5 ms·

I found myself nodding along (if not necessarily agreeing 100%) until I got to this: I could have done the whole thing Taco Bell style if I had only manned up

I found myself nodding along (if not necessarily agreeing 100%) until I got to this: I could have done the whole thing Taco Bell style if I had only manned up and broken out sed, but I pussied out and wrote some Python. I know this article was written over 5 years ago, but I still feel the need to say: expressions like manned up and pussied out are a huge turn-off for me. Regardless of the ideas surrounding them or the author's programming skills, the author loses a good chunk of credibility in my eyes simply by using them. Sure, it's a stylistic choice, but it's one that I feel is actively harmful to our industry, especially for those who are new to software development or interesting in learning. So if you're reading this and you're one of those new or interested people: please don't let this turn you off from discovering and learning tools like sed or Python. One is not inferior to the other—they are simply different tools that can be used for a wide range of different things. Don't be afraid of using the "wrong" tool for the job (because even experienced developers do this sometimes), just keep on learning new tools and adding them to your own tool belt. Share your work with others, and then when someone tells you you're using the "wrong" tool, ask them to explain why and to propose alternatives. Lather, rinse, repeat.

adnzzzzZ 11y ago
>So if you're reading this and you're one of those new or interested people: please don't let this turn you off from discovering and learning tools like sed or Python. Your comment has exactly the same effect on me that its content warns people about. I'm not interested in an industry where people engage in policing other people's tone and word choices in such a harsh way. For every imaginary person you claim who might be turned off from the industry when reading such terms, there's some other imaginary person who feels more connected and enjoys the atmosphere better maybe because it seems more honest and less "professional".
- SwellJoe 11y ago
  "policing other people's tone and word choices in such a harsh way" Feeling offended, are we? His words no more harmed you than the original article harmed the person you're replying to, and they certainly don't have the force of police backing them up. We all have the right to express our opinions, and we all should have the expectation to be called on it when we say stupid shit (like "pussied out" or "manned up", which are sexist in a time where at least some of us would like for our industry to be more diverse and welcoming to new people, especially people who aren't especially common in our industry, like women). The article said some stupid shit, surrounded by lots of good advice. It's OK to call out the stupid shit. Take your own advice: Don't be so sensitive.
  - wtbob 11y ago
    IMHO, stating '"manned up" is stupid shit' is at least as stupid as saying 'manned up,' but probably more so: where the latter is just a bit juvenile, and can be used deliberately for effect, the latter is just childish. It shouldn't be taken any more seriously than emanations of 'Timmy is looking at me!' from the back seat.
    - SwellJoe 11y ago
      My metric for why "manned up" and "pussied out" is the kind of language I don't want to use, is "will this make someone, particularly someone in the extreme minority in my community, feel unwelcome or unwanted or unappreciated in my community?" So, of course, my first amendment rights mean I can say those kinds of things, without fear of police knocking down my door and dragging me off to a gulag. But, I don't want to say them, because it makes some people feel unwelcome in the conversation. Who do you believe I've made to feel unwelcome in saying that those phrases are stupid? (If the answer is, "People who enjoy saying shit that contributes to a culture of misogyny and sexism, with no one ever calling them on it." Then, I'm OK with it. It there's some other answer, I'd sincerely like to hear it.)
      - wtbob 11y ago
        The thing is, I don't think that 'manned up' is something which 'contributes to a culture of misogyny and sexism'; on the contrary, I believe that it's a valuable phrase. It is objectively better to be a man than a child. Like you, I don't mind making people feel unwelcome who really are unwelcome; unlike you, I consider people who derail technical discussions ostensibly to complain about perceived bias (but really to attract attention to themselves) to be unwelcome.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - secure 11y ago
    In your reference [1], one of the answers is http://english.stackexchange.com/a/100992 http://english.stackexchange.com/a/100992: > OED gives at least two different senses for this word. That of female genitalia is attested as early as 1699, but it's not considered for the sense meaning "coward". The other one, which I copy below, is the purported source of pussy meaning "coward". Basically, using a pet name usually given to women, like sweetheart, princess, etc. to refer to a man mockingly. The part where making fun of a person by calling them women names is what’s not okay, regardless of whose genitalia are involved or aren’t.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - theseoafs 11y ago
    The only outrage I'm seeing here is yours. Regardless of the ancient linguistic evidence you want to trot out, "pussy" is a gendered term in this day and age. It just is. And using gendered terms as insults is going to make people uncomfortable, "social justice warriors" notwithstanding.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
      - theseoafs 11y ago
        Those same people also understand that the word "pussy" means "vagina". I refuse to believe that everyone is truly under the impression that these are two completely independent words with no relation whatsoever. This is the same argument that leads people to believe that it's okay to call someone a faggot if you're not literally talking about gay people and I don't buy it. Moreover I don't see what "hoops" you have to jump through to see why using the word in that way could upset some people. We should use language which isn't divisive. Finally, the "pussy" thing is kind of secondary to me to "man up", which is also far from ideal to me in terms of phrasing.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
seanclayton 11y ago
Is the mindset of "cats are easily scared" considered socially unacceptable and offensive nowadays? Or is the word pusillanimous a derogatory term? I'm extremely confused by your distain of the phrase "pussied out." "Manned up" is understandable, though.
- skybrian 11y ago
  It doesn't refer to cats. It's a rude way to refer to women.
  - such_a_casual 11y ago
    That's a very interesting interpretation. >if I had only manned up and broken out sed, but I pussied out and wrote some Python Sounds to me like the author was speaking about being tough vs being weak. It doesn't sound like he was referring to women at all. I wonder if we asked the author if he would say he was talking about how weak women are? Cause I seriously doubt that.
    - skybrian 11y ago
      Yes, he wasn't talking about women specifically but it's like "manned up" or "throws like a girl". It's a figure of speech based on the assumption that women are weaker than men. At one time such metaphors were common but they're no longer considered polite. Times have changed and if you want your writing to have the effect you intended, you need to know these things. I suspect the author wanted to sound a bit rude, though.
      - such_a_casual 11y ago
        > "if you want your writing to have the effect you intended" And here's where we are in strong disagreement. You know exactly what the author meant. I know exactly what the author meant. We both know that the author did not intend to offend anyone, and being a blog post, was speaking the way he would to himself or to his friends. However, the way that I see things, is that yourself, as well as others in this thread, want to make-believe that the meaning was somehow lost because the author didn't use words and phrases from the PC playbook. This is where I believe I our argument lies (and I think you'd agree). Just because you are offended, or you think someone else was offended, doesn't change what the author meant, and it hasn't prevented you from knowing what the author meant. In my opinion, the use non-PC language is a very effective tool of weeding out people who aren't good listeners.
such_a_casual 11y ago
That's a whole lot of words without actually saying anything. What credibility is the author losing? Credibility as a programmer? Credibility as someone who can speak to you personally? How are phrases like "manned up" or "pussied out" harmful to "our industry"? I guess I'm living under a rock, because I had no idea that we were destroying the future of programming by using words that aren't on your approved list. Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the content, the author, or the author's intentions. It has everything to do with your own insecurities. I sincerely hope that your post was actually sarcastic and I've simply jumped to conclusions here. I truly hate this zero-tolerance generation (my own generation), and I have never met a man I respected that didn't curse.
- knappe 11y ago
  You're living under a HUGE rock. Both phrases are disliked by anyone who also wants to increase the diversity of the people working in the field of "computers". The phase "manned up" and "pussied out" are harmful and off-putting and I winced when I read them as well. They're harmful to the author's credibility in the same way that people saying things are "gay" would be to, well, anyone. They show that the person uttering the phase has, in fact, zero tolerance for diversity, the exact opposite of your claim, if they're willing to use such language. EDIT: To even further help remove that big rock. Using those phrases shows a lack of tolerance for diversity, because they're willing to use phrases that other people, ala diversity (not you), find offensive.
  - such_a_casual 11y ago
    Tolerance is not being politically correct, it's tolerating people who aren't. In recent history, it was not politically correct to be gay. In fact, things which were gay were very offensive to a lot of people. Tolerance is having the common sense to know the difference between someone who's trying to offend you and someone who's not. If you are "harmed" or "off-put" by those phrases, then you really need to go out and talk to these people that you think are so offensive. When someone doesn't mean you any offense, then none should be taken. Maybe you never played sports, or cursed, or got in fights, and that's fine. But to judge someone on their connotation rather than their meaning is irrational. I say shit's gay all the time. And I have no problem throwing around the word faggot. Does that mean I'm intolerant to gay people? No. Does it mean I'm trying to offend boys who like boys, or girls who like girls? No. They're just words. And when I use them I'm trying to express an emotion that I feel towards a certain experience or person. An emotion that is easily understood by those who are actually listening. But impossible for someone to understand if they are just looking to be offended. Words mean what the speaker intends them to mean, not what you want to interpret them to mean.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
monochromatic 11y ago
It's always hilarious when people get offended on behalf of someone else. Particularly when the someone else is theoretical.
- secure 11y ago
  I am offended by language such as the one in question. There, it’s no longer theoretical.
  - bcook 11y ago
    From the perspective of the OP, it was theoretical when the post was written. You being offended now does not change the past.
    - bcook 11y ago
      [Too late to edit] Please tell why the downvotes. Logically, I conclude that I am correct.
  - monochromatic 11y ago
    How nice for you.
wyager 11y ago
Ignoring useful information because it's conveyed using crass language is incredibly foolish. Do so at your own peril.

adnzzzzZ 11y ago

>So if you're reading this and you're one of those new or interested people: please don't let this turn you off from discovering and learning tools like sed or Python. Your comment has exactly the same effect on me that its content warns people about. I'm not interested in an industry where people engage in policing other people's tone and word choices in such a harsh way. For every imaginary person you claim who might be turned off from the industry when reading such terms, there's some other imaginary person who feels more connected and enjoys the atmosphere better maybe because it seems more honest and less "professional".

SwellJoe 11y ago
"policing other people's tone and word choices in such a harsh way" Feeling offended, are we? His words no more harmed you than the original article harmed the person you're replying to, and they certainly don't have the force of police backing them up. We all have the right to express our opinions, and we all should have the expectation to be called on it when we say stupid shit (like "pussied out" or "manned up", which are sexist in a time where at least some of us would like for our industry to be more diverse and welcoming to new people, especially people who aren't especially common in our industry, like women). The article said some stupid shit, surrounded by lots of good advice. It's OK to call out the stupid shit. Take your own advice: Don't be so sensitive.
- wtbob 11y ago
  IMHO, stating '"manned up" is stupid shit' is at least as stupid as saying 'manned up,' but probably more so: where the latter is just a bit juvenile, and can be used deliberately for effect, the latter is just childish. It shouldn't be taken any more seriously than emanations of 'Timmy is looking at me!' from the back seat.
  - SwellJoe 11y ago
    My metric for why "manned up" and "pussied out" is the kind of language I don't want to use, is "will this make someone, particularly someone in the extreme minority in my community, feel unwelcome or unwanted or unappreciated in my community?" So, of course, my first amendment rights mean I can say those kinds of things, without fear of police knocking down my door and dragging me off to a gulag. But, I don't want to say them, because it makes some people feel unwelcome in the conversation. Who do you believe I've made to feel unwelcome in saying that those phrases are stupid? (If the answer is, "People who enjoy saying shit that contributes to a culture of misogyny and sexism, with no one ever calling them on it." Then, I'm OK with it. It there's some other answer, I'd sincerely like to hear it.)
    - wtbob 11y ago
      The thing is, I don't think that 'manned up' is something which 'contributes to a culture of misogyny and sexism'; on the contrary, I believe that it's a valuable phrase. It is objectively better to be a man than a child. Like you, I don't mind making people feel unwelcome who really are unwelcome; unlike you, I consider people who derail technical discussions ostensibly to complain about perceived bias (but really to attract attention to themselves) to be unwelcome.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- secure 11y ago
  In your reference [1], one of the answers is http://english.stackexchange.com/a/100992 http://english.stackexchange.com/a/100992: > OED gives at least two different senses for this word. That of female genitalia is attested as early as 1699, but it's not considered for the sense meaning "coward". The other one, which I copy below, is the purported source of pussy meaning "coward". Basically, using a pet name usually given to women, like sweetheart, princess, etc. to refer to a man mockingly. The part where making fun of a person by calling them women names is what’s not okay, regardless of whose genitalia are involved or aren’t.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- theseoafs 11y ago
  The only outrage I'm seeing here is yours. Regardless of the ancient linguistic evidence you want to trot out, "pussy" is a gendered term in this day and age. It just is. And using gendered terms as insults is going to make people uncomfortable, "social justice warriors" notwithstanding.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - theseoafs 11y ago
      Those same people also understand that the word "pussy" means "vagina". I refuse to believe that everyone is truly under the impression that these are two completely independent words with no relation whatsoever. This is the same argument that leads people to believe that it's okay to call someone a faggot if you're not literally talking about gay people and I don't buy it. Moreover I don't see what "hoops" you have to jump through to see why using the word in that way could upset some people. We should use language which isn't divisive. Finally, the "pussy" thing is kind of secondary to me to "man up", which is also far from ideal to me in terms of phrasing.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

seanclayton 11y ago

Is the mindset of "cats are easily scared" considered socially unacceptable and offensive nowadays? Or is the word pusillanimous a derogatory term? I'm extremely confused by your distain of the phrase "pussied out." "Manned up" is understandable, though.

skybrian 11y ago
It doesn't refer to cats. It's a rude way to refer to women.
- such_a_casual 11y ago
  That's a very interesting interpretation. >if I had only manned up and broken out sed, but I pussied out and wrote some Python Sounds to me like the author was speaking about being tough vs being weak. It doesn't sound like he was referring to women at all. I wonder if we asked the author if he would say he was talking about how weak women are? Cause I seriously doubt that.
  - skybrian 11y ago
    Yes, he wasn't talking about women specifically but it's like "manned up" or "throws like a girl". It's a figure of speech based on the assumption that women are weaker than men. At one time such metaphors were common but they're no longer considered polite. Times have changed and if you want your writing to have the effect you intended, you need to know these things. I suspect the author wanted to sound a bit rude, though.
    - such_a_casual 11y ago
      > "if you want your writing to have the effect you intended" And here's where we are in strong disagreement. You know exactly what the author meant. I know exactly what the author meant. We both know that the author did not intend to offend anyone, and being a blog post, was speaking the way he would to himself or to his friends. However, the way that I see things, is that yourself, as well as others in this thread, want to make-believe that the meaning was somehow lost because the author didn't use words and phrases from the PC playbook. This is where I believe I our argument lies (and I think you'd agree). Just because you are offended, or you think someone else was offended, doesn't change what the author meant, and it hasn't prevented you from knowing what the author meant. In my opinion, the use non-PC language is a very effective tool of weeding out people who aren't good listeners.

such_a_casual 11y ago

That's a whole lot of words without actually saying anything. What credibility is the author losing? Credibility as a programmer? Credibility as someone who can speak to you personally? How are phrases like "manned up" or "pussied out" harmful to "our industry"? I guess I'm living under a rock, because I had no idea that we were destroying the future of programming by using words that aren't on your approved list. Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the content, the author, or the author's intentions. It has everything to do with your own insecurities. I sincerely hope that your post was actually sarcastic and I've simply jumped to conclusions here. I truly hate this zero-tolerance generation (my own generation), and I have never met a man I respected that didn't curse.

knappe 11y ago
You're living under a HUGE rock. Both phrases are disliked by anyone who also wants to increase the diversity of the people working in the field of "computers". The phase "manned up" and "pussied out" are harmful and off-putting and I winced when I read them as well. They're harmful to the author's credibility in the same way that people saying things are "gay" would be to, well, anyone. They show that the person uttering the phase has, in fact, zero tolerance for diversity, the exact opposite of your claim, if they're willing to use such language. EDIT: To even further help remove that big rock. Using those phrases shows a lack of tolerance for diversity, because they're willing to use phrases that other people, ala diversity (not you), find offensive.
- such_a_casual 11y ago
  Tolerance is not being politically correct, it's tolerating people who aren't. In recent history, it was not politically correct to be gay. In fact, things which were gay were very offensive to a lot of people. Tolerance is having the common sense to know the difference between someone who's trying to offend you and someone who's not. If you are "harmed" or "off-put" by those phrases, then you really need to go out and talk to these people that you think are so offensive. When someone doesn't mean you any offense, then none should be taken. Maybe you never played sports, or cursed, or got in fights, and that's fine. But to judge someone on their connotation rather than their meaning is irrational. I say shit's gay all the time. And I have no problem throwing around the word faggot. Does that mean I'm intolerant to gay people? No. Does it mean I'm trying to offend boys who like boys, or girls who like girls? No. They're just words. And when I use them I'm trying to express an emotion that I feel towards a certain experience or person. An emotion that is easily understood by those who are actually listening. But impossible for someone to understand if they are just looking to be offended. Words mean what the speaker intends them to mean, not what you want to interpret them to mean.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

monochromatic 11y ago

It's always hilarious when people get offended on behalf of someone else. Particularly when the someone else is theoretical.

secure 11y ago
I am offended by language such as the one in question. There, it’s no longer theoretical.
- bcook 11y ago
  From the perspective of the OP, it was theoretical when the post was written. You being offended now does not change the past.
  - bcook 11y ago
    [Too late to edit] Please tell why the downvotes. Logically, I conclude that I am correct.
- monochromatic 11y ago
  How nice for you.

wyager 11y ago

Ignoring useful information because it's conveyed using crass language is incredibly foolish. Do so at your own peril.