Psychohistorian comments on Of Exclusionary Speech and Gender Politics - Less Wrong

62 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 July 2009 07:22AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (647)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Nanani 22 July 2009 12:48:42AM 13 points [-]

I think anyone who feels excluded as a gender is not a very good rationalist, and therefore might want to shut up and study some more.

You are not your genetalia. Stop being a girl or a guy; put your rationalist hat back on. PLEASE.

For the record, I'm female and have been adversely affected by what other females have called objectification on this site.

Comment author: Psychohistorian 22 July 2009 06:27:37AM *  3 points [-]

Hopefully this site is not strictly preaching to the choir. Someone who believes people here have good ideas and understands why you should probably be charitable to naive generalizations or somewhat offensive assertions made here will not have a problem occasionally running into them.

However, it is not hard to imagine an individual unfamiliar with "rationalism" seeing a few too many posts on pickup artists and deciding their time would be better spent on another site.

Comment author: Nanani 23 July 2009 12:29:12AM 1 point [-]

If the person is familiar with PUAs, won't they just laugh and ignore the posts? That's what I did until this ugly gender/hormonal mess flared up.