I think this varies greatly by situation and with the specifics of X, how it’s seen in that group, and how well it actually describes Bob’s behaviors as seen by Alice. I don’t see much generality here, and I think there are a lot of Xs that can’t be usefully discussed on LW, so I’m not sure how to dig deeper.
I am curious about your use of “invisible” for what I’d have termed “low-status”. Is this specific to some Xs, or just a different way of referring to the same thing?
Hmm. I think I’m not in the right social group to understand this. I don’t share a fear of invisibility, and I don’t quite see how admitting X can make one more invisible than just exhibiting behaviors of X. But again, I also suspect it’s idiosyncratic to the groups in which Bob and Alice participate, and the X in question.
I wish you the best! Thanks for posting, even if it didn’t quite resonate with me.
I think this varies greatly by situation and with the specifics of X, how it’s seen in that group, and how well it actually describes Bob’s behaviors as seen by Alice. I don’t see much generality here, and I think there are a lot of Xs that can’t be usefully discussed on LW, so I’m not sure how to dig deeper.
I am curious about your use of “invisible” for what I’d have termed “low-status”. Is this specific to some Xs, or just a different way of referring to the same thing?
They’re completely different. Invisible means: can’t be seen. X doesn’t have to be good, bad, low/high status. It’s any property.
Hmm. I think I’m not in the right social group to understand this. I don’t share a fear of invisibility, and I don’t quite see how admitting X can make one more invisible than just exhibiting behaviors of X. But again, I also suspect it’s idiosyncratic to the groups in which Bob and Alice participate, and the X in question.
I wish you the best! Thanks for posting, even if it didn’t quite resonate with me.