Seeking Out People and Information That Challenge Our Worldview
And I distrust anyone who fails to actively seek out information (articles, websites, books and everything else) that strongly challenges their own worldview.
And I distrust anyone who fails to actively seek out information (articles, websites, books and everything else) that strongly challenges their own worldview.
The ACLU is doing a victory lap on a case that risks demoralizing many woman athletes and dissuades them from competing at all. Here's the ACLU Tweet:
We now have a competing-frames argument like we do in the abortion debate (my body vs. don't kill babies). In transgender sports, the competing frames are A) It is insulting and unfair to exclude trans people from women's sports, versus B) Trans women are so much stronger, faster and larger than bio women (because they went through puberty as men) that they are dominating the competition. This competing Frame flips between two principles and also flips between the perspectives of the two parties to this dispute.
In reaction to the ACLU Tweet many people are applauding this court decision as kind and decent, the correct thing to do for trans women. Laudable first principles are important, but so are the overall consequences for women's sports. What if this court case destroys the careers of aspiring women athletes in order to invite athletes who went through puberty as men to compete as women? I believe that this decision will demoralize many women athletes and convince them give up careers as women athletes. Regardless of how well-intentioned it is to be "inclusive," this decision is likely to hurt attendance and destroy the carefully constructed spaces that most women athletes want and need in order to fairly compete. My concerns are echoed by the concerns of many women who have responded to the ACLU Tweet. Here are some excerpts from numerous comment Tweets to the above Tweet, all of them by women:
This is definitely not a victory for girls and women. It is a victory for trans identified males.
How is this a victory? This is a kick in the teeth for women in sports
Girls are going to drop out of sports if they know that they don't have a fair competition.
All these transwomen are way taller than the average woman/girl yet even seeing this obvious physical difference they deny the Male body that these transwomen inhabit. Why don't female hormones shorten these transwomen to a normal woman's height? A: Because Trans science is false
If women and girls to walk off the field, who will biological men race /play against then ?
Seriously, this left has lost its mind. I’m tired of wondering where sanity went and expecting it to come back.
The fact that every left wing person in this country isn’t screaming about the damage this will do to our girls tells me the left I knew no longer exists.
Let this sink in. A rights organisation is fighting not to keep boys out of girls sports but to PUT THEM IN.
This is so worrisome. A female cannot compete with a transwoman, especially if they transitioned after male puberty. Most bone and muscle mass for a transwoman will have already been built as a male. For a biological woman to compete, she would have to take testosterone.
A tragedy for women/girls! The ACLU actively works against women/girls to steal their existing rights! The ACLU attempts to steal opportunities of girls to compete, steal their scholarships.
What’s the point? Sport is competitive. Looking at World Rugby’s analysis, allowing TW to play against women is not remotely competitive. It is dangerous. Who wants to compete in, or watch that?
It will kill women’s sport taking the little revenue it had with it.
Here's the quadruple whammy:
A) Confirmation Bias, B) Availability Heuristic and C) the Focussing Illusion and D) In-group loyalties.
These add up to an extremely dangerous personal hubris that we have no blindspots, that we know everything we need to know, and that our ideas are fully tested whereas we have simply enshrined them in our own brains, surrounding them with mental electrified fences. We need THIS daily vitamin: Our ideas need to be repeatedly tested by numerous uninterested or antagonistic OTHERS. We often commit medical malpractice when we pretend we are world-class doctors who can adequately diagnose our own thought processes.
I am fatiguing from meeting people who never ever doubt their mental hygiene and never worry about the need to run meaningful real-world tests on their own ideas. I'm getting worn out watching people bark at each other on FB instead of showing humility and a willingness to learn from each other. I want to ask so many people on FB: "Why are you here? To learn something new or merely to strut around looking for fully cooked allies?"
Cognitive linguist Steven Pinker has had an illustrious career as a teacher and prolific author. His politics have often leaned to the left. None of this immunizes him from baseless attacks by hundreds of people who apparently don't see any value in Pinker's willingness to contribute his expertise to national conversations on critically relevant issues. They are unwilling to give fair readings to Pinker's statements. They also appear to be threatened by Pinker's use of germane statistics in order to shed light on complex claims involving police behavior and racism.
Here is the opening paragraph of a recent letter signed by almost 500 people, many of them grad students and undergrads, then sent to the Linguistic Society of America:
In reaction to this letter, Jerry Coyne, eminent Professor of Professor of Ecology & Evolution, concludes as follows at his website: "I’m really steamed when a group of misguided zealots tries to damage someone’s career, and does so dishonestly."
Linguist John McWhorter has also indicated his enthusiastic support of Steven Pinker:
Here is Jerry Coyne's full blog post, setting forth the numerous false accusations against Pinker coupled with the evidence clearly demonstrating that these accusations are false. Coyne's post is titled "The Purity Posse pursues Pinker."
I invite you to read both sides of this dispute. I suspect you will be outraged at the way Pinker is being treated. You might also wonder how it is that hundreds of people who claim to be highly knowledgeable in linguistics are such inept readers. The phrase "social conflagration" might come to mind as you review the evidence. The name Robespierre might periodically pop into your thought process.
Tweet from Scott Barry Kaufman, who is one of my favorite podcast hosts at The Psychology Podcast: