[LaGrange]

Oh my god. You are joking, right? You're actually getting it, but trying to portray a kind of disgusting sexist male that would say that?

The slide is offensive, because it relates to objectification of women. It's just that. It would be hard to explain it to you, and, actually, the only reason you don't get it is because you don't want to get it, so I won't even bother for your sake. But, like, I don't think things like what you said should be left without an answer, because some innocent might stumble upon them and think no one objects.

It's because of the way women are treated. It's because of the prevalence of violence and rape. It's because a dude probably won't be battered and raped due to him being an ex, but it's something that happens to women all the time. It's something that's hard to grasp for most dudes, including you. It does relate to a form of violence/abuse, and only way you can reject that is by being intentionally obtuse.

Oh, and if he put up his previous boss face with the word "cock" on it, he would stand a serious chance of being fired. He put up his ex's (or just random woman's, still relevant) photo with a word "bitch" on it and he still has a job. And the job lets him speak publicly. What. The. Hell.

[cipherpunk]

Nothing I said in my comment was sexist, and calling me disgusting is utterly uncalled for. What's your problem exactly? How do you link the word "bitch" to rape and battery? How do you differentiate the fact that this was an ex girlfriend to the situation with an ex boss? What does any of this have to do with work standards?

You just come across as bitter and incredibly rude. Sort it out.

[guelo]

If I really hate my ex girlfriend and think she is a horrible evil woman, what would be a good biting derogatory word to use that would connotate "awful female" without other women seeing it as an attack on the entire gender?

[raganwald]

If she is an awful person, just say so. The fact that you connect her awfulness with her gender is the problem. Consider the fact that I am an asshole. I can describe this in many ways without needing to describe my so-called color. But the moment someone calls me a Nigger... That's wrong.

Same thing.

[cousin_it]

When I imagine myself calling some woman a bitch, my mind doesn't seem to contain the idea that all women are bitches. I can sort of sympathize with your having an overactive detector of bigoted speech, but I'm uncomfortable with your trying to shut me up based on the detector's output instead of what I actually meant.

[raganwald]

If you are uncomfortable with push back against your choice of words, your best bet is to avoid using controversial expressions in public.

Regardless of what you think you mean, it's a statistical certainty that someone, somewhere is going to regard words like "bitch" as inappropriate, or will feel uncomfortable, or will think poorly of you for making that choice.

It's not like I'm this lone, eccentric weirdo suggesting that it is not necessary to use the word "bitch" to describe a person whose behavior displeases you.

[raganwald]

Update: And yes, of course, it's not like you are a sexist oppressive pig either, nor are you in an isolated minority. We're two people arguing opposing points that are both well within the range of normal human behavior. What makes the subject "controversial" is that there are large numbers of people on either side of the question and many on each side take it seriously. All I'm trying to say here is that since it is controversial, it's safest to use the word in a more private setting, not an Internet forum and especially not a conference presentation. I think we can agree on the question of avoiding controversy even if we disagree on whether the word describes a specific woman.

[defen]

Can't say I'm a fan of this sterile world where realms of human experience and observation are ignored for the sake of an ideology.

[raganwald]

Can you be a bit more specific? What is sterile about describing a person in opprobrious terms without using the word "bitch?"

What realms of human experience and observation are we ignoring? I suggest the opposite: Slurs like "bitch" are lazy, they ignore the myriad of subtle colours and shades of human behavior and replace them with a catch-all that means roughly "we disapprove of you."

I am certain that a man can damn his ex with far more wounding intent by expanding his vocabulary and unleashing his inner poet. Such insults would hardly be sterile, they would be fecund.

[defen]

First of all I want to make it clear that I'm not defending Noah's use of that slide - I think it was dumb. I don't think that you think I approve of it, but I just wanted to get that out of the way up front. For the sake of argument though I'll be operating under the assumption that denigrating an ex- in a slide is a good idea, and the issue is to choose the correct word.

Back on topic, the ideology I was thinking of is the idea that men and women aren't statistically different (or if they are, that mentioning such things is impolite). I would argue that "bitch" captures a characteristically female way of hurting a man with whom she's had a relationship. (See Carmen for the high-culture version, or Louis CK for the pop-culture version - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpW3orlfp7E) It's true that the word also carries other connotations, but I don't think that was the intent.

I agree that it may be "lazy", but from a purely practical perspective, it would be tough to find a similarly short word (short enough to fit on the bobble-head) that conveys the meaning. "Evil" might work and is gender-neutral, but the class of actions that make one "evil" are broader than the class that make one a "bitch".

[Tsagadai]

There should always be a divide between public life and private life. It's called professionalism. Unless your profession revolves around peoples private lives you should avoid the 'realms of human experience' and focus on 'experiences related to you getting money/work done'. There is a time and a place, and knowing this is an important part of being an adult and fitting into society.

[defen]

I agree. See my other reply here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2751754

Somehow we got sidetracked onto the issue of whether it's ever ok to use a gendered description of someone's bad behavior.

[michael_dorfman]

If you really hate your ex-girlfriend and think she is a horrible evil woman, what would be the point of gratuitously parading your hatred in a technical presentation?

The easiest way for you to avoid having other women see your comment as an attack on the entire gender is to make sure that the comment is appropriate to the context.

[almost]

Why does the word need to indicate that she is a she? Do you think her awfulnes and femaleness are connected?

[bluedanieru]

It could be that her awfulness has a female quality to it rather than a gender-neutral or male one, in which case a female-specific insult could be appropriate (to the extent any insult would be appropriate to the listener, that is - the tone of this discussion is quickly heading toward the case where it is not appropriate to insult people at all, ever).

[LaGrange]

Female quality of the awfulness? You know, why it's mostly okay for you to decide against continuing a relationship if some physical quality of your partner disturbs you beyond the point when you can deal with it. It's sad but it happens. But I can't really imagine when such a situation would qualify someone as a horrible person.

And, I think that it's okay to insult people, for example it's okay to call someone who assigns "femininity" to character flaws a male chauvinistic pig.

[bermanoid]

And, I think that it's okay to insult people, for example it's okay to call someone who assigns "femininity" to character flaws a male chauvinistic pig.

Do you really believe that there are no linkages between sex and certain character flaws? Or is it just that this is one of those things that people should know better than to talk about when being polite? [I'd probably agree with the latter, FWIW]

Because in my life, the character flaws that I've seen in people absolutely tend to cluster based on sex. The stereotypes of the violent alcoholic boyfriend and capricious hypersensitive girlfriend come to mind as patterns that I've seen played out way too many times for the correlation to be a statistical anomaly, given that the inverse situations are very rare. I'd never say that women can't be abusive drunks that cheat on their SOs with 20 year olds and pay more attention to their jobs than their kids, but if you heard that a person of unknown sex was described that way, where would you put your money? Is it really so unfair to make that assumption?

In the end it doesn't really matter w.r.t. the current debacle - it's flat out wrong to refer to people as "bitch", and even more wrong to do so at a professional conference, and I just won't stand up for that. I do, however, think that it's fine and proper to consider certain personality traits to be more prevalent in women than men and vice versa, as long as the correlations are real (whether or not they're to blame on genetics or culture); to do otherwise is to pretend to live in a world that only exists in our imaginations.

[cipherpunk]

rolleyes

[bluedanieru]

And what is it about my chauvinism that is peculiarly masculine?

[LaGrange]

"I don't really like my ex."

When it's justified, "I think my ex was abusive," for example. That's quite biting, as far as I am concerned.

Edit: oh, I didn't relate to the "female" part. That's because you can't do that without being a horrible person yourself.

[Tichy]

Saying "my ex was abusive" makes you sound a bit like a victim, though. Why did you put up with being abused? Just saying, it is probably not the effect you wanted to achieve.

It is also more detailed, which might be even worse to spill in public than just generic insults.

[bluedanieru]

These aren't insults.

[LaGrange]

What. "Abusive" is not an insult to you?

Or is your problem based on the fact that "abusive" relates to an actual character trait, and not the gender of your ex?

[true_religion]

Calling someone abusive is descriptive.

Calling someone a bitch is an insult.

[scott_s]

Insults can be descriptive. In fact, the most biting insults are accurate descriptions.

[LaGrange]

OK, right, sorry. English as second language and all that.

Thus, my new Guide to Insulting People as a Decent Human Being: Don't.

[bluedanieru]

I suppose it is an insult if untrue. Sort of. But you specifically ruled out that case. No, I do not think it is an insult.

[VMG]

"asshole"?

[Tichy]

I think it is inappropriate to call people names in public. But to be honest your rant is a bit over the top in my mind. It's not objectification, rape, slavery or whatever. It was just somebody calling somebody else names in public. ("Cock" on the boss picture would be just as inappropriate).

[cipherpunk]

It is inappropriate to call people names in public. It is distasteful. What this isn't is sexism, and it's certainly not offensive to the entire female gender.

[Tichy]

That's what I said, I think?

[cipherpunk]

Indeed. I wasn't offering a dissenting view, just reiterating that this isn't sexist. Apologies for confusion :)

[hallmark]

"Bitch" is a derogatory term toward women.

Is that still under debate? Would you be able to say "bitch" in front of your mother and not feel uncomfortable?

[Tichy]

I think the idea of swearwords in general is to be derogatory. Would you be comfortable saying "shitface" in front of your mother?

I am not a native speaker, but I think "bitch" is actually just the word for a female dog. What makes it a swear word is in the imagination and value system of the receiver.

It would probably be wise to never use derogatory words for other people in general. But that doesn't seem the way the human psyche is set up.

[fiblye]

I really don't get the connections you're making. Not at all.

Sure, it was pointless to put the slide up there, but nobody was physically, mentally, or emotionally harmed aside from unrelated third parties that are overly-sensitive to insults that aren't being thrown at them.

And don't pretend that men aren't ever the victims of an abusive relationship or rape. "Bitch" doesn't in any way involve rape or violence. At all. It's just a term that's mostly applied to certain females that did something to really piss a person off. Males get terms like "bastard" and "faggot" thrown at them whenever they piss someone off, yet nobody ties that to prison rape.

[neutronicus]

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=2122

[LaGrange]

Yes, ESR is annoying, nothing new. Also, wow, did he do a strawman, haha. The actual claim is "your refusal to acknowledge "racism, sexism, homophobia, oppression" (BTW, ESR fails@interpunction, haha) when presented with those makes you a racist/sexist/homophobe". With opression it's a little different, because you can be an opressor even if you don't want to. Yeah, that's not fair, tough luck, that's how privilege works.

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/patriarchy-blaming-the-t... <- here, I have my authority, and my authority is better than yours because she has a cool nickname, duh. The site also has a reading list, BTW.

[neutronicus]

You called the guy disgusting, and proceeded to obliquely tar him with the same brush as rapists and wifebeaters.

Your rhetoric is over-the-top, and discredits you.

(Note: I'll readily concede that the presenter is ... not the sort of person with whom I'd like to associate. Perhaps all the way to not doing business with him.)

[orangecat]

With opression it's a little different, because you can be an opressor even if you don't want to. Yeah, that's not fair, tough luck, that's how privilege works.

A perfect illustration of ESR's point.

[owenmarshall]

ESR denies every privilege under the sun?

I'm shocked. /s

[orangecat]

The slide is offensive

Agreed.

because it relates to objectification of women.

Assumes facts not in evidence. He doesn't like one particular woman; this doesn't generalize to demeaning all women.