You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

army1987 comments on [LINK] Why I'm not on the Rationalist Masterlist - Less Wrong Discussion

21 Post author: Apprentice 06 January 2014 12:16AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (866)

Comments (866)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 06 January 2014 03:33:50PM 9 points [-]

the percentage of LW women has grown slightly (lazy to look up the census result)

It grew from 3% in 2009 to 8.9% (cis) + 1.3% (trans) in 2012.

Comment author: jsalvatier 06 January 2014 11:55:39PM 0 points [-]

1.3% trans! That's super cool

Comment author: VAuroch 09 January 2014 07:50:02AM 2 points [-]

Given that a large part of LW is drawn from the Bay Area, which IIRC has significantly higher trans density than the at-large 1%, that's actually under where I would expect.

Wait, 1.3% trans women. Depending on the number of trans men, that may be much closer to representative of the broader likely-to-encounter-LW population. (Which I'd expect to have 2x-5x as many trans people as the general population.)

Comment author: [deleted] 11 January 2014 10:47:27AM *  2 points [-]

From the 2012 survey results:

GENDER:
M (cis): 1021, 86.2%
F (cis): 105, 8.9%
M (trans f->m): 3, 0.3%
F (trans m->f): 16, 1.3%
Other: 29, 2.4%
No answer: 11, 0.9%

Previously discussed here.

Comment author: VAuroch 12 January 2014 01:44:03AM 0 points [-]

OK, still lower than I would expect, then. Somewhat disappointing.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit