You can’t just use redefinitions to turn trans women similar to cis women.
Definitions are on a map. Similarity means “having some property in common”, which in general is in the territory, but the perception of similarity depends on which properties we are noticing, so it is influenced by the map.
(For a mathematician, an ellipse is similar to a hyperbole, because both are conic sections. For a non-mathematician, the ellipse is a lame circle, and the hyperbole is two crooked lines; not similar.)
You can’t use a redefinition to conjure a property that didn’t exist before, but you can use it to draw attention to an already existing property.
(We have already successfully “redefined” dolphins to mammals. Previously they were considered fish. The fact that they live in water did not change.)
So the question is, which properties do trans women and cis women have in common (this cannot be redefined) and which properties we are paying attention to (this can be redefined).
Trans women start out much more similar to cis men than to cis women, and transitioning doesn’t do very much.
Maybe yes, maybe no; where is the evidence? (I am focusing on the first part of the sentence. I assume that by “transitioning” you refer to the act of coming out as trans, not to hormonal therapy.)
the rationalist community is trying to make him transition for bad reasons
Speaking for myself, I don’t care whether Zack transitions or what his reasons would be. Perhaps we should make a poll, and then Zack might find out that the people who are “trying to make him transition for bad reasons” (“trying to trick me into cutting my dick off”) are actually quite rare, maybe completely nonexistent.
If I were to transition today and didn’t pass as well as Jessica, and everyone felt obligated to call me a woman, they would be wireheading me: making me think my transition was successful, even though it wasn’t. That’s not a nice thing to do to a rationalist.
By this logic, any politeness is wireheading. If you want to know whether you are passing, perhaps you could ask directly. In that case, I agree that lying would be a sin against rationality. But in the usual social situation… if I meet a cis woman who looks not very feminine, I am not giving her unsolicited feedback either.
Too bad we can’t predict whether Zack would pass before he actually goes ahead and transitions.
Maybe he’s different from those other trans women, but in that case it seems like a problem that he keeps insisting he is the same as them.
Yeah, this is exactly my problem with Zack’s statements. I am okay with him making plausibly sounding statements about himself, but when he tries to makes statements about others (who seem to disagree?), I demand evidence.
Speaking for myself, I don’t care whether Zack transitions or what his reasons would be. Perhaps we should make a poll, and then Zack might find out that the people who are “trying to make him transition for bad reasons” (“trying to trick me into cutting my dick off”) are actually quite rare, maybe completely nonexistent.
As a historical analogy, imagine a feminist saying that society is trying to make her into a housewife for bad reasons. ChatGPT suggests Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986). Some man replies that “Speaking for myself, I don’t care whether Simone becomes a housewife or what her reasons would be. Perhaps we should make a poll, and then Simone might find out that the people who are ‘trying to make her a housewife for bad reasons’ are actually quite rare, maybe completely nonexistent”.
Well, probably very few people were still trying to make Simone into a housewife after she started writing thousands of words on feminism! But also, society can collectively pressure Simone to conform even if very few people know who Simone is, let alone have an opinion on her career choices.
Many other analogies possible, I picked this one for aesthetic reasons, please don’t read too much into it.
Definitions are on a map. Similarity means “having some property in common”, which in general is in the territory, but the perception of similarity depends on which properties we are noticing, so it is influenced by the map.
(For a mathematician, an ellipse is similar to a hyperbole, because both are conic sections. For a non-mathematician, the ellipse is a lame circle, and the hyperbole is two crooked lines; not similar.)
You can’t use a redefinition to conjure a property that didn’t exist before, but you can use it to draw attention to an already existing property.
(We have already successfully “redefined” dolphins to mammals. Previously they were considered fish. The fact that they live in water did not change.)
So the question is, which properties do trans women and cis women have in common (this cannot be redefined) and which properties we are paying attention to (this can be redefined).
Maybe yes, maybe no; where is the evidence? (I am focusing on the first part of the sentence. I assume that by “transitioning” you refer to the act of coming out as trans, not to hormonal therapy.)
Speaking for myself, I don’t care whether Zack transitions or what his reasons would be. Perhaps we should make a poll, and then Zack might find out that the people who are “trying to make him transition for bad reasons” (“trying to trick me into cutting my dick off”) are actually quite rare, maybe completely nonexistent.
By this logic, any politeness is wireheading. If you want to know whether you are passing, perhaps you could ask directly. In that case, I agree that lying would be a sin against rationality. But in the usual social situation… if I meet a cis woman who looks not very feminine, I am not giving her unsolicited feedback either.
Too bad we can’t predict whether Zack would pass before he actually goes ahead and transitions.
Yeah, this is exactly my problem with Zack’s statements. I am okay with him making plausibly sounding statements about himself, but when he tries to makes statements about others (who seem to disagree?), I demand evidence.
As a historical analogy, imagine a feminist saying that society is trying to make her into a housewife for bad reasons. ChatGPT suggests Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986). Some man replies that “Speaking for myself, I don’t care whether Simone becomes a housewife or what her reasons would be. Perhaps we should make a poll, and then Simone might find out that the people who are ‘trying to make her a housewife for bad reasons’ are actually quite rare, maybe completely nonexistent”.
Well, probably very few people were still trying to make Simone into a housewife after she started writing thousands of words on feminism! But also, society can collectively pressure Simone to conform even if very few people know who Simone is, let alone have an opinion on her career choices.
Many other analogies possible, I picked this one for aesthetic reasons, please don’t read too much into it.