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 examines the correlation between names considered 'douchebag' names and Republican political affiliation, presenting humorous hypotheses to explain the findings. Longer summary

Scott Alexander humorously explores the correlation between names perceived as 'douchebag' names and political affiliation. He compares two lists of names considered 'douchebag' names from internet sources with data on political affiliation by name. The analysis reveals that names considered 'douchebag' names are disproportionately associated with Republican voters. Scott presents three hypotheses to explain this correlation: douchebags are disproportionately Republican, parents who choose these names are disproportionately Republican, or 'douchebag' is a tribally-coded slur. The post maintains a satirical tone throughout, starting with a deliberately provocative title. Shorter summary

Scott argues that social psychology is often misused in political discourse, presenting counterintuitive claims to demonstrate how easily it can be manipulated to support various agendas. Longer summary

This post critiques the use of social psychology in political discourse, arguing that it's often misused to support preexisting beliefs. Scott presents six counterintuitive social psychology claims that oppose common narratives, such as media violence preventing crime and fighting stereotypes increasing prejudice. He argues these claims, while not definitively proven, are as plausible as their more commonly accepted opposites. The post highlights the dangers of using speculative social psychology to justify social engineering, emphasizing that poorly replicated short-term studies can prove almost anything. Scott concludes by advocating for caution and subtlety when applying social psychology findings to social policy. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander explores how selection bias might create the stereotype of angry, vocal atheists, and speculates on how this concept might apply to other groups. Longer summary

This post discusses how selection bias may contribute to the stereotype of atheists as loud and angry. Scott argues that while religious people are visible in many contexts, atheists are typically only noticed when criticizing religion or advocating for atheist causes. This creates a false impression that atheists are obsessed with attacking religion. The post suggests that most atheists rarely discuss their lack of belief, but these individuals don't get attention as atheists. Scott then extends this concept to other groups, speculating that similar selection biases might contribute to stereotypes about Muslims, Christians in secular areas, and even ethnic groups. Shorter summary