7 ms·

This has nothing to do with the belief that a woman is simply someone who identifies as a woman. According to this belief, the following statement is sufficient

This has nothing to do with the belief that a woman is simply someone who identifies as a woman. According to this belief, the following statement is sufficient to become a woman: I am a woman. I think this belief is absurd prima facie and would have been recognized as such by virtually anyone, say, ten years ago. I am not a woman. Furthermore, I do not believe that you believe I have been a woman while typing out that sentence in the middle. Do you?

inigyou 2mo ago
Identifying is more than just telling me you are something.
CamperBob2 2mo ago
Whatever. It's none of my business what you call yourself. And none of the government's.
- incrudible 2mo ago
  Is that so? So you reject laws that require people to affirm my gender based on nothing but my self identification? That is a right wing position in current year.
  - InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
    This is such a vague claim that it is impossible to answer it in good faith. What do you mean by "affirm one's gender"? And what else are you supposed to do than treat people by how they present themselves and ask you to treat them? You can't exactly ask people for a gene test, or a peek inside their pants, or whatever else it is that would satisfy your curiosity. You are unfortunately correct that accosting people and demanding information about their sex or gender has become a right-wing position recently. Which is quite curious, given how traditionally, you would expect extreme individualism and liberalism of the "don't tread on me" kind to be a right-wing position. So where does this leave us? Are LLMs right-wing because they correctly point out that "there are only two sexes and every human fits into one of them" is not biologically correct, or that gender is a social construct? Or are they just, you know, correct when they say that?
    - CamperBob2 2mo ago
      Which is quite curious, given how traditionally, you would expect extreme individualism and liberalism of the "don't tread on me" kind to be a right-wing position. It's like gun control, famously championed by Ronald Reagan when the Black Panthers started arming up. Nothing but perhaps the speed of light is faster than a conservative dropping his defense of a given individual right the instant the Wrong People start exercising that right.
      - Gareth321 2mo ago
        I don't think you know many conservatives or understand their position on this well. They/we are perfectly happy for a man to call himself a woman. The part where we draw the line is a) government policies forcing us to take part in the delusion, and b) schools reinforcing it with children. Let us remember that it was the paedophile named John Money who cam up with the hypothesis in the 50s that one could have a gendered soul distinct from their biological sex. He wasn't taken seriously until very recently because it's a crazy, unfalsifiable hypothesis. I'm happy to accept evidence of this gendered soul existing, but until now, no one has provided any. In the mean time, feel free to call yourself whatever you like. Just do not make laws forcing me to join in, and do not prey on children. These are not unreasonable requests.
        InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
        > They/we are perfectly happy for a man to call himself a woman This is plainly false, as we shall immediately see. > The part where we draw the line is a) government policies forcing us to take part in the delusion, and b) schools reinforcing it with children. Ah, see, you're "perfectly happy," but you can't go a single sentence without calling it a delusion, bringing up pedophilia, calling the idea that people can feel a gender different from their sex "crazy" and pretending that you're being "forced to join in" and that people are "preying on children." You can't even pretend for one short comment. > that one could have a gendered soul distinct from their biological sex This is not what gender is. There is no evidence for any soul at all, and souls have nothing to do with gender.
  - jssjsjsj 2mo ago
    It's also a left-wing position. See for example Kara Dansky.

inigyou 2mo ago

Identifying is more than just telling me you are something.

CamperBob2 2mo ago

Whatever. It's none of my business what you call yourself. And none of the government's.

incrudible 2mo ago
Is that so? So you reject laws that require people to affirm my gender based on nothing but my self identification? That is a right wing position in current year.
- InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
  This is such a vague claim that it is impossible to answer it in good faith. What do you mean by "affirm one's gender"? And what else are you supposed to do than treat people by how they present themselves and ask you to treat them? You can't exactly ask people for a gene test, or a peek inside their pants, or whatever else it is that would satisfy your curiosity. You are unfortunately correct that accosting people and demanding information about their sex or gender has become a right-wing position recently. Which is quite curious, given how traditionally, you would expect extreme individualism and liberalism of the "don't tread on me" kind to be a right-wing position. So where does this leave us? Are LLMs right-wing because they correctly point out that "there are only two sexes and every human fits into one of them" is not biologically correct, or that gender is a social construct? Or are they just, you know, correct when they say that?
  - CamperBob2 2mo ago
    Which is quite curious, given how traditionally, you would expect extreme individualism and liberalism of the "don't tread on me" kind to be a right-wing position. It's like gun control, famously championed by Ronald Reagan when the Black Panthers started arming up. Nothing but perhaps the speed of light is faster than a conservative dropping his defense of a given individual right the instant the Wrong People start exercising that right.
    - Gareth321 2mo ago
      I don't think you know many conservatives or understand their position on this well. They/we are perfectly happy for a man to call himself a woman. The part where we draw the line is a) government policies forcing us to take part in the delusion, and b) schools reinforcing it with children. Let us remember that it was the paedophile named John Money who cam up with the hypothesis in the 50s that one could have a gendered soul distinct from their biological sex. He wasn't taken seriously until very recently because it's a crazy, unfalsifiable hypothesis. I'm happy to accept evidence of this gendered soul existing, but until now, no one has provided any. In the mean time, feel free to call yourself whatever you like. Just do not make laws forcing me to join in, and do not prey on children. These are not unreasonable requests.
      - InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
        > They/we are perfectly happy for a man to call himself a woman This is plainly false, as we shall immediately see. > The part where we draw the line is a) government policies forcing us to take part in the delusion, and b) schools reinforcing it with children. Ah, see, you're "perfectly happy," but you can't go a single sentence without calling it a delusion, bringing up pedophilia, calling the idea that people can feel a gender different from their sex "crazy" and pretending that you're being "forced to join in" and that people are "preying on children." You can't even pretend for one short comment. > that one could have a gendered soul distinct from their biological sex This is not what gender is. There is no evidence for any soul at all, and souls have nothing to do with gender.
- jssjsjsj 2mo ago
  It's also a left-wing position. See for example Kara Dansky.