Text Analyzers - Male or Female?

submitted by IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly from (self.LGBDropTheT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] [score hidden] stickied comment (4 children)

This is very interesting! But in and of itself, this isn't quite right for our sub. A gender/sex-specific sub, rather than an LGB/sexuality-specific sub, would be best.

I'd recommend s/GenderCritical, s/GenderCriticalGuys, or s/ThereAreTwoGenders. Maybe even the debate sub, s/GCdebatesQT - wouldn't hurt to reach out to their mods to see if they'd be interested.

That said, if you plan to specifically analyze FTM/MTF who claim to be LGB and provide those results, then it would be appropriate here.

I'm removing this thread from our sub, but I would encourage you to share about this in our next Sunday Social. Maybe there's a better online analyzer, maybe there are coders among us who want to create their own tool, maybe there are researchers and/or statisticians who want to help analyze, etc etc.

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I understand your position and of course you are the moderator.

My only rebuttal is that the argument is made all the time that we should be selecting dating partners based on "gender" and not sex. When we ask what "gender" means, the best we get is some kind of mental state. But if that were true, there should be objective evidence that supports the idea that some people who (e.g.) are male in terms of sex have more female brains and vice versa.

Of course the approach I wrote out in 10 minutes is supremely flawed for a lot of different reasons (the training set used to train the analyzer might not generalize to the target population, confounders such as age and social context). But I would argue the larger scale objective is important and relevant to LGB, whose identities are based on sexual orientation, which is objective. I do not think "gender" is objective at all. Demonstrating that is important to our cause (if it can be done).

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I absolutely 100% understand what you're saying about how our sexuality is being argued as based on gender instead of sex. It's within our rules that the conflation of the two is not allowed, and LGB is sex-based. That discussion is absolutely relevant here.

We have an intermingling with gender/sex-specific subs, but at the end of the day, our goals are different. We are here to reinforce LGB sexual orientation, whereas the other subs reinforce that sex/gender are different.

Here, our fight is for LGB first and foremost, with sex/gender coming in second and immediately after that. We're here to focus on lesbian, gay, and bisexual needs/issues/concerns.

In other places, the fight is about sex/gender first, with LGB and even hetero coming after that, in no particular order or priority. They exist to dismantle gender and sex-based roles, regardless of sexual orientation.

Does that make sense? Like, we have similarities and can hold hands, but we're not fighting for the same things. And it does a disservice to each of our goals to mish-mash us together, because then we all end up feeling overrun and colonized as our goals are redirected.

The responses in this thread provide examples. No one is talking about LGB or sexual orientation. They're talking about male/female or man/woman.

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's fair and I understand.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you, I really appreciate your understanding!

If you ever have ANY questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask us mods by sending ModMail: https://saidit.net/message/compose?to=/s/LGBDropTheT. There aren't many of us around these days, but those of us who are, we're more than happy to discuss.