It’s interesting as a “just for fun” idea. On some blogs it would probably be fine, but OB used to feel a lot more rigorous, important, and multiple levels above me, than it does now.
For some posts, only occasionally, I wonder if Robin Hanson is intentionally messing with the LessWrong crowd that’s still over there, posting the most plausible stuff he can think of that’s.… well… wrong.
I’m nowhere near as conversant with OB’s back catalog as I am with LW’s, which might skew my interpretation, but on reading Gentle Silent Rape I did suspect I was being, well, trolled.
Yes, that post neglects to mention an obvious fact that makes it come off as hysterical and creepy/potentially dangerous. However, the lesser point that sex-‘starved’ people (especially men) are unfortunately Acceptable Targets, even though sexual deprivation can be a significant emotional harm, seems true and important.
(It seems to me that people vary a lot in how much they suffer when sexually deprived, and the typical mind fallacy is rampant in both directions, though probably more problematic coming from the low sufferers. As a low sufferer myself, this is not a personal complaint.)
Is it just me or is Overcoming Bias almost reaching the point of self-parody with recent posts like http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/12/renew-forager-law.html ?
It’s interesting as a “just for fun” idea. On some blogs it would probably be fine, but OB used to feel a lot more rigorous, important, and multiple levels above me, than it does now.
Did Hanson’s posts specifically feel that way? OB used to be a group blog.
I think Robin is playing at something like fourth- or fifth-order contrarian at this point.
There’s a word for doing that on the Internet. I wonder what that word is.
For some posts, only occasionally, I wonder if Robin Hanson is intentionally messing with the LessWrong crowd that’s still over there, posting the most plausible stuff he can think of that’s.… well… wrong.
But this is simply wild mass guessing on my part.
I’m nowhere near as conversant with OB’s back catalog as I am with LW’s, which might skew my interpretation, but on reading Gentle Silent Rape I did suspect I was being, well, trolled.
It might be trolling, but Hansen has a history of trying to figure out scenarios where whether women actually want sex is irrelevant.
If it were sincere, it would be a sterling example of the dangers of proceeding with no feedback.
Reaching?
Naah.
Yes, that post neglects to mention an obvious fact that makes it come off as hysterical and creepy/potentially dangerous. However, the lesser point that sex-‘starved’ people (especially men) are unfortunately Acceptable Targets, even though sexual deprivation can be a significant emotional harm, seems true and important.
(It seems to me that people vary a lot in how much they suffer when sexually deprived, and the typical mind fallacy is rampant in both directions, though probably more problematic coming from the low sufferers. As a low sufferer myself, this is not a personal complaint.)