1/Deleting this tweet because a few people thought it was unfair and I don't have the bandwidth to fully defend it at the moment (which means I shouldn't have tweeted it!). But briefly: I am not saying these critics are the same as SJG, but the style/tactic is very, very similar.
2/ Harden bends over backward to explain why what she's saying isn't "genetic determinism," right down to getting into the philosophical weeds of what we mean by causation, explaining how different worlds/cultural structures would cause the same genes to lead to totally different
3/ outcomes, etc. etc. To read her book and then say she is "nudging the reader towards genetic determinism" is, imo, dishonest, and the same cheap style of argument that's been endemic for decades: you deal not with the text, but with what someone *could* be saying, or how
4/ their words *could* be interpreted. Anyway, feel free to listen to my nterview with her and I didn't mean to enter the convo in an inflammatory manner.
1/ A lot of journalists thought what happened to @pescami was incredibly fucked up but couldn't or wouldn't say so because they were afraid it would harm them professionally. It was VERY fucked up. The circular-firing-squad dynamic going on in journalism right now is incredibly
2/ shitty and it's insane to me anyone could deny that it's a problem. There's a lot of cowardice afoot, particularly among older editors and writers who have felt the ground shuft under them and who would be truly fucked if they ever lose their jobs, which allows them to be
3/ steamrolled by younger, angrier writers and editors who use social justice as cover for opportunism and score-settling. Being at the center of one of these shitstorms sucks and I'm glad @pescami came through it okay. As a reader/listener, you should make your opinions on this
Very interesting situation. Scientific American ran a ridiculously bad column denouncing E.O. Wilson on very flimsy, caricature-of-social-justice grounds. A bunch of scientists signed an eloquent/effective debunking. Then they found out one of their co-signatories was Problematic
2/Folks should understand that given the climate of everything right now, Hoekstra and Moreau almost certainly were on the receiving end of countless DMs, emails, etc. telling them that they were doing unspeakable harm to marginalized people by signing the letter. Stuff's insane.
3/ It's easy to say "Ha! Under such circumstances *I* wouldn't fold!" But that's not really how social pressure works in reality. Remember that the exact same thing happened with people pulling their names off the Harper's letter.
The idea that the "dedicated science sources" offer clear answers to questions like exactly how long schools should remain closed, how long we should mask four and five years olds, and what the right lockdown policies are... none of this is true.
2/ No one *actually* cares about the "dedicated science sources." So much of this is culture-war garbage. It isn't any more scientific to say "Well James Lindsay likes this thread so it must be suspect" than it is to follow his paranoiac rantings.
3/ TRUST THE SCIENCE is a fundamental misunderstanding of what science can and can't do except on the most simple/binary questions, like whether vaxxed folks are less susceptible. Most of the time science can only offer the flimsiest or most provisional guidance.
As you can from this brief documentary I produced with my own funds, Florida has entirely too much nature
2/ I think people like touristy South Florida because there is a certain guilelessness to it. At the end of the day we all just wanna walk around beautiful palm-studded places drunk and/or on cocaine, w/occasional breaks to look at alligators. Why dress up basic human desires?
3/ Also, everyone is at least a little bit gay and/or Cuban and/or Jewish, personality-wise, which explains Miami's popularity.
(I'm really good at this and should be a travel writer.)
Reminder that many prominent youth-gender clinicians are opposed to the idea of young people getting comprehensive mental-health assesments before obtaining permanent medical procedures designed to alleviate gender dysphoria, and they get quoted credulously in major news outlets
2/ Would be interesting for someone to ask @jack_turban what his general approach would be in a situation like this. My sense is he doesn't think there are any situations where adults should intervene to delay/stall transition, but I'm blocked so can't pose the question directly.
3/ Turban appears opposed to even a six-month assessment process before putting adolescents on medical treatments with permanent effects. He should expand on this a bit. More in-depth writing and dealing with counter-arguments, less snarky tweeting. These are serious decisions.