4 ms·

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 ca

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.
  - knappe 11y ago
    You're making a huge leap of faith in using words that you know others find offensive, even if you yourself don't find them offensive nor mean to use them in an offensive manner. The leap of faith you're making is that _everyone_ will interpret their meaning in the way you've intended them to be used. Does it seem like that will always work out? The short answer is no. No it will not. This is _EXACTLY_ why we have conferences now enacting a code of conduct [0]. "Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, religion, technology choices, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention." The phrases used above certainly fall within the provision above. [0] http://confcodeofconduct.com/ http://confcodeofconduct.com/
    - such_a_casual 11y ago
      People are people. As I tried to communicate to you before, this intolerance is no different than the intolerance used to persecute gay people all over the world. They are different, they are offensive. "It offends my religious beliefs." Morality is not about what's popular, and it's not about what offends you, it's about empathy. Failure to see that these words are not actually offensive is a direct result of failing to empathize with the speaker.
      - ethbro 11y ago
        Probably going to get a fair amount of negative karma over this, but... here goes with the "in my experience" stereotypes (albeit largely also agreed to by a friend from the Gulf states who spent time in both Atlanta and Boston): In the Northeast and much of the West coast, being tolerant is not saying a thing. In the Southeast, it's saying a thing with humor or empathy. Example: my friend makes a joke with an African American friend in Atlanta referring to a stereotype in a humorous manner. In the Southeast, that plays like "we both know our friendship is solid, and yes, some stereotypes we're both aware of are amusing." In the Northeast? Surrounding people (not the friend in question, mind you), "How could you even refer to a stereotype out loud? That just shouldn't be done." Call me crazy, but I subscribe to the Mel Brooks theory of laughing at a thing is the strongest form of rejection. You can reject his language, but not his right to use it.
- collyw 11y ago
  You should have a look at this if you are jumping to conclusions about the way the word "gay" is used (actually watch the video its more informative). http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/21/the-gay-word-what-does-it-mean-when-young-people-use-it-negatively http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/21/the-gay-wor...
  - msandford 11y ago
    Louis CK has a hilarious bit about a very similar word that a lot of people think is homophobic and offensive but which he argues isn't.
  - knappe 11y ago
    Every time I hear it being used, it is in a derogatory fashion, ie "That's so gay" to something that they find distasteful or dislike. I'm not jumping to conclusions, since I saw it in my generation and in my sibling's generation (a decade of age difference) and the meaning certainly hasn't changed.
- jack9 11y ago
  > Using those phrases shows a lack of tolerance for diversity Not at all. You can be tolerant and socialized with a particular vocabulary. Same old arguments from the same old SJWs.
- wyager 11y ago
  >Both phrases are disliked by anyone who also wants to increase the diversity of the people working in the field of "computers". I want to increase the diversity in the field of "computers". I do not dislike either phrase. There's a huge difference between wanting more variety and political pandering. They're only tangentially related, in fact. I actually don't want to work with the kind of people who get really upset at vernacular.

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.
- knappe 11y ago
  You're making a huge leap of faith in using words that you know others find offensive, even if you yourself don't find them offensive nor mean to use them in an offensive manner. The leap of faith you're making is that _everyone_ will interpret their meaning in the way you've intended them to be used. Does it seem like that will always work out? The short answer is no. No it will not. This is _EXACTLY_ why we have conferences now enacting a code of conduct [0]. "Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, religion, technology choices, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention." The phrases used above certainly fall within the provision above. [0] http://confcodeofconduct.com/ http://confcodeofconduct.com/
  - such_a_casual 11y ago
    People are people. As I tried to communicate to you before, this intolerance is no different than the intolerance used to persecute gay people all over the world. They are different, they are offensive. "It offends my religious beliefs." Morality is not about what's popular, and it's not about what offends you, it's about empathy. Failure to see that these words are not actually offensive is a direct result of failing to empathize with the speaker.
    - ethbro 11y ago
      Probably going to get a fair amount of negative karma over this, but... here goes with the "in my experience" stereotypes (albeit largely also agreed to by a friend from the Gulf states who spent time in both Atlanta and Boston): In the Northeast and much of the West coast, being tolerant is not saying a thing. In the Southeast, it's saying a thing with humor or empathy. Example: my friend makes a joke with an African American friend in Atlanta referring to a stereotype in a humorous manner. In the Southeast, that plays like "we both know our friendship is solid, and yes, some stereotypes we're both aware of are amusing." In the Northeast? Surrounding people (not the friend in question, mind you), "How could you even refer to a stereotype out loud? That just shouldn't be done." Call me crazy, but I subscribe to the Mel Brooks theory of laughing at a thing is the strongest form of rejection. You can reject his language, but not his right to use it.
collyw 11y ago
You should have a look at this if you are jumping to conclusions about the way the word "gay" is used (actually watch the video its more informative). http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/21/the-gay-word-what-does-it-mean-when-young-people-use-it-negatively http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/21/the-gay-wor...
- msandford 11y ago
  Louis CK has a hilarious bit about a very similar word that a lot of people think is homophobic and offensive but which he argues isn't.
- knappe 11y ago
  Every time I hear it being used, it is in a derogatory fashion, ie "That's so gay" to something that they find distasteful or dislike. I'm not jumping to conclusions, since I saw it in my generation and in my sibling's generation (a decade of age difference) and the meaning certainly hasn't changed.
jack9 11y ago
> Using those phrases shows a lack of tolerance for diversity Not at all. You can be tolerant and socialized with a particular vocabulary. Same old arguments from the same old SJWs.
wyager 11y ago
>Both phrases are disliked by anyone who also wants to increase the diversity of the people working in the field of "computers". I want to increase the diversity in the field of "computers". I do not dislike either phrase. There's a huge difference between wanting more variety and political pandering. They're only tangentially related, in fact. I actually don't want to work with the kind of people who get really upset at vernacular.