4 ms·
No, inclusivity is not about banning speech, it is about making sure that people can feel comfortable in an environment. Sometimes that means enforcing certain
by lukev 10y ago
No, inclusivity is not about banning speech, it is about making sure that people can feel comfortable in an environment.
Sometimes that means enforcing certain standards of speech and behavior. Which you already agree with, if you are at all functional in society.
The question in this case is not whether inclusivity is a good thing, it's whether Crockford's speech/actions were "bad enough" in the context of a conference. I don't know (and don't care to know) about that, but it's vitally important not to throw the inclusivity baby out with the bathwater.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Thriptic 10y agoWhile in principle I agree with you, I think at a certain level people need to just learn how to deal with stuff that offends them. I hear things that offend me on a regular basis, including inflammatory (and absurd) remarks about people I care about and groups I am a part of. At the end of the day, I just brush these speakers off as assholes who don't know what they are talking about and go about my day.
- LyndsySimon 10y agoI couldn't agree more. While there are certainly people out there who make inflammatory statements in order to offend and marginalize others, they are in the extreme minority. I've got an essay cooking in my head right now that's tentatively titled "Gaining useful insight from aggressive comments".
- mzw_mzw 10y agoJust because people claim to have good principles doesn't make them good people or mean that their tactics will accomplish the principle. These systems of public shaming, mobbing, and self-interested entryism clearly aren't creating inclusivity; rather, they are dramatically counterproductive in that regard. If you truly support inclusion, you should be opposing these tactics and the people who use them.