Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I'm not feeling oppressed. The problem isn't me feeling oppressed, it's other people feeling oppressed.

Poor choice of language can set up an exclusionary environment.

To you, this may be funny.

To me, your accusation of humorlessness reminds me of people who engage in sexually harassing "jokes" in the workplace, and then try to get away with it by using "humor" as an excuse.

You aren't the one who gets to decide when other people feel uncomfortable.




Your attitude and remarks are creating a hostile and uncomfortable environment for me. I demand that you stop immediately.

-----


>Your attitude and remarks are creating a hostile and uncomfortable environment for me. I demand that you stop immediately.

I don't understand the point you are making. If your remarks were making me feel uncomfortable wouldn't you expect me to say so? Why not?

-----


Such a tone-deaf retort is typical of those who fail to see the problem. Again the issue isn't about your or my level of comfort; the issue is the environment we set up for young people considering their opportunities in life.

-----


From the Wikipedia link in your profile I see you invented Google's "Don't Be Evil' motto.

At least now I finally understand how they manage to still hold on to that.

As long as you redefine evil to exclude things you don't feel other people should be hurt by you're all clear!

-----


Evil is teaching people to view themselves as weak victims at every available opportunity.

-----


Wait; did you just define calling out a needlessly offensive name as evil?

You do realise that would sort of be making the exact point I was trying to make, right? Or am I missing some seriously self-deprecating joke here?

-----


Words are meaningless without definition.

You say that the word "bro" is needlessly offensive. Let me ask you, where is your balance point? What is the right level of offensive? The cost of censorship is real, and teaching people to be helpless victims does more harm than any word ever could.

-----


>The cost of censorship is real

A portion of your potential audience giving you feedback that think that they the name is bad is 'censorship'?

-----


Yet even without definitions you are typing words and I am reading them and we're having a conversation here, so let's not go pretend-meta here.

The right level of offensive is the level that, given all viewpoints, does the most to benefit to society as a whole.

You're a rich straight white guy whose only discomfort over this comes down to not being able to say whatever you damn well want whenever you damn well please.

From this thread you can clearly see that there's a shit ton of people, many of whom have to re-evaluate their every word and action in our industry, for whom this triggers feelings of marginalization, ridicule and disrespect.

Insisting on maintaining your privilege over theirs and even going so far as to label their reactions as taught helplessness and defining that as evil ... well ... that pretty much sounds like the root of all evil to me.

-----


> You're a rich straight white guy

Could you be any more offensive and dismissive? What difference does his cultural background have when discussing the name of a piece of software?

Oh, wait, everything right? Cisgendered, rich white men are the enemy!

If you want, think of 'bro' as a shortened version of 'brochure'. Is it less offensive to you now?

-----


When somebody starts victim-shaming people it's very relevant to bring up the fact that they are in a social position where they have the least possible real-world experience with the negative side of the issues they're being dismissive about.

But yeah; the tone argument. Good to see that brought up. Going through your comment history is literally Derailment Bingo gold. I'm sure paul is happy to know that his bro's still have his back. ;)

-----


"Victim shaming", "Privilege", "Tone argument", "Derailment".

Hope you're enjoying all that kool aid, bro. :)

-----


Are you implying that "bro" is evil?

-----


> I'm not feeling oppressed. The problem isn't me feeling oppressed, it's other people feeling oppressed.... You aren't the one who gets to decide when other people feel uncomfortable.

But.. you.. are?

-----


Do you realize how patronizing it is when white males get preemptively upset over something instead of letting women and minorities speak for themselves?

-----


The funny thing is women and minorities are rarely offended by these sort of things but the White males of HN seem to think everyone else is a damsel in distress in dire need of their protection.

-----


> You aren't the one who gets to decide when other people feel uncomfortable.

> it's other people feeling oppressed

Seems a bit hypocritical doesn't it? You are sort of correct. The only person who gets to decide if "he/she" (notice the political correctness?) is offended is "himself/herself." Just as you cannot tell someone he/she is offended, you cannot tell anyone he/she is being offensive. The only person who can label someone as offensive is the person who is offended by the words.

Stop getting offended over pointless shit. Nothing can be offensive without offensive intent. 99% of the time, the problem lies with the person getting offended, not the person doing the offending. Nobody has an obligation to feel like they are walking on glass when he/she opens his/her mouth.

-----


I wonder how many female programmers actually feel oppressed by this?

-----


I doubt many do. The ones who would feel oppressed probably just avoid the field. Which is not an optimal outcome, in case that wasn't obvious.

-----


We should compile in a Wiki (or something similar) everything that might make someone uncomfortable.

That way, we can look up and make sure this thing never happens. Then, with any luck, a strawperson (not strawman) will never feel like that for something on the internet again.

-----


You aren't the one who gets to decide when other people feel uncomfortable.

... because that's your job, I suppose?

-----


Why would this hypothetically offended person not by offended by "man"? They would not use it(as offended as they are), therefore they'd never learn it meant "manual", just as they wouldn't learn that "bro" is short for "brochure"....right?

-----


> Poor choice of language can set up an exclusionary environment.

Do you have any examples of this assertion to help understand what you are getting at and how it relates to this?

-----


You sure felt uncomfortable all over the comments page. Yuck bra.

-----




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: