Posts
Comments
Hey people!
I'm "new" here, having spent the last 2 years reading and following the "core" material. I have no clue how I got here. I remember following an idle path of exploration and suddenly finding this beautiful place where it seems like there are true adults.
I'm a young adult constantly amazed at the scope of this world, a composition student that has somehow gained (mild) success (read: gotten paid anything at all), I've used basic rationality tools when deciding if my
(then) relationship was worth it, found out that it wasn't, I didn't accept the answer, tried again when everything in that relationship was on fire and managed to leave relatively unharmed. I hope to gain some friendships from this community, and I'm looking for people willing to do some betting to help train a beginner rationalist mind.
I think it's time for me to engage in the community, now that I'm young and able to change my habits "easily" for the better. I've been thinking of starting some sort of rationalist hangout/meetup in Malmö, Sweden (where i currently live). I'm slightly unsure where I could check if there's any interest at all, pointers would be welcome :)
I'm going to come clean here: Your post has made me so ANGRY that I have to respond. Usually I'd leave it be, to conserve resources needed for a hostile world and because the chance that you're being intellectually honest is not high enough. Politics is the mindkiller; You are a transphobe, and it shows. There is also no way for me to argue that you couldn't just respond with: "He thinks he's a woman! He must be crazy, pay no heed to him!" (for outsiders sake, I'm a trans-woman)
But honestly? You argue for my existance being an invalid way of human life. You argue that everyone sees me not as I present myself socially, but rather that they see my genotype. Somehow. You are also wrong about calling my being trans a psychiatric disorder, just like being homo, hetero or bi isn't. I'll show you using this list. [1) Not as far as science can tell, currently research points to complex interplay of biological, neurological and sociological reasons for being trans. 2) Yes, being transgender is not something you choose. 3) Yes, There are more Cis-people than trans-people. 4) No. Dysphoria is unpleasant, but the rate of trans-people who regret their choice later in life is astronomically small.
"...regrets were extremely rare (1–1.5% of MtF patients and <1% of FtM patients; Pfäfflin, 1993).
I have never been as happy in my life as I am now. 5) No, This isn't a discrete phenomena, as many people are non-binary and would not consider themselves only male or only female. 6) yes, it's commonly treated with hormonal therapy and surgical help.] I do not consider this sufficient grounds to remove someone's agency. I think you are wrong.
Therefore, I should be able to refute the claims you have which are wrong. I'm going to respond to your paragraphs thusly:
1: Yes, but Solomon would not have changed his opinion on what his words mean. But you are mostly correct.
2: I agree! Black is not equal to white, but grey is actually grey. Remember this.
3: Yes and No. These arguments are analogous to intersex conditions when viewed as pertaining to the concept of SEX, but they are also analogous to transgender people when viewed as pertaining to the concept of GENDER. SEX is not equal to GENDER, which is showed by the intersex women who have an XY-chromosomal pair. They clearly are women{GENDER} but they are not clearly women{SEX}. Likewise, I'm personally clearly a man{SEX} but I hope that I can convince people that I'm at least by default a woman{GENDER}.
4: No, we do not say that the "determent" of SEX is personal identity. Because it would rightly be considered dumb. We do say that the "determent" of GENDER is personal identity.
5: Please stop saying that I'm delusional. Also read this on why it IS different being trans-gender as opposed to believing that you are another person, or non-human animal etc.
6: Where can you find an objective truth regarding someones GENDER? The whole concept of GENDER falls apart pretty quickly outside of other peoples ideas and affirmations of it. My truth is infact reliant on other people, as is yours. I have been misgendered before my transition (someone thought i was a girl) and I am properly gendered now. I'm just as much of a woman{GENDER} as any of the other women I know are.
7: Your point falls on paragraph 6: being wrong. Other people do not need to affirm my belief, they just happen to do it regardless.
8: I agree! The potential for harm must be outweighed by the potential for good! As I see it, the potential for good is such: People get to live happier lives. Nice. The potential for harm? No discernible difference compared to otherwise.
OP quote: Yes! gender dysphoria is a psychiatric disorder, just like depression is.
9: Good job, you're being reasonable. I agree.
10-12: Yes, you're right. What you are implying is however false. I'm not delusional when saying that my GENDER is that of a woman. Just like someone isn't delusional when they are homosexual.
OP quote+13: Why change the brain when you can change the body? If you feel bad because you're overweight due to other clinical conditions, why decide that poking around in the brain is a good idea? Like REALLY?
OP quote +14: did you read "Safe" in that text? This is WHY I dislike the idea of poking around in the brain, directly or indirectly. Frontal lobotomy does not work for helping transgender people, nor does it help anyone to outweigh it's cost.
Op quote +15: It's not a delusion if everyone is sharing it. There is only one defence for you if I think you are not your self-reported GENDER. It is as follows: "I feel like I am a [Preferred GENDER], I look like my [Preferred GENDER] and people refer to me as a [Preferred GENDER]. Therefore I am a [Preferred GENDER]."
Op quote +16: Your argument falls on paragraph 6: being wrong. Again. To use a metaphor: perceived grey is grey. No, Transpeople are not the same as Cispeople, but they use shared words. You misuse language by saying that GENDER is SEX.
17: Ahhh, here transphobia rears its ugly head. It's been great not seeing you. Go away. Anyway, I would be very annoyed indeed if my trans-man friend got sent to a womens prison, instead of a mens prison. Not even slightly like allowing someone who identifies as a wolf into the wolf-enclosure. AND SOMEHOW YOU THINK THAT BLAMING THE VICTIM OF A RAPE FOR IT IS RIGHT! IF YOU HOLD THE BELIEF IMPLIED THAT THE POOR TRANSMAN WHO WAS SEXUALLY ABUSED GOT WHAT WAS COMING TO HIM THEN YOU ARE A MONSTER. A rapist does not care what their victim thinks, that comes with the crime. Your point is moot.
18: What about male sex offenders who get sent to male prison? What about female sex offenders who get sent to female prisons? Housing ANYONE in a cell with a serial rapist seems dumb. You also do not destroy womens ability to congregate without males, remember that GENDER is not the same as SEX. Disallowing access to gendered spaces means that you are forcing transmen to use womens spaces, and transwomen to use mens spaces. Groups of people who are especially VULNERABLE to sexual assault. does that seem reasonable?
19: What gender specialists? Argument from authority seems weird here since I've never heard of this authority. I've never heard of a rising tide of male{SEX} sex offenders claiming to be female{GENDER}. In absence of reliable sources, I disregard statistics. Sex offenders are also unlikely to follow any rule given given to them to follow, thus safety would not be increased.
20: Your point is moot by 19: being disregarded. Is it unsafer being a woman when accompanied by a transwoman than when accompanied by a Cisman? I don't know, but I have my suspicions.
Op quote +21: I agree with you! That is not the reason to call someone their preferred pronoun. There exists so many better reasons!
Op quote +22: What rules of rationality? Is there any Epistemiological reason to not separate SEX from GENDER? About freedom of belief, authenticity and safety , both freedom of belief and authenticity is moot because you don't separate SEX from GENDER whereas those you argue against do. Safety is a fun one. Riddle me this: Is it safer to have unbalanced men and women who are not allowed to live properly take to violence to get said right, or is it safer to have balanced transmen and transwomen who are content and productive citizens? Is it safer to have people who desperately needs to find out whats wrong via any means necessary than it is to have content people who knows what they want?
Now go away, I will not respond to more Transphobic shit here.
Ouch.
This post is very frightening to me in that I had not viscerally understood just how far off we are from solving FAI. Are we really (probably) in the area of before solving the problem, invent Calculus? Is that Hyperbole? Or worse? Also, the post also gives me hope that the problem of FAI is solvable (hopefully tractably!). When i was at first shown the problems that arise from just trying something, it felt like no one had any attack whatsoever. Now i think i understand better that no one really knows anything, but they do have some sort of an attack on it. I'd feel pretty safe if one could formalise a solution in math without paradox.
This might constitute an artists complaint, but since i believe your goal is to effectively persuade/argue/show i think that the post suffered from stewing on the exact same material all the way through. Maybe contrast Beth/Alonso with a Dunce/Alonso interaction? Show how immediatly jumping on a solution is rather silly directly, not only indirectly?
Anyways, my sympathies if conversations like this are part of your daily (weekly) work. It hurt just to read.