Posts
Comments
they are not likely to be careful in evaluating the effects of their actions on women.
But this is not a bias. The word "bias" means a factual error. Cruel or other-harming behavior is not described by the word "bias". Unless you think that there is motivated cognition rather than explicit cruelty going on.
But it seems that the effect of debate is to challenge bias, whereas the effect of censoring debate is to perpetuate it.
which is biased by men
What do you mean by "biased"? Do you mean, there is some factual error that has been made? Or do you mean "Men will benefit from the information being disseminated here"?
(that is, at least including a wide range of women's experiences as well as men's)
Why does this matter? Would it be censorship-worthy if one had a discussion about how teenagers experience life without also discussion how people of other ages do?
I don't see why lack of easily offendable women on LW is seen as a problem that needs to be solved. As has been said before, the more people you let in, the more the discussion will regress to the internet mean.
There is a matter of truth at stake here: just how does human sexual interaction actually work? Is there a "double standard" at play, of the "Homo Hypocritus type involved? What does that tell us about the potential commons problems that the human race might have? What does it tell us about how the sexual male-female interaction could be improved for all?
These are interesting and important questions for rationalists, and it is a shame to kow-tow a small minority for whom the truth is just too painful.