Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Met Paul Graham Once

okayfail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#791

Post by chlodwig »

brandon272 wrote: post #771
chlodwig wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The RCTs that validate your assertion (or mine) when comparing reparative therapy and affirmation do not exist. All that we have to rely on now is the overwhelming consensus among medical and mental health professionals, and that consensus appears to exist among major reputable bodies worldwide, and is based on their many decades of collective clinical experience and research. If medical bodies are changing guideline…

I am well aware of the current concerns around the incentives that exist in the medical industry when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoric people. Some of it we should absolutely be concerned about, particularly when it comes to treatment of children. Where the current public discourse on these issues goes off the rails is that we conclude that, because these concerns around improper incentives and improper…

We don't need a mind reading machine to understand what gender dysphoria is, because gender dysphoric people tell us what they are thinking and feeling

It's not this simple. For one, lots of people are all kinds of confused. There are people who think they are dysphoric, transition, then realize they totally messed up. There are people who say, "I went through a period when I was a kid where I was a tom-boy or told my parents I was the other sex -- thank goodness this kind of ideology wasn't around then because I could have been trannsed. I'm perfectly happy in my biological sex right now." If you read a lot of stories they aren't necessarily "dysphoric" they just think it will benefit them someway to transition, in the same way a weightlifter who goes on steroids is not "dysphoric" about his body, he just might think he is happier to be muscled up.

And we also have people who later admit that they lied about the nature gender identity in order to get sex change drugs and trans people who admit there is substantial political pressure to make their personal testimonials about gender identity conform to a certain script: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trans-rights-biologi... https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-30/essays/on-liking-women/

Because we do not actually have the technology to turn a man into a female (or vice versa), I think the most honest and best course is to tell that person, "Sorry, you are not a woman, and the surgery you are asking for will not actually get you want you want. Cross-dressing and wearing lipstick does not make you a woman. But if you learn to accept who you are, you can live a happy life." To be convinced that this common sense approach is not the best approach, I would need very strong evidence -- at minimum multiple randomized controlled trials by honest researchers.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#792

Post by foldr »

crackercrews wrote: post #786
foldr wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a practical solution. So what’s the problem?

Probably that gender ideology played a sizable role in getting Trump re-elected. It was the topic of his most popular ad, and IIRC the plurality of swing state voters said it was the most important issue for them. So getting people to use preferred pronouns was a bit of a Pyrrhic victory in my book.

>IIRC the plurality of swing state voters said [gender ideology] was the most important issue for them.

I don't think that you RC. Citation very much needed here.

The issue of neopronouns is largely theoretical, since almost all users of neopronouns also accept the gender neutral 'they'. The Trump ads weren't about neopronouns, and I doubt that most Trump voters (or indeed most Democratic voters) could tell you what a neopronoun is.

Using people's preferred pronouns out of he/she/they is just common courtesy. It's essentially what everyone, social conservatives included, already does whenever they take someone's word regarding their gender rather than looking down their pants before talking about them in the third person.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#793

Post by brandon272 »

countarthur wrote: post #774
brandon272 wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "delusion" would be looking down and seeing a penis where a vagina exists. There is nothing delusional about understanding and acknowledging a difference between your identity and biological sex and seeking alignment between the two, in fact, it's a pretty rational approach versus the alternative of living in permanent misery. Just because we cannot see the physical manifestation of suffering or understand someone'…

It doesn't cause extreme mental anguish, I just... don't have to play along with childish games like pretending someone can be the opposite sex. I just don't! However easy or respectful you think it would be for me to play make believe, or even just pay two-faced lip service. That seems to really wind people up but since the executive order today (I'm not American incidentally), everyone is going to have to get used…

> It doesn't cause extreme mental anguish, I just... don't have to play along with childish games like pretending someone can be the opposite sex.

See, this is where you guys get it twisted. This is not a matter of playing along, it's not a game. It's a matter of social practicality. Example:

If you meet a new person who clearly appears to be a woman, do you use female pronouns with that person? What if that person is biologically male and has transitioned, and you simply don't know that? Presumably you don't do genital inspections on every new person you meet to ensure that you are not "playing along with childish games", right?

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#794

Post by crackercrews »

foldr wrote: post #792
crackercrews wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably that gender ideology played a sizable role in getting Trump re-elected. It was the topic of his most popular ad, and IIRC the plurality of swing state voters said it was the most important issue for them. So getting people to use preferred pronouns was a bit of a Pyrrhic victory in my book.

>IIRC the plurality of swing state voters said [gender ideology] was the most important issue for them. I don't think that you RC. Citation very much needed here. The issue of neopronouns is largely theoretical, since almost all users of neopronouns also accept the gender neutral 'they'. The Trump ads weren't about neopronouns, and I doubt that most Trump voters (or indeed most Democratic voters) could tell you what…

Eh, ok. [1] I guess there must be another reason Trump's campaign spent hundreds of millions of dollars broadcasting that ad. It was way more than they spent on any other ad.

You're moving the goalpost here and pretending that neopronouns is not that big an issue. But it's obviously just part of the gender ideology issue, which was clearly part of the reason Trump won.

I can see that there are still people out there with their heads in the sand. I wonder who you'll help elect next time around?

1: https://www.megynkelly.com/2024/11/11/survey-finds-trans-iss...

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#795

Post by foldr »

chriscappuccio wrote: post #681
foldr wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think PG's problem is with the prigs, not the lgbt movement itself. Can these be separated? You're essentially asking if the LGBT movement can be separated from the exact kind of activism that's enabled the advances in LGBT rights that we've seen since the 1960s. In a word, no, they can't be separated. The 'priggishness' of one or two decades ago is the moral truism of the present. Here, for example, is a spoof fl…

Of course it can be separated. There is no inherent reason the two must be molded together. Zero.

As always with history, you can imagine how things might have happened differently. For example, you can imagine gay marriage having been legalized without people ever having put social pressure on others not to use homophobic language. The two things are certainly not inherently linked. But then, very few things are inherently linked in history and politics. It's not much of an argument against a certain form of activism to point out that its results could in principle have been obtained by other means.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#796

Post by brandon272 »

chlodwig wrote: post #788
brandon272 wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "delusion" would be looking down and seeing a penis where a vagina exists. There is nothing delusional about understanding and acknowledging a difference between your identity and biological sex and seeking alignment between the two, in fact, it's a pretty rational approach versus the alternative of living in permanent misery. Just because we cannot see the physical manifestation of suffering or understand someone'…

What is "gender identity"? What is the evidence that "gender identity" exists, outside of my identity as a sexed being (ie the influence of hormones on my brain and psychological development, the knowledge of my own body)? If such a phenomena as "gender identity" exists outside of biological sex, why redefine words like "she" and "woman", which have always referred to biological sex, instead of coming up with new wor…

I'm a bit confused as to why you are pretending that the word "gender" and the concept of gender either doesn't exist or is part of some very recent flimsy social construct. The concept of gender being used to categorize things as male/female/masculine/feminine is not new, and the concept of gender roles being used for general (not rigid) categorization of male and female traits is not new, either.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#797

Post by brandon272 »

chlodwig wrote: post #791
brandon272 wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am well aware of the current concerns around the incentives that exist in the medical industry when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoric people. Some of it we should absolutely be concerned about, particularly when it comes to treatment of children. Where the current public discourse on these issues goes off the rails is that we conclude that, because these concerns around improper incentives and improper…

We don't need a mind reading machine to understand what gender dysphoria is, because gender dysphoric people tell us what they are thinking and feeling It's not this simple. For one, lots of people are all kinds of confused. There are people who think they are dysphoric, transition, then realize they totally messed up. There are people who say, "I went through a period when I was a kid where I was a tom-boy or told m…

> There are people who think they are dysphoric, transition, then realize they totally messed up.

Some people start businesses, it doesn't go well, they then realized they messed up and totally regret it. Does this mean that all entrepreneurship should be banned?

The logical failure in your argument is that you are saying that because there are problems with current approaches to transgender care, that gender dysphoria is not real and does not need to be taken seriously or treated or accommodated.

> I think the most honest and best course is to tell that person, "Sorry, you are not a woman, and the surgery you are asking for will not actually get you want you want. Cross-dressing and wearing lipstick does not make you a woman. But if you learn to accept who you are, you can live a happy life."

There is zero evidence that your "common sense approach" works at all, and there is zero evidence that reparative or conversion therapy works at all for those with legitimate gender dysphoria.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#798

Post by nathan_compton »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #783
nathan_compton wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prigs really aren't that big of a deal. Like literally who cares what they are up to?

They lost the Dems the election. “She’s for them” was by far trumps most successful ad according to polling

Maybe the people who voted for Trump genuinely don't like trans people and the prigs have nothing to do with it.

I mean its really fucked up to vote for someone who will dehumanize and villainize a population NOT because you dislike that population but just because SOME OTHER people are speaking about it vehemently. Is this what you are suggesting happened?

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#799

Post by foldr »

crackercrews wrote: post #794
foldr wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>IIRC the plurality of swing state voters said [gender ideology] was the most important issue for them. I don't think that you RC. Citation very much needed here. The issue of neopronouns is largely theoretical, since almost all users of neopronouns also accept the gender neutral 'they'. The Trump ads weren't about neopronouns, and I doubt that most Trump voters (or indeed most Democratic voters) could tell you what…

Eh, ok. [1] I guess there must be another reason Trump's campaign spent hundreds of millions of dollars broadcasting that ad. It was way more than they spent on any other ad. You're moving the goalpost here and pretending that neopronouns is not that big an issue. But it's obviously just part of the gender ideology issue, which was clearly part of the reason Trump won. I can see that there are still people out there…

You said ‘swing state voters’. The survey you indirectly link to is talking about ‘swing voters’:

>Our definition of swing voters includes those who are undecided in the presidential race, have changed their voting preference since 2020 (voting Democrat in one election and Republican in the other), or are independents who either indicate they split their votes between Democrats and Republicans, or who hold either favorable or unfavorable views of both Trump and Harris.

The sample of voters is weighted towards swing states, but judging by the numbers for 'All voters', gender wasn't the predominant issue for swing state voters in general.

I don't think that neopronouns are a big issue outside of hypothetical arguments on the internet. You can certainly link neopronouns to a broader issue that people care about. But this thread was just about neopronouns (starting from your question "What about neopronouns?") before you brought Trump into it!

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#800

Post by solid_fuel »

mgraczyk wrote: post #644
BlackFingolfin wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which robber baron do you consider to be responsible for curing polio?

Bill Gates, who contributed around 30% of the total money spent on the world eradication effort so far

So he didn't create the vaccine, and he didn't provide most of the money spent on eradication, but he did sit down for a nice long dinner with an administration that is now pulling funding from the WHO and other international health organizations.

In the meanwhile, the technocrat administration we just got is putting the anti-vaccine activist RFK Jr up as Secretary of Health and Human Services. The progress we have made on eliminating Polio is at risk directly because of actions taken by this crop of billionaires. That is more on Musk and Zuckerberg than Gates, but these people cannot be trusted to use the power and influence they have for anything other than self-enrichment.

Post reply on HN