4 ms·

You didn't tackle any of the real criticism in my message. You remark on a discrete symptom (which is a precursor) and you affirm it's essential importance to

You didn't tackle any of the real criticism in my message. You remark on a discrete symptom (which is a precursor) and you affirm it's essential importance to your life without any historical consciousness. And that is my basic gripe with PC culture: sensitivity to every little thing that you feel hurts you or impairs you or makes you feel included. Hell is other people, get over yourselves.

SwellJoe 9y ago
I couldn't make much sense out of the rest of your comment; it seemed vague and a little paranoid. So, I latched onto the one concrete thing in your comment, assuming it was demonstrative of what you were criticising. "sensitivity to every little thing that you feel hurts you or impairs you or makes you feel included. Hell is other people, get over yourselves." That seems simple when you're white and male, and the entire industry (and much of the world) treats your existence within it as a default and correct thing. I try to assume honest intentions when someone tells me something I've said/done is hurtful, and try to remember not to say/do it again. The backlash against "PC culture" just comes off as really entitled and overly sensitive, to me (which is, ironically the same thing anti-PC people accuse everyone else of being). I don't know how to resolve that clash. I, personally, want to be part of solutions to problems rather than an impediment. I view the imbalance in our industry as a problem worth solving; welcoming more women and under-represented people of color into our industry as equals (even when it means making changes to how we do things and how we talk about things) is a net positive for everyone. It's just increasing the pool of talent devoted to solving the world's technical problems and that can't be bad. But, it sounds like I still may not be understanding your position. Can you provide another concrete example of what you're talking about? I noted your preference for big-picture rather than details earlier, but I'm clearly not grasping the big picture you're drawing...I need more details to understand where you're coming from
- throwme211345 9y ago
  You like to characterize as vague (or worse) what can be reasonably inferred or researched and have a knack for constructing positions by pleading ignorance: which makes it simpler when creating straw men and redirecting|reducing conversation scope. You sound naive and well meaning but I think that is artifice. Your comments reflect the essentially reactive nature of the PC movement (to me) which is to reject what you find distasteful and inject whatever you believe in (edit: with no real historical consciousness). Do you believe that experienced white men should be displaced (by default) by persons of color or women in a profession because of skill equivalency? Is there a ratio for that displacement? Is it based on merit or is it based on something else?

SwellJoe 9y ago

I couldn't make much sense out of the rest of your comment; it seemed vague and a little paranoid. So, I latched onto the one concrete thing in your comment, assuming it was demonstrative of what you were criticising. "sensitivity to every little thing that you feel hurts you or impairs you or makes you feel included. Hell is other people, get over yourselves." That seems simple when you're white and male, and the entire industry (and much of the world) treats your existence within it as a default and correct thing. I try to assume honest intentions when someone tells me something I've said/done is hurtful, and try to remember not to say/do it again. The backlash against "PC culture" just comes off as really entitled and overly sensitive, to me (which is, ironically the same thing anti-PC people accuse everyone else of being). I don't know how to resolve that clash. I, personally, want to be part of solutions to problems rather than an impediment. I view the imbalance in our industry as a problem worth solving; welcoming more women and under-represented people of color into our industry as equals (even when it means making changes to how we do things and how we talk about things) is a net positive for everyone. It's just increasing the pool of talent devoted to solving the world's technical problems and that can't be bad. But, it sounds like I still may not be understanding your position. Can you provide another concrete example of what you're talking about? I noted your preference for big-picture rather than details earlier, but I'm clearly not grasping the big picture you're drawing...I need more details to understand where you're coming from

throwme211345 9y ago
You like to characterize as vague (or worse) what can be reasonably inferred or researched and have a knack for constructing positions by pleading ignorance: which makes it simpler when creating straw men and redirecting|reducing conversation scope. You sound naive and well meaning but I think that is artifice. Your comments reflect the essentially reactive nature of the PC movement (to me) which is to reject what you find distasteful and inject whatever you believe in (edit: with no real historical consciousness). Do you believe that experienced white men should be displaced (by default) by persons of color or women in a profession because of skill equivalency? Is there a ratio for that displacement? Is it based on merit or is it based on something else?