GeniesLoki

He's very confident of his position and he's very big on "principle of charity" as a talking point but he's not actually very good at being charitable to competing worldviews. Most blatant example is that basically every time feminism comes up you need to salt the post liberally.

My impression was that his relationship with feminism is largely shaped by that thing where you criticize your own side more than the opponent's and don't bother to explain all the ways in which it's good because they feel so obvious to you. So then he comes off as anti-feminist.

Hmm no that doesn't feel right. I agree he's not actually sexist/misogynistic/etc. I don't think he's a bad person or anything. I do think he's not engaging well with some of the ways other people are also trying to do good.

Scott definitely seems to me to be anti-the-current-feminist-movement (even though like most people he agrees that marital rape should be illegal and women should be able to have credit cards and so on). Like, what *current* feminist issues has he expressed support for?

Comparatively, Scott is uncontroversially an effective altruist, and no one would, reading his articles, mistake him for an anti-EA person because of how much he criticizes EA.

(In fact, Scott has been very critical of Dylan Matthews, an EA who is commonly mistaken for an anti-EA because one of his posts critical of EA went viral.)

The impulse to defend anti-feminist people by declaring them to be secretly feminist is very odd to me. I am anti-social-conservative and I do not go around claiming that actually I am the real social conservative, look at my progressive views on family policy.

I think it's partly that there's a very wide range of meanings of "feminist" and people want to defined anti-feminists as "not anti-feminist" because "anti-feminist" is being interpreted as being against the broad "women are people" sense of feminism.