrase "actual woman" in a context where _you know goddamned well_ what I mean by it. -I mean it just as I might say "actual meat" to distinguish such from [plant-based imitations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_analogue), or "actual wood" to distinguish such from [composite materials](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood-plastic_composite), without anyone raising an eyebrow. The general concept here is that of _mimickry_. The point is not to denigrate the mimic—one might have any number of reasons to _prefer_ meat substitutes or composite wood to the real thing. +I mean it just as I might say "actual meat" to distinguish such from [plant-based imitations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_analogue), or "actual wood" to distinguish such from [composite materials](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood-plastic_composite), without anyone raising an eyebrow. The general concept here is that of _mimickry_. The point is not to denigrate the mimic—one might have any number of reasons to _prefer_ meat substitutes or composite wood to the real thing. (Nonhuman animal welfare! Termite-proof-ness!) "The trait distribution of trans women isn't identical to that of cis women" does not _convey the same meaning_. Those words do not encode the _empirical hypothesis_ I'm trying to communicate, that "trans" isn't just pointing to a subcluster within the "woman" cluster (like "young woman" or "Japanese woman"), it's actually denoting a subcluster within the _male_ cluster in the subspace of dimensions corresponding to [developmental sex](http://unremediatedgender.space/2019/Sep/terminology-proposal-developmental-sex/)-related traits that we don't know how to change with current technology. @@ -41,3 +41,7 @@ And when a crazy person in your robot cult thinks you've made a philosophy mista ---- [Pope who is also Jesus, Selective Draft Law cases] + +---- + +[univariate fallacy; I'm a weird guy; I would like to believe there could be a cis woman like me. Not obvious that I acutally know any. My sister is a natural experiment; hands vs. finger; "felt sense"] -- 2.17.1