paper-machine comments on LW Women Submissions: On Misogyny - Less Wrong

27 [deleted] 10 April 2013 07:54PM

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

Comments (472)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 12 April 2013 12:57:27PM -2 points [-]
Comment author: MugaSofer 12 April 2013 08:28:15PM *  1 point [-]

I fail to see why being certain while uninformed and powerful vs. being certain while uninformed and powerless is a good Schelling point. I suspect this is why that comment was downvoted.

Comment author: [deleted] 12 April 2013 08:53:51PM -2 points [-]

If you're not going to give reasons why you don't think it's a valuable ontology, then there's nothing more to say.

The comment was clearly downvoted for political reasons. I should never have wasted so much time arguing with someone who had admitted they were mind-killed. Please don't act like karma is remotely representative of the correctness of comments.

Comment author: drethelin 13 April 2013 07:46:51AM 6 points [-]

of course it was. the entire concept and topic of mansplaining is political. It's overtly a status move, seeking to reduce the status of men explaining to women. We can ignore whether or not this should be the case, or whether the current disequilbirium in the splainosphere towards men doing the splaining is something that deserves to be corrected, but to say that "mansplaining" carves reality at any joints but political ones seems untrue to me.

Comment author: [deleted] 13 April 2013 10:24:06AM -1 points [-]

but to say that "mansplaining" carves reality at any joints but political ones seems untrue to me.

That's all I was saying. For instance:

I assure you that I am fully aware that sometimes also black people steal from black people, or white people from black people, or white people from white people, etc... but that is irrelevant here, because those acts just don't have the same qualia.

"Qualia"? Goals, motivations, and revealed preferences (that is, the things that separate "explaining" from "mansplaining" and from "splaning" in general) aren't qualia.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 13 April 2013 01:07:32PM 3 points [-]

I never would have guessed that anyone could have meant that by "qualia". I take it to mean the experiential aspect of the world.

Comment author: MugaSofer 12 April 2013 09:20:23PM 2 points [-]

The comment was clearly downvoted for political reasons.

If you're not going to give reasons why you think it's a valuable ontology, then there's nothing more to say.