I for one look forward to when language can be used in a way that the original author sees fit and without having to pander to every gentle sensitivity or taste.
We should be considerate in how we listen as well as how we speak. It does no good to speak insensitively, nor to listen oversensitively. Communication is a two-way street.
When I feel offended, I treat it as an opportunity to learn about a different viewpoint. Sometimes it makes me change my mind. It always gives me a better understanding of people.
The thing is, you've got a woman right here telling you, "this is exclusionary and seems stupid on the face of it." We don't even have to guess at how it's taken by someone who doesn't fit into its built-in description; they're telling us in plain language.
The different viewpoint, I guess, is that the original author has some outdated views on gender competence.
I've seen lots of comments saying "oh but it adds flair to language," and that's a reeeeeally weak defense. There is much better language available; that stuff just sounds stupid at best and retrograde at worst.
I agree that the comment was insensitive. I never said otherwise. I was pointing out that you missed a case: it is entirely possible “that is not what they meant and they do not need to update their vocabulary”.
Of course it's possible they didn't mean to equate programming skill with masculinity. That doesn't mean that they don't need to update their vocabulary--just like those those elderly people I know who still use words like "negros" to refer to black folks.
Sometimes, the world changes, and it's up to us to keep up with the times.
(It's funny, I bet you anything if the original author had said "this negro gentleman at my workplace...", no one would be defending his retrograde use of language.)
You’re not wrong, but we’re arguing about different things, and I’m not sure how I can make myself clear.
I think they didn’t mean to equate programming skill and masculinity. I also think they should be more sensitive in how they speak. I also think it’s dishonest to ignore the fact that one can be true without the other.
Furthermore, “manly man” is a wacky satirical caricature of “real man”, a problematic stereotype. “Negro” is just a problematic stereotype. I think we should find a better comparison, but one doesn’t come to mind.
1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it.
2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence
This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.
Someone feeling excluded does not make something exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide someone's opinion is objective fact [i]simply because they're a woman, I might add[/i].
If that's what they meant, that's a pretty retrograde attitude.
If that isn't what they meant, maybe it's time to update their vocabulary.