From: M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2021 17:15:07 +0000 (-0800) Subject: tap at "Challenges" X-Git-Url: http://534655.efjtl6rk.asia/source?a=commitdiff_plain;h=9f5acac3c58637dc1d63a017aefb6a995e3f37f0;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git tap at "Challenges" Managed to "get started" with this yesterday and a minute ago, but let's clear off the staging area and actually have a solid writing day today! No time to waste. --- diff --git a/content/drafts/challenges-to-yudkowskys-pronoun-reform-proposal.md b/content/drafts/challenges-to-yudkowskys-pronoun-reform-proposal.md index 53252a1..bda0d11 100644 --- a/content/drafts/challenges-to-yudkowskys-pronoun-reform-proposal.md +++ b/content/drafts/challenges-to-yudkowskys-pronoun-reform-proposal.md @@ -73,16 +73,17 @@ Bad language design? I mean, maybe! You could argue that! You could probably get The "default for those-who-haven't-asked [going] by gamete size" part of Yudkowsky's proposal is _trying_ to deal with the backwards-compatibility problem by being backwards-compatible—prescribing the same behavior in the vast majority of cases—but in doing so, it fails to accomplish its stated purpose of de-gendering the language. -To _actually_ de-gender English while keeping _she_ and _he_ (as contrasted to coordinating a jump to universal singular _they_, or _ve_), you'd need to _actually_ shatter the correlation between pronouns and sex/gender, such that a person's pronouns _were_ just an arbitrary extra piece of data that you couldn't deduce from their appearance and just needed to remember in the same way you have to remember people's names and can't deduce them from their appearances. But as far as I can tell, _no one_ wants this. When's the last time you heard someone you heard someone request pronouns for _non_-gender-related reasons? ("My pronouns are she/her—but note, that's _just_ because I prefer the aesthetics of how the pronouns sound; I'm _not_ in any way claiming that you should believe that I'm in any sense female, which isn't true.") Me neither. +To _actually_ de-gender English while keeping _she_ and _he_ (as contrasted to coordinating a jump to universal singular _they_, or _ve_), you'd need to _actually_ shatter the correlation between pronouns and sex/gender, such that a person's pronouns _were_ just an arbitrary extra piece of data that you couldn't deduce from their appearance and just needed to remember in the same way you have to remember people's names and can't deduce them from their appearances. But as far as I can tell, _no one_ wants this. When's the last time you heard someone request pronouns for _non_-gender-related reasons? ("My pronouns are she/her—but note, that's _just_ because I prefer the aesthetics of how the pronouns sound; I'm _not_ in any way claiming that you should believe that I'm in any sense female, which isn't true.") Me neither. But given that pronouns _do_ convey sex-category information, as a _fact_ about how the brains of actually-existing English speakers _in fact_ process language (whether or not this means that English is terribly designed), some actually-existing English speakers might have reason to object when pressured to use pronouns in a way that contradicts their perception of what sex people are. In an article titled ["Pronouns are Rohypnol"](https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/), Barra Kerr compares preferred pronouns to the famous [Stroop effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect). When color words are printed in text of a different color (_e.g._, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, _&c._) and people are asked to name the color of the text, they're slow to respond: the meaning of the word interferes with their ability to name the color in front of our eyes. -Kerr suggests that preferred pronouns +Kerr suggests that preferred pronouns have a similar effect, that "a conflict between what we see [...] and what we are expected to say, affects us." As an exercise, she suggests (privately!) translating sentences about transgender people to use natal-sex-based pronouns, and honestly asking oneself: "Do you feel differently, on reading it this way? Do you react differently?" +[TODO: I have a marketing problem here; the fact that Kerr chose a sexual violence example is actually kind of important here; if the sentence was about borrowing vacuum cleaners, then people in Berkeley _will_ play dumb] -[TODO: Kerr suggests misgendering as an exercise] +Unfortunately, I don't have a study with objective measurements on hand (let me know in the comments if you do!) but I think native English speakers who try this exercise and introspect will agree with Barr's assessment: "You can know perfectly the actual sex of a male person, and yet you will still react differently if someone calls them _she_ instead of _he_." [TODO: Contrary to Yudkowskys' claims about lies, Kerr _isn't_ claiming that pronouns can be "lies"; the article is _very_ explicit about this; Yudkowsky is obviously completely unfamiliar with his opponents' arguments] @@ -197,3 +198,5 @@ https://www.genderdissent.com/the-resistance-column https://www.womenarehuman.com/extra-jail-time-for-incarcerated-women-who-use-male-pronouns-for-male-transgender-identifying-inmates/ Spanish speakers screw up he/she—because they're used to dropping pronouns! https://cogsci.mindmodeling.org/2017/papers/0639/paper0639.pdf + +a rationality community that can't think about this stuff, but can get existential risk stuff right, is like asking for self-driving car software that can drive red cars but not blue cars