They mostly sound reasonable at a bullet-point level, but reading closer turns up details such as:
> Signatories must commit to “defining and otherwise interpreting ‘male,’ ‘female,’ ‘woman,’ and ‘man’ according to reproductive function and biological processes.”
But interpreting male and female according to some other criteria would also not be ideologically neutral.
If your point is that the standards are not neutral, I guess on at least this point I have to agree. If your point is that the status quo is neutral, I disagree.
Was that true? Did the universities themselves decide? Or was at least some of the support for trans "ideology" (I don't know what better word to use, but I'm not happy with this one either) due to pressure from the government? [Edit: Maybe trans "movement" is what I wanted to say.]
True, it was less pressure and more subtle than Trump's pressure. And it was in the direction that the universities were more willing to move in, due to the personnel of universities leaning left. But was it really "the universities themselves decide"? I'm not sure that it was.
But I will agree to this at least: Left to themselves, the universities were not likely to wind up where Trump is trying to push them to be.
You insinuate that the federal government exerted pressure on colleges to conform to pro-trans-rights ideologies, with "less pressure and more subtle".
Cite any pressure from the federal government.
You're engaging in a version of BSABSVR argumentation.
Biology is ideologically neutral. People who disagree with that position are anti-biology (anti-science) on this topic. It certainly makes sense to begin with how to treat men and women by noting they're biologically different instead of whatever they imagine themselves to be.
We certainly don't issue degrees based only on what expertise they identify as. We don't allow them in office based on whether they identify as President or Principal. We should likewise not use their feelings or unsubstantiated beliefs to determine if they're a man or a woman when biology has the answer almost every time. Intersex, the exceptions, we'll handle on a case by case basis.
What parts of the biology of sex mandates different treatment? Do you mean that medicine should be tailored to biology? Yes obviously, and even very progressive research hospitals take great pains to ensure the treatment is tailored to biology. Perhaps more so than conservative hospitals. You would know this if you engaged with the research outside of the news.
Outside of medicine? What different treatment does “biology” merit?
I don't think it's that difficult if you're training a lot and eating accordingly. For someone eating 3000 calories a day, that's less than 25% of calories from protein, which is pretty reasonable.
It's harder if you're not eating a lot overall, but still doable with some planning and the occasional protein shake.
Yeah, this is a weird article to have popped up on HN and probably pretty opaque to anyone not already versed in the topic. The "ecological" part here comes from ecological psychology [1] which, in contrast to cognitive psychology, tries to explain perception and action in terms of dynamical systems. The terminology is indeed very strange if you're not familiar with it.
When applied to sports coaching it basically comes down to:
- Skill is a matter of interacting with and adapting to the game environment (which includes the other players), rather than memorizing or automatizing correct movement patterns
- Humans are good at unconsciously figuring out how to move in order to interact with their environment, but bad at consciously controlling their movements
- So to teach people effectively, instead of telling/showing people what to do, you set up carefully designed practice environments and let them experiment and figure stuff out
[2] is probably a better introduction to this topic than the linked article.
Thanks for the summary -- that was really helpful. Is ecological psychology used in a broader way than just movement / sports? I guess I'll read the wikipedia page, but I'm intrigued by the idea, so if there's a review paper you'd recommend or some other reference aside from the one you linked, I'd dig it.
Most of my clients were from a local meetup where I eventually got to know most people quite well and they me. It was mostly word-of-mouth where people remembered "Oh! <other startup> had similar problems and WJW solved it for them".
In my experience (doing consulting/freelance work for a few years now), you have to get away from "freelance" kinds of jobs into "consulting". The terms are not well defined and there's a lot of overlap. But generally consulting seems to imply jobs where the client is relying on your judgment and you're responsible for the project as a whole. Freelancing is more about doing narrowly-scoped pieces of technical work.
Sites like Toptal mostly offer freelance type jobs, and there's a lot of price competition among freelancers.
For consulting work, clients don't think twice about paying $200/hour, even when the actual technical work is pretty straightforward. Higher rates are definitely possible if you have specialized skills and/or find the right clients. But you can really only find these jobs through personal connections.
If you like the "knees over toes guy" exercises, I'd definitely recommend signing up for his online coaching program for a couple of months. The Youtube videos are a bit scattered and there are some nuances to the progressions that don't come through very well, plus the feedback on your form is helpful when starting out.
I also started from the Youtube videos but I got a lot more out of it after I started doing the full program with coaching.
A lot of martial arts training is focused on practicing techniques in isolation and developing "perfect" form (punches/kicks in the air, doing the same throw repeatedly against a cooperative partner). The problem is that any technique you want to apply against an opponent in a competition (or self-defense situation) also has a significant tactical/decision-making component, which is not really trained by that approach. You have to learn when to do a technique, how to set it up, and how to adapt the movement to your specific opponent. You can learn the tactical skills in sparring but it's difficult because there's so much going on.
So when you try to jump from isolated technique practice to sparring, there's a disconnect because you haven't built the tactical skills. Even worse, the movement you practiced in isolation may be different from what works in sparring, so all that isolated practice can actually be counterproductive. You can see this pretty clearly in combat sports like kendo and fencing which have a strong component of tradition -- the movements of high-level competitors tend to be very different from the "correct" form taught in class.
I'm not sure how much this would apply to aikido, which as I understand it is not particularly focused on competitive or self-defense applications.
If you're interested in pedagogy for martial arts (or sports in general), I highly recommend "Development of Technique and Tactical Skill" by Luis Preto and Spyridon Katisgiannis.
"Principles-Based Instruction for Self Defense" by Rory Miller is also pretty good, if a bit rambling.
Thank you for the pointers. I have already put the Preto's book in my Amazon basket.
Yes, I am aware that Aikido is radically different from most other martial arts (some dojos do practice a sort of "freeflow randori" but it's usually just having many ukes throwing attacks at you, and there is not much resistance to your techniques... and in any case it never really dominate the lesson in terms of time).
Regarding your answer: personally I think this is a sort of paradox which cannot really be solved when teaching "how to fight": if I go to a "translator school" I will dedicate lots of time in actually translate texts.
There will always be a practically infinite quantity of German texts to pick up, and I am expected to always tackle each with full energy and apply any trick I know.
At the same time, there will never be a German text that will sue me from its hospital bed, or send the police to arrest my teachers and close down the school on Manslaughter charges.
Even if we look at fighting arts/sports that were designed to freely apply full force (e.g. Judo) what you learn there is targeted to face an opponent which is wearing Judo Federation approved garb, is alone and is in your same weight class and probably level of expertise.
And there is at least a referee around, fight happens on a sort of "consecrated ground" etc. etc.
I've always felt the same way. My fingers naturally want to spread out, so pulling them close enough together to rest on the home keys causes a lot of tension.
> Signatories must commit to “defining and otherwise interpreting ‘male,’ ‘female,’ ‘woman,’ and ‘man’ according to reproductive function and biological processes.”
Which is not exactly ideological neutral.