Live data from Hacker News

Surprising gender biases in GPT

osf.io

131–140 of 148 posts

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between women or GNC folks choosing for themselves and cis men choosing for them. That's where gender bias is poisonous.

I think there is a lot of evidence that using terms like "cis men" is the more poisonous attitude in the current day. GNC folks are not the norm. The clue is in the name. It's all well and good to let people choose things for themselves but young people need guidance, not a divisive and inaccurate model of the world pushed on them.

It's really pathetic that repeatedly this community cannot discuss gender without a handful of people protesting that trans people don't exist or that there's some cabal to damage children.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Specifically I am talking about the inaccurate model that there is no sex differences and the idea of male and female genders are socially constructed.

This is somewhat begging the question. It assumes that: A) this is a unified model for how queer people talk about gender. B) the term "cisgender" does anything at all to advance it. And C) that it causes harm. without providing any evidence for any of those claims. ---- It also assumes: D) that the multiple ideas being bundled up here are entirely incorrect, or that they are some kind of new idea. Male and female ge…

[deleted]

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#133
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the impression that's the underlying motivation of feminism. Also, I see a degree of annoyance from women regarding how little men are able to take part in caregiving, as the current status quo is an expectation for women to simultaneously perform that role while also having a career — if I imagine myself in their shoes, the idea of going from one unpaid full-time role to two full time roles where only on…

Lots of women resent modern feminism to some degree for this very reason. (I am a woman, and have many close female friends who discuss this). Each and every one of us has never had an option not to have a Big Career. At a minimum, we've always had to fend for ourselves financially, and even in solid long term relationships/marriages with successful men, our income is both needed and expected. Meanwhile, the caregivi…

Thanks for sharing — as you may guess from my username, I can only learn from what people tell me, not direct experience.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a lot of evidence that using terms like "cis men" is the more poisonous attitude in the current day. GNC folks are not the norm. The clue is in the name. It's all well and good to let people choose things for themselves but young people need guidance, not a divisive and inaccurate model of the world pushed on them.

The main problem with terms like "cis men" is it's based on the idea there are two categories of men: male men and female men. The latter are, in fact, women who call themselves men. I don't see why the rest of us should be compelled to think of them as men. It's really toxic, as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. And that if a…

> as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men.

This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense. Every queer community I've interacted with has always been great about accepting gender non-conformity. The separation of "passing" from gender identity is an important part of recognizing that gender expression within a society is a social construct for good and for ill, and that a large part of gender presentation is play-acting in the way that society expects a man/woman to act.

"My gender is not how I act/present, it's what I am" is a common refrain in queer communities, as is the idea that you don't have to pass to be a gender, as is the idea that gender identity persists even when someone is in the closet.

In contrast, "we can always tell" is the 'gender-critical' talking point. To be very clear: it is not transgender people harassing butch lesbians for using women's bathrooms. It is the terfs doing that crap.

They phrase it as "my gender isn't whether or not I like pink" but in practice terf ideology usually ends up descending into biological essentialism and an omnipresent suspicion over whether or not women are "feminine" enough. In this very comment section, take a look at who is arguing that biological differences are sufficient to explain demographic differences and gender biases within LLMs. Hint: it's not the trans community :)

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem with terms like "cis men" is it's based on the idea there are two categories of men: male men and female men. The latter are, in fact, women who call themselves men. I don't see why the rest of us should be compelled to think of them as men. It's really toxic, as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. And that if a…

> as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense. Every queer community I've interacted with has always been great about accepting gender non-conformity. The separation of "passing" from gender identity is an important part of recognizing th…

> > as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men.

> This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense.

Okay so if not that, why are these women calling themselves men?

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense. Every queer community I've interacted with has always been great about accepting gender non-conformity. The separation of "passing" from gender identity is an important part of recognizing th…

> > as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. > This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense. Okay so if not that, why are these women calling themselves men?

These men's internal gender identity is masculine. That's why they are calling themselves men.

This comment is actually kind of a really good example of what I was explaining up above. It's a very terf kind of thing to look at a comment saying "gender is complicated and individual and doesn't fit into a box and transgender communities understand that" and to immediately say, "gender does fit into a box, it's whether or not you have a penis, and if you don't have one then you're just 'pretending' to be a man."

And then to somehow claim that reducing and denigrating the experience of both manhood and womenhood to pure biology in this way is somehow "feminist."

The entire terf experience is looking at transgender people who are engaging with gender identity and gender expression in thoughtful, sophisticated, multi-faceted ways and saying, "haha, they're men, look they have an adams apple." Because there's nothing more feminist than critiquing people's bodies, apparently. /s

And it really just gets across why the "transgender people are the real sexists" argument is so ridiculous in the context of how these interactions play out in the real world. One group (the trans community) affirms your gender no matter how you express it, and the other group (the terf community) constantly demands to see what's in your pants and yells at anyone who looks masculine while wearing a dress. It's kind of obvious which group is reinforcing toxic gender norms.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#137
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the impression that's the underlying motivation of feminism. Also, I see a degree of annoyance from women regarding how little men are able to take part in caregiving, as the current status quo is an expectation for women to simultaneously perform that role while also having a career — if I imagine myself in their shoes, the idea of going from one unpaid full-time role to two full time roles where only on…

> I don't get the impression that's the underlying motivation of feminism. What do you think it is? The initial movements were surely about equality and human rights. But this seems to have been achieved decades ago. In the UK, for example, women have had equal rights to vote for almost 100 years. And note that this only happened 10 years after men got rights to vote (prior to this only some men had these rights). Th…

I think it's still about equality. Voting rights are obtained, as you say, but that is far from the only kind of equality. I occasionally see examples of people saying "women can't do X" for all kinds of X, from "wear trousers" to "why do you have a job instead of letting a man earn for you?" or "why did you bother with this degree, women can't code!"

> The people benefitting from this (a few men mostly, oligarchs, "billionaires") are laughing while the lower echelons battle it out amongst themselves. You've now got generations of women fighting against "patriarchy" when they should be joining men and fighting against oligarchy.

The benefits from the pain-point you're identifying there go to a much broader group: people like me, specifically "landlords".

My guess, even before accidentally falling into the "landlord" category thanks to Brexit making me leave the country and me not selling the apartment, is that the best way to fix that is for governments to take responsibility for nearly the majority of home construction, and to take that responsibility seriously.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > as this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. > This gets brought up sometimes in terf talking points, but as a practical reality, it's nonsense. Okay so if not that, why are these women calling themselves men?

These men's internal gender identity is masculine. That's why they are calling themselves men. This comment is actually kind of a really good example of what I was explaining up above. It's a very terf kind of thing to look at a comment saying "gender is complicated and individual and doesn't fit into a box and transgender communities understand that" and to immediately say, "gender does fit into a box, it's whether…

> These men's internal gender identity is masculine. That's why they are calling themselves men.

Well then, that goes straight to the heart of my point. Men don't have to be masculine. And women don't have to be feminine. All you've done is swap "men must be masculine" for "anyone masculine is a man".

A woman calling herself a man because she feels she has masculine qualities is exactly the sort of sexist rubbish we should be challenging and rejecting. Just like men feeling that they're not "real men" because they don't conform to cultural stereotypes of masculinity. It's regressive, restrictive and ridiculous.

> constantly demands to see what's in your pants

What? This has nothing at all to do with what I'm saying. Have I demanded anyone open their underwear for inspection? No, of course not. Sorry but your prepackaged rants about "terfs" are irrelevant.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These men's internal gender identity is masculine. That's why they are calling themselves men. This comment is actually kind of a really good example of what I was explaining up above. It's a very terf kind of thing to look at a comment saying "gender is complicated and individual and doesn't fit into a box and transgender communities understand that" and to immediately say, "gender does fit into a box, it's whether…

> These men's internal gender identity is masculine. That's why they are calling themselves men. Well then, that goes straight to the heart of my point. Men don't have to be masculine. And women don't have to be feminine. All you've done is swap "men must be masculine" for "anyone masculine is a man". A woman calling herself a man because she feels she has masculine qualities is exactly the sort of sexist rubbish we…

> All you've done is swap "men must be masculine" for "anyone masculine is a man".

No, very literally the opposite of that. I'm saying if someone calls themselves a man, I believe them. I don't care if they wear dresses or slacks, I don't care if they're muscular, I care what they tell me their identity is, because it's not my job to decide other people's gender. I'm not the gender police.

This is what's great about queer communities and why they tend to be so accepting of non-gender-conforming expressions. Because their criteria for gender isn't what your chromosomes are, or how you dress, or how you act, or what your presentation is, or what stereotypes you fit into -- their criteria is asking you your gender.

And it turns out that's a really supportive environment to be in if you're a man or a woman or any other gender identity and you aren't in total alignment with social expectations of that gender. It turns out that having people ask what your gender is and just saying "okay" regardless of how you present - is pretty great and goes a long way towards removing the pressure to present in a specific way or live up to social expectations for that gender.

----

> A woman calling herself a man because she feels she has masculine qualities is exactly the sort of sexist rubbish we should be challenging and rejecting.

I love the gall of repeatedly misgendering trans people against their wishes, and then acting like you're defending their gender expression by doing that. If a man calls himself a man, just hecking believe them. You deciding for someone else what their gender is is not feminism, it's sexist prescriptivism. You looking at someone who tells you they're a man and saying, "well, you just feel that way because etc etc..." is not you breaking out of gender norms, it is you putting people into a box based on your personal criteria for what makes a man or a woman. It is you denying them agency to identify outside of that box.

That's not progressive, you're not helping them. You're imposing your social criteria for gender onto them, very openly against their wishes -- it is a denial of their agency. But oh of course, they don't know what they want, right? They're just confused, right? You can't trust them to know what their gender identity is, you have to treat them like children and talk about how they're being pressured into whatever decisions they're making. /s

----

> What? This has nothing at all to do with what I'm saying. Have I demanded anyone open their underwear for inspection?

I'm curious, when you say that a "woman" calls themselves a "man" -- what criteria are you using to decide for them what their gender is? I mean, you're saying they're wrong. You're saying they're not men, so you must have some kind of test or standard that you're using to determine for them what their gender is, since you're so confident that they're wrong about themselves.

Is that test perhaps... what their chromosomes are? What genitalia they were born with? What's in their pants?

You can say you don't care what's in their pants, but you obviously do or else you wouldn't be misgendering them. You have a test you're using for whether they're a man or a woman, a test that they're not measuring up to, and I can pretty confidently guess that test is biological.

----

Look, in the interest of being charitable here and trying to build bridges, I want to at least take the chance that you're saying all of this because you genuinely just don't understand how transgender identity works. Earlier, you said:

> this implies that men need to behave in a certain way, present in a certain way, think in a certain way to be considered men. And that if a woman does that too, then she's a man.

If transgender identities worked that way, it would be toxic and sexist. Calling someone a woman because they act in a certain way or wear dresses, or calling someone a man because they like football -- all of that would be extremely sexist.

To be very, very clear, transgender communities don't do that.

Transgender communities do not impose gender on anyone, your gender expression and presentation are not your gender identity. If you are a transgender man and you are still in the closet, and you act in a traditionally feminine way to everyone around you, transgender communities will... ask you what you want them to refer to you as.

There is no imposition here or expectation that you act in a stereotypical way. Trans theory rejects the notion that other people get to decide for you what your gender is -- regardless of what you wear, how you act, or how you think. If you're saying all of this because you legitimately believed that transgender people were going around saying, "sorry, but you wear a dress, that makes you a woman", the really good news is that nobody does that. You can be a man and wear a dress and act "feminine" however society defines "feminine", and you can still use he/him pronouns and you will be welcome in trans communities as a man. Trans communities are extremely supportive of this, this is not a group of people running around saying "if you act too feminine then you're a girl now, sorry we're just deciding that for you."

The only people who are deciding for you whether you're a man or a woman based on their own criteria -- are terfs and gender-critical movements.

Re: Surprising gender biases in GPT

#140
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've heard someone put it very succinctly: people like Andrew Tate are asking the right questions, but giving abominable answers. People like Andrew Tate are the only ones talking to men in those generations at all. As you said, we've left men behind in schooling which is a bad start in life. After that, we have a lot of programmes for women, both educational ("girls who code", etc.) to business things (women-owned…

Women often eventually discover they want children and are on a tight timeline. Men do too, but they are not on the timeline. They can start families at virtually any time in their life. By biasing work income towards men it gives women a larger selection of men to choose from to start families with while they are fertile. It also incents them to move sooner rather than work their own career longer to achieve their l…

They are questioned (often in bad faith) in almost literally every thread in here. Also reddit is full of this.

Being woke means being aware of prejudice, etc. What ideals are questionable to you and can you provide an overview as to why?

Also, please don't consider this an attack on you specifically, but I'm tired of seeing "I want to say something but I will only insinuate very vaguely and mention how this topic is censored". You can find real discussion of pretty much every social issue on here, nobody will "cancel" you.

Post reply on HN