In fact “Roissy in DC” (a blog written by an openly misogynistic male “pick-up artist”) has a much larger percentage of female commenters than Less Wrong
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if this is principally defensive or similarly self-interested. Women interested in not being duped by jackasses will benefit little from understanding why they should one-box Newcomb’s problem, compared to the benefit of understanding how to spot guys like Roissy.
Not that I’m implying every single woman who follows him has that motivation; his topic is admittedly much simpler and has virtually universal appeal than most LW content, at least to single people (not his take on the topic, just the topic generally).
I think my point still stands. The women aren’t always posting supportively, but they are posting. They post because they are interested in the subject matter: dating relationships, sex, etc. These are topics of broad appeal.
This site, however appeals to a group of self-identified rationalists who are interested in obscure topics like Newcomb’s problem and the possibility of strong AI. This mindspace cluster is small and overwhelmingly male. Obviously, this is not a criticism of women. Enjoying these topics (or not) is merely a matter of preference.
Women aren’t avoiding this site because of occasional comments alluding to the fact that men like having sex with attractive women.
This is what I’m talking about in my other comment. “Women” are interested in “dating, relationships, sex” and “self-identified rationalists” are interested in “newcomb’s problem, and the possibility of strong AI”. Do you know what most men are doing tonight? Not hanging out here.
I’m interested in the possibility of strong AI and am slowly but surely obtaining and reading the necessary foundational material (starting off with SIAI core reading). I’m perfectly able to love and understand Newcomb’s problem and similar. Whether you meant “the average woman” or what, it’s careless of you to say this.
Though I agree with you that it is unlikely that women are not participating because of perceived sexism.
Edit: I’d like to mention that I’ve tried my hardest to get my boyfriend to read this site more often, but he refuses, because he thinks some of the stuff we talk about is ridiculous and irrelevant to life.
Edit: deleted female anecdote, but leaving male anecdote, because it is still necessary to provide support for my point.
This is what I’m talking about in my other comment. “Women” are interested in “dating, relationships, sex” and “self-identified rationalists” are interested in “newcomb’s problem, and the possibility of strong AI”. Do you know what most men are doing tonight? Not hanging out here.
What part of my comment are you disagreeing with? You seem to think I was claiming “men like rationality topics” and “women like dating/relationship topics”. This is not at all what I was claiming.
I was stating that almost everyone, male and female, is interested in dating/relationship topics and there is only a tiny set of people interested in LW-style rationality topics. For whatever reason, this set is mostly male. I don’t know what your anecdote is supposed to demonstrate, except that there are some men who aren’t interested in LW and some women who are (which is totally compatible with my comment).
I know I’m late to this party but… I totally agree that mostly it’s the case that there is an initial low volume of women coming to this site.
However… given that there is already a low volume arriving at the site we should therefore be extra careful not to scare any away through total insensitivity.
I don’t mean we should be afraid to utter words that may be taken the wrong way, but that PUA is really a very hot topic… one that is not appreciated by a very large proportion of women (myself included).
It goes a little beyond “occasional comments alluding to the fact that men like having sex with attractive women.”—which I definitely have no problem with. PUA is about manipulation—specifically, manipulation of the kinds of automatic processes that a woman can normally rely on to benefit her own safety and enjoyment—a manipulation of these processes that does not, in fact, benefit the woman, but the man doing the PU. This is why it’s a Dark Art.
I personally feel uncomfortable supporting a site that support the lesser forms of evil.
I would be equally pissed off if we talked supportively about the more manipulative advertising and marketing techniques…
I think that we should avoid these topics, because it scares people away—men as well as women, but the PUA one specifically scares women away… and given that there’s so few of us here already, we should try especially hard to not do that.
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if this is principally defensive or similarly self-interested. Women interested in not being duped by jackasses will benefit little from understanding why they should one-box Newcomb’s problem, compared to the benefit of understanding how to spot guys like Roissy.
Not that I’m implying every single woman who follows him has that motivation; his topic is admittedly much simpler and has virtually universal appeal than most LW content, at least to single people (not his take on the topic, just the topic generally).
I think my point still stands. The women aren’t always posting supportively, but they are posting. They post because they are interested in the subject matter: dating relationships, sex, etc. These are topics of broad appeal.
This site, however appeals to a group of self-identified rationalists who are interested in obscure topics like Newcomb’s problem and the possibility of strong AI. This mindspace cluster is small and overwhelmingly male. Obviously, this is not a criticism of women. Enjoying these topics (or not) is merely a matter of preference.
Women aren’t avoiding this site because of occasional comments alluding to the fact that men like having sex with attractive women.
This is what I’m talking about in my other comment. “Women” are interested in “dating, relationships, sex” and “self-identified rationalists” are interested in “newcomb’s problem, and the possibility of strong AI”. Do you know what most men are doing tonight? Not hanging out here.
I’m interested in the possibility of strong AI and am slowly but surely obtaining and reading the necessary foundational material (starting off with SIAI core reading). I’m perfectly able to love and understand Newcomb’s problem and similar. Whether you meant “the average woman” or what, it’s careless of you to say this.
Though I agree with you that it is unlikely that women are not participating because of perceived sexism.
Edit: I’d like to mention that I’ve tried my hardest to get my boyfriend to read this site more often, but he refuses, because he thinks some of the stuff we talk about is ridiculous and irrelevant to life.
Edit: deleted female anecdote, but leaving male anecdote, because it is still necessary to provide support for my point.
What part of my comment are you disagreeing with? You seem to think I was claiming “men like rationality topics” and “women like dating/relationship topics”. This is not at all what I was claiming.
I was stating that almost everyone, male and female, is interested in dating/relationship topics and there is only a tiny set of people interested in LW-style rationality topics. For whatever reason, this set is mostly male. I don’t know what your anecdote is supposed to demonstrate, except that there are some men who aren’t interested in LW and some women who are (which is totally compatible with my comment).
With the new information from your second comment, I read your original comment in a different way. We have no disagreements.
I know I’m late to this party but… I totally agree that mostly it’s the case that there is an initial low volume of women coming to this site.
However… given that there is already a low volume arriving at the site we should therefore be extra careful not to scare any away through total insensitivity.
I don’t mean we should be afraid to utter words that may be taken the wrong way, but that PUA is really a very hot topic… one that is not appreciated by a very large proportion of women (myself included).
It goes a little beyond “occasional comments alluding to the fact that men like having sex with attractive women.”—which I definitely have no problem with. PUA is about manipulation—specifically, manipulation of the kinds of automatic processes that a woman can normally rely on to benefit her own safety and enjoyment—a manipulation of these processes that does not, in fact, benefit the woman, but the man doing the PU. This is why it’s a Dark Art.
I personally feel uncomfortable supporting a site that support the lesser forms of evil. I would be equally pissed off if we talked supportively about the more manipulative advertising and marketing techniques…
I think that we should avoid these topics, because it scares people away—men as well as women, but the PUA one specifically scares women away… and given that there’s so few of us here already, we should try especially hard to not do that.