Hey, I'm game!

I'm not sure my question counts as "basic", but let me know. On another thread, you implied that it was.

What is the feminist perspective, in theory and as revealed by actions, on how stereotyping language ("girls are bad at math", "men are trash", etc.) affects psychological safety and does or does not elicit stereotype threat, and, consequently, the ability to have productive discussions with all relevant parties and formulate pragmatic approaches needed to address social problems? If the answer differs by group targeted by stereotype, I want to know how and why they think it does. Since the answer differs between feminists, I at least want the Kelsey perspective described, since you seem to endorse it; others are fine to give perspective but aren't necessary.

In order for the answer to be useful to me, it does have to hit all the points. I've already got a fragmentary understanding of bits of the answer; it's tying the whole picture together that isn't working. The answer doesn't need to be a defense--I just want accuracy. It does need to do better than LLMs, which get the basics, but in my hands don't really grapple with the key synthesis of psychological safety vs "punching up" vs productive discussion with all relevant parties--they just wander into general excuses like "women shouldn't have to temper their opinions to spare men's feelings", which completely ignores the whole psychological safety and engaged stakeholders angle.

If, with your understanding, you can see that this is actually several questions, let me know what they are and I'll consider whether I'm willing to enlist your services for each one. Package deal, though--I don't want it split up where you answer easy things I already know and don't get to the heart of the matter which I don't.

If you are worried about our different assessments of whether your tutoring service actually reached the bar I am requesting, I am happy to defer to a consensus decision of Gemini Advanced, ChatGPT-4, and Claude Opus on whether your answer was at least "good" on a scale of "excellent", "good", "fair", or "poor" when given my request, that LLM's own answer to the question, and your answer(s) as input, along with a request to rate the answers as such. We can also ask it, if you want, not to judge whether your answers are correct, but only whether the answers cover what I'm asking for.

I am happy to provide you with the LLMs' answers as a starting point, with comments about how and why I find each answer unsatisfying.

Edit: I'm also happy to increase the fee to $75 per answer if I directly donate it to a mutually agreeable charity and send you proof of payment. NNAF is great--happy to support them.