Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by madisonmay 3127 days ago
Like most language, meaning is dependent on context. But in general it seems to be good practice to steer clear from pronouns associated with a particular gender when there are other perfectly good terms to be used (In this context, "people", "folks", or even "focused".)
1 comments
zaptheimpaler 3127 days ago
"seems to be good practice" for who? people who enjoy policing language, maybe. some people just want to express themselves without hypervigilantly monitoring every single word they say, for anything that could potentially offend anyone.
link
jacalata 3127 days ago
People who care about the effect their words have on other people.
link
zaptheimpaler 3126 days ago
And what of the effect suppressing/policing speech has on society and wellbeing? Believe it or not, censoring yourself and having to be in a heightened state of alertness with every word you say, against a litany of possible ways someone might take offense also has a negative effect on people.
link
jacalata 3126 days ago
It's funny, I don't experience that "heightened state of alertness" at all. Maybe the onus should be on those people who have no way to know if what they say could be offensive to get a clue and learn about the world?
link
zaptheimpaler 3125 days ago
Great, diversity and inclusion for everyone! (except anyone who doesn't agree with you, or anyone with poor social skills - fuck em). Business as usual. You know there are plenty of people, women included, who AREN'T offended at all by the term "guys" to refer to people.

And tomorrow when inclusion for neurodiversity/autism becomes the next social cause, you can talk about how you value diversity SO MUCH, all the while telling them to "get a clue" when their "diversity" manifests itself.

link
jacalata 3124 days ago
In my experience, autistic people are far less likely to offend people than charismatic "leader types", mostly because they are willing to learn and don't just blow off feedback with some bullshit about having the right to be offensive. Don't use them as a shield. And yes - people who don't agree on the value of inclusion cannot be included without destroying the inclusivity. Popper, paradox of intolerance, etc.
link