Angel suggests that we don’t have more women here because we need more “diversity of opinion within feminism” and more use of distinctions popular with academic feminists, such as gender vs. sex. So let me note that my original post consisted almost entirely of quoting from academic feminists. Also note that while Eliezer did make the requested gender/sex distinction in the above, it actually was not used in his further discusison—it appears to be there just there to signal.
Also note that while Eliezer did make the requested gender/sex distinction in the above, it actually was not used in his further discusison—it appears to be there just there to signal.
Maybe I’m imagining the dismissive tone here, since I don’t know you personally, but isn’t signalling awareness and acceptance vis a vis sex and gender exactly what we’re talking about doing here? If Eliezer succeeded in doing so, great! Maybe that’ll help make LW seem more inviting to women.
Maybe that’ll help make LW seem more inviting to women.
I rather suspect that any benefits from a post made in 2008 have already been realised. In fact this post probably originally appeared on OvercomingBias!
Yeah, it’s clear from some of the comments that it did. But it’s hard to reply in a new time context from the rest of the conversation. You could interpret my comment along the lines of “Even if he is ‘just’ signalling, doing so seems to be fully in line with the goal of making OB/LW more inviting to women.”
I rather suspect that any benefits from a post made in 2008 have already been realised. In fact this post probably originally appeared on OvercomingBias!
These claims may contradict each other, because Overcoming Bias has Robin Hanson in it, and he may have neutralized such benefits or made the signals in the post seem less credible by association.
Angel suggests that we don’t have more women here because we need more “diversity of opinion within feminism” and more use of distinctions popular with academic feminists, such as gender vs. sex. So let me note that my original post consisted almost entirely of quoting from academic feminists. Also note that while Eliezer did make the requested gender/sex distinction in the above, it actually was not used in his further discusison—it appears to be there just there to signal.
Maybe I’m imagining the dismissive tone here, since I don’t know you personally, but isn’t signalling awareness and acceptance vis a vis sex and gender exactly what we’re talking about doing here? If Eliezer succeeded in doing so, great! Maybe that’ll help make LW seem more inviting to women.
I rather suspect that any benefits from a post made in 2008 have already been realised. In fact this post probably originally appeared on OvercomingBias!
Yeah, it’s clear from some of the comments that it did. But it’s hard to reply in a new time context from the rest of the conversation. You could interpret my comment along the lines of “Even if he is ‘just’ signalling, doing so seems to be fully in line with the goal of making OB/LW more inviting to women.”
These claims may contradict each other, because Overcoming Bias has Robin Hanson in it, and he may have neutralized such benefits or made the signals in the post seem less credible by association.