Scott Alexander responds to reader comments on his culture wars article, addressing various topics including 4chan history, transgender issues, feminism, dating apps, and internet censorship. Longer summary

This post highlights various comments on Scott's previous article about online culture wars. It covers topics such as the history of 4chan, the role of transgender issues in culture wars, the decline of feminism discourse, the impact of dating apps on social interactions, internet censorship, and the evolution of online movements. Scott responds to these comments, often agreeing with some points while remaining skeptical of others. He also reflects on how his own perspective might be limited by his age and experiences. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines the evolution of online culture wars from atheism to feminism to race, analyzing the dynamics of these shifts and speculating on future trends. Longer summary

Scott Alexander traces the evolution of online culture wars from New Atheism through feminism to the current focus on race, examining how each movement rose and fell in popularity. He analyzes the dynamics of these shifts using concepts like fashion cycles and signaling theory, and speculates on the future trajectory of culture war topics. The post explores how terms like 'SJW' and 'woke' impacted discourse, the rise and potential decline of New Socialism, and draws parallels to longer-term cycles of mainstream institutional values. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander responds to a New York Times article about him, addressing what he sees as unfair claims and misrepresentations. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to a recent New York Times article about him and his blog, which he perceives as negative and retaliatory. He addresses four main claims from the article, explaining why he feels they are unfair or misrepresented. Scott denies being aligned with Charles Murray's controversial views on race, clarifies his comments about feminists, defends his stance on women in tech, and addresses his alleged connections to right-wing figures in Silicon Valley. He expresses concern about the article's impact on his friends, family, and patients, and requests that people not contact him about the situation. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques a study claiming gender bias in GitHub, pointing out methodological flaws and media misrepresentation of its non-peer-reviewed findings. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques a study about gender bias in GitHub pull request acceptance rates. He points out several issues with the study's methodology and interpretation, including the lack of peer review, ambiguous statistical significance, and potential confounding factors. He also criticizes media outlets for misrepresenting the study's findings, exaggerating its conclusions, and failing to mention its non-peer-reviewed status. Scott emphasizes that the study actually shows women's pull requests are accepted more often overall, and that the observed bias against women in one subgroup is small and possibly not statistically significant. He expresses concern about how such studies are used to promote a narrative of widespread sexism in tech. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander analyzes 2D:4D ratio data from LW/SSC surveys, finding unexpected correlations with feminism and masculinity, despite failing to replicate basic gender differences in digit ratios. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses his analysis of the 2D:4D ratio (length of index finger divided by length of ring finger) and its correlations with psychological traits, using data from the Less Wrong and Slate Star Codex surveys. The study aimed to explore connections between digit ratio, gender, and various traits like feminism and autism. Despite failing to replicate the basic finding of men having lower digit ratios than women, the study found unexpected correlations between digit ratio and opinion of feminism in men, and between digit ratio and masculinity in women. Scott expresses confusion about these results, noting inconsistencies with previous research and unexpected patterns in the data. He concludes that while the study was messy, it managed to find clear signals in unexpected places, though he remains uncertain about the implications of these findings. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques feminist stereotyping of nerds, arguing that nerds' social struggles are real and not simply male entitlement. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to Laurie Penny's article about 'nerd entitlement,' arguing that feminists often unfairly stereotype and shame nerdy men. He contends that nerds' social difficulties and pain are real, and not simply a result of male entitlement or privilege. Alexander criticizes the tendency to dismiss nerds' struggles and accuse them of misogyny, arguing this perpetuates harmful stereotypes. He calls for more understanding and nuance in discussions of gender, privilege, and social dynamics in nerd culture. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews G.K. Chesterton's 'What's Wrong With The World', analyzing its critiques of early 20th century society and its proposed solutions. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews G.K. Chesterton's 1910 book 'What's Wrong With The World', discussing Chesterton's critique of early 20th century society and his proposed solutions. The review highlights Chesterton's unique writing style, his opposition to both conservative and progressive ideologies of his time, and his call for a return to traditional values. Scott also critically examines Chesterton's arguments, pointing out their limitations and the challenges of implementing such ideas in the modern world. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander explains the 'motte and bailey doctrine', a rhetorical fallacy, providing examples and comparing it to the 'weak man fallacy'. Longer summary

This post explains and analyzes the 'motte and bailey doctrine', a rhetorical fallacy popularized by the author. The concept involves making a controversial claim (the bailey) and then retreating to a more defensible position (the motte) when challenged. Scott provides several examples of this fallacy in action, including in religious arguments, feminism, and pseudoscience. He then compares it to the 'weak man fallacy', showing how they are mirror images of each other. The post concludes by advising readers to avoid vague, poorly-defined concepts in debates and instead focus on specific, clear propositions. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques feminist discourse around 'nice guys', arguing it can be unfair and counterproductive, potentially driving lonely men towards anti-feminist ideologies. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of 'nice guys' and how they are portrayed in feminist discourse. He argues that the criticism of 'nice guys' by some feminists is often unfair and counterproductive, potentially driving lonely men towards more extreme anti-feminist ideologies. The post examines the origins of this discourse, its effects on men struggling with loneliness, and suggests a more empathetic approach to addressing these issues. Shorter summary

Ozy Frantz provides a detailed critique of common 'manosphere' beliefs, particularly those of blogger Heartiste, using scientific studies and logical arguments to counter claims about human sexuality and dating. Longer summary

This post is a detailed rebuttal of many common beliefs within the 'manosphere', particularly focusing on the blogger Heartiste. The author, Ozy Frantz, argues against Heartiste's views on human sexual interaction, beauty standards, gender differences, and dating strategies. They provide counterarguments supported by scientific studies and logical reasoning, addressing topics such as physical attractiveness, femininity, sluttiness, and 'game' techniques. The post also touches on issues of evolutionary psychology, societal norms, and the nature of human sexuality. Throughout, Ozy maintains a skeptical stance towards many manosphere claims while acknowledging some gender differences do exist. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines two cases of online mob justice in feminist circles to argue that movements abandoning civility ultimately self-destruct. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses two incidents of online mob justice in the feminist community. The first involves Charles Clymer, a feminist activist who was attacked on social media for perceived misogyny and insensitivity. The second is 'Jacobinghazi', a controversy involving the leftist magazine Jacobin. Scott uses these examples to argue that movements which abandon principles of charity and civility ultimately harm themselves, comparing them to cancers that grow too large and destructive. He concludes that communities which tolerate jerks within their ranks will eventually be torn apart by those same jerks. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines how 'weak men' arguments can be weaponized to unfairly discredit entire groups, forcing defensive coalitions and unnecessary conflicts. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of 'weak men' arguments and how they can be used as 'superweapons' in debates. He explains how targeting the weakest or most extreme members of a group can unfairly discredit the entire group, even if most members don't share those characteristics. The post explores this dynamic in various contexts, including religion, atheism, feminism, and men's rights movements. Scott argues that this tactic forces people to defend even the worst members of their group, creating unnecessary conflicts and making it difficult for individuals to distance themselves from extreme positions within their broader category. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues against using dishonest and harmful tactics in pursuit of social or political goals, defending the power of truthfulness, kindness, and liberalism. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues against the idea that using lies, insults, and harassment is justified in pursuing social or political goals. He contends that civilization and progress are built on agreements to be truthful and kind, even to opponents. The post explores how beneficial equilibria can arise without central enforcement, through reciprocal communitarianism and 'divine grace'. Scott defends his focus on criticizing those who claim to be rational but use dishonest tactics, seeing them as a threat to the 'walled garden' of rational discourse. He argues that liberalism and non-violence have been historically successful strategies, contrary to the view that they are weak. The post ends by comparing liberalism to a powerful 'Elder God' that should not be underestimated. Shorter summary

Scott debunks viral misinformation about false rape accusation rates and provides more accurate estimates, while criticizing the spread of such inaccuracies in feminist circles. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques a viral Buzzfeed article that claims false rape accusations are extremely rare, showing how the article's statistics are severely flawed. He provides a more accurate analysis of false rape accusation rates, estimating they affect between 0.3% to 3% of men in their lifetimes. Scott expresses frustration at how readily such misinformation spreads in feminist circles and urges readers to be extremely skeptical of statistics from these sources. He concludes by discussing the difficulty of dealing with rape accusations given the significant rates of both rape and false accusations. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander humorously criticizes ten irritating internet trends he hopes will end in 2014, ranging from overused words to memes and logical fallacies. Longer summary

Scott Alexander humorously criticizes ten internet trends he wants to stop seeing in 2014. These include overused words like 'fanboy' and 'butthurt', inconsistent arguments about global warming, the doge meme, meta-humor, socioeconomic insults, misuse of 'dude' and 'bro', generational arguments, criticism of girls with male friends, and doge memes referencing the Doge of Venice. He satirically dissects each trend, pointing out their logical flaws or overuse, and occasionally proposes solutions or compromises. The post is written in a sarcastic and exasperated tone, reflecting Scott's frustration with these internet phenomena. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques the concept of 'rape culture', arguing that society actually treats rape more seriously than many other crimes, contrary to what the term implies. Longer summary

Scott Alexander expresses confusion and skepticism about the term 'rape culture'. He examines five claims associated with the concept and argues against each one, concluding that society actually treats rape as particularly heinous compared to other crimes. He discusses how the criminal justice system handles rape cases, victim-blaming behaviors, sexual objectification, and the disproportionate attention given to rape compared to other issues. The post uses various examples and statistics to support its arguments, maintaining that the concept of 'rape culture' is misguided and contradicts observable societal attitudes towards rape. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that generalizing male violence to all men is problematic, drawing parallels with racist generalizations about crime. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques arguments that generalize male violence to all men, drawing a parallel with how similar arguments about black people and crime would be considered racist. He analyzes statistics on crime rates by race and gender, showing that while there are disproportions, it's unfair and counterproductive to treat all members of a group as dangerous. The post suggests ways to discuss violence and rape awareness more constructively, without unfairly stigmatizing entire groups. Scott emphasizes the importance of acknowledging that the vast majority of men are not violent, and argues that overgeneralizing can be harmful both to men and to the goal of reducing violence against women. Shorter summary