5 ms·

Good input and definitely worth considering. Bookmarked :) I really do dislike #18 though: "If you need a quick name for a generic fictional character, c

Good input and definitely worth considering. Bookmarked :) I really do dislike #18 though: "If you need a quick name for a generic fictional character, consider using one from a culture or gender that you usually wouldn't.[..] the cost of sometimes calling your imaginary computer programmers Julianna is zero." First of all, there's a often a good reason you usually wouldn't: It's not realistic. And many readers will pick up on that and be annoyed. So the cost is not zero. More generally, I think truth matters, and talking about the world as it is does not mean we don't want change. Pretending the world is somehow "better" than it really is does not help anyone.

CJefferson 8y ago
It's not realistic to have a programmer called Julianna? I better let my friend know. I always thought her C++ was good, but I was obviously wrong.
- gizzlon 8y ago
  Women can code. Most programmers are men
  - whack 8y ago
    I think you're reading far too much into a blogger naming one of their fictional characters "Juliana" Speaking of reality, I seldom come across Chinese/Indian names either, even though they make up a huge portion of the industry. Do you get annoyed by that as well?
    - gizzlon 8y ago
      "I think you're reading far too much into a blogger naming one of their fictional characters "Juliana"" That's not what OP is saying, and it's not one blogpost. For a more general background check out this podcast (or hes book that I haven't read): https://www.jordanharbinger.com/jonathan-haidt-the-danger-of-good-intentions-and-safe-spaces/ https://www.jordanharbinger.com/jonathan-haidt-the-danger-of... (ok, not the same, but related) That stands to reason, yes. It's not the case where I live though.
keerthiko 8y ago
You're free to dislike it, but your conclusion "it does not help anyone" is objectively false. It actively does help many people. There's a reason why marginalized communities care about "representation". Seeing people like themselves represented in the mainstream helps a marginalized individual see the path to an advanced level in an industry where they are a minority. It's inspiring. It keeps them trying despite meeting a roadblock that their other peers may not encounter. It may not be realistic, but representation is welcoming to minorities, and not really harmful to well-represented folks. Just because it doesn't help you, doesn't mean it doesn't help anyone, which is a good thing to keep in mind in general.
- gizzlon 8y ago
  "You're free to dislike it, but your conclusion "it does not help anyone" is objectively false." Well, you think that, but you don't actually know. Even if it helps in some ways it could have downsides (for the individuals or the society at large) making it a net loss. "Seeing people like themselves represented.." Probably, and that's all fine and dandy. It's possible to do that without pretending. It's the misrepresentation of reality id dislike, not the diversity itself or even the highliting of it. "Just because it doesn't help you.." That's very condescending. Also, I'm sure I'm in some minority if I look hard enough :P
  - lallysingh 8y ago
    Falsifying "it does not help anyone" is pretty easy.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - patcon 8y ago
    Minority in any meaningful sense, which is what we're discussing here, is something felt. Seeing reality distorted toward your representation is something you can feel, because it's otherwise been off-kilter and absent throughout the rest of your spacetime, in a million little ways. If you don't feel it -- or think you have to dig deep and look, as you suggest -- then, I love you, but you don't really understand what is being talked about here. That's not a barb or a take-down, nor anything the you should feel bad about, but it is a fact about the conversation you're trying genuinely to have. No pressure, but this is a really good read! https://sindeloke.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/37/ https://sindeloke.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/37/ It was the very first thing I accidentally came across back when I used to moderate a forum, before I realized there was anything to figure out about these conversations. I'm grateful for any consideration or attention you've given to this comment, as I know that we're all stupid-busy and distracted in this world of our. Cheers :)
dotancohen 8y ago
I think that it depends on audience. In the United States, you could use almost any culture's name and it would be plausible. But using e.g. an Irish name in a Saudi setting would require a bit of explanation. Of course, a good author could use that twist to his advantage. But it could easily be overdone, more than a single "not like the others" characters would distract from the rest of the book if it is not central to the story.
- gizzlon 8y ago
  Exactly. But no-one would argue that you should use Irish sounding names in your Saudi blog about Saudi people.
belorn 8y ago
I have no issue with that section except that I doubt it will be universally applied. Julianna would also usually not be used to describe a person that sacrificed families and friends for money only to die alone and rejected, or Julianna the cheap antagonist that is a one-sided character of pure evil with zero depth. Reversing gender roles is usually only fun as long it falls within current cultural accepted norms.
- nabnob 8y ago
  There's tons of popular stories with an evil witch or stepmother...
  - belorn 8y ago
    Those are within the current cultural accepted norms. A evil witch is not evil because the woman choose it, but rather because she got possessed by the devil which is then driving actor. Evil which is rarely if ever used interchangeable with a "bad guy" antagonist. Similar but different, a evil stepmother is not evil because she chosen to be evil, but rather always coupled together with context that is not interchangeable with the "bad guy" antagonist. Often this is used to demonstrate the downfall of over-protectiveness of ones own offspring over those of others. Try replace any of the antagonist in TV or movies with "evil witch or stepmother" and you have not just changed the gender but likely warped the story. Thanos would look a bit odd as a evil stepmother (and how would his motive for the Infinity Stones work?), and Ebenezer Scrooge as the evil witch would change the meaning of Charles Dickens story.
claudiawerner 8y ago
Perhaps, then, the point is to annoy people and challenge their assumptions - if they are so annoyed to see it, perhaps this will in the more thoughtfully inclined people make them question why they find it so annoying. A big idea in philosophy is that challenging our ideas generates some discomfort, so doing philosophy isn't a purely hedonist activity. I think at least in this case blogging could learn a thing from philosophy.
Veen 8y ago
Although you have to be careful if you want to avoid being spanked for cultural appropriation or some such nonsense.
sethammons 8y ago
I prefer they just use gender neutral values. They, them, their. Avoid he, she, him, her. I've heard from a couple of folks that the "I have a friend, let's call them $NAME,..." really grates them. Skipping all of that is fairly trivial.
- humanrebar 8y ago
  On the other hand, I have found making "they" more ambiguous about number to be grating. There are several forms of passive voice if they are needed. One could just get used to that.
patcon 8y ago
It's late, and I don't have the energy to engage fully as I'd hope to in my better life, but I have to admit that I'm hugely disappointed in the substance of your comment. I'm sure you're a kind person, but this comment feels very callous to my sensibilities. I mean, I understand NOT understanding, but I fail to understand the confidence exhibited here. "readers will be annoyed"? What readers? What sort? All I can assume is that maybe you and I have slightly different neurotypes, and that for you, somehow a factual sense of "truth" of the world is more urgent to represent than a harmless distortion in the name of unrealized justice. It feels like you're saying we shouldn't pre-emptively apply reality distortion fields on the way to a more just world. Because reasons. Sorry, I'm being testy, and I shouldn't be. I retract. Rather, it feels like you're saying we shouldn't because it might annoy neurotypes who are annoyed by it. I should add that the sort of analytical neurotype who would be annoyed, is _actually_ having a shining moment of power through accessible tech knowledge, and so that makes it even more disappointing that this is how people with this neurotype are processing the world. I'm not trying to come across as insulting. I'm just sad and frustrated about your views. You are entitled to have them, and I am entitled to be sad about that.

CJefferson 8y ago

It's not realistic to have a programmer called Julianna? I better let my friend know. I always thought her C++ was good, but I was obviously wrong.

gizzlon 8y ago
Women can code. Most programmers are men
- whack 8y ago
  I think you're reading far too much into a blogger naming one of their fictional characters "Juliana" Speaking of reality, I seldom come across Chinese/Indian names either, even though they make up a huge portion of the industry. Do you get annoyed by that as well?
  - gizzlon 8y ago
    "I think you're reading far too much into a blogger naming one of their fictional characters "Juliana"" That's not what OP is saying, and it's not one blogpost. For a more general background check out this podcast (or hes book that I haven't read): https://www.jordanharbinger.com/jonathan-haidt-the-danger-of-good-intentions-and-safe-spaces/ https://www.jordanharbinger.com/jonathan-haidt-the-danger-of... (ok, not the same, but related) That stands to reason, yes. It's not the case where I live though.

keerthiko 8y ago

You're free to dislike it, but your conclusion "it does not help anyone" is objectively false. It actively does help many people. There's a reason why marginalized communities care about "representation". Seeing people like themselves represented in the mainstream helps a marginalized individual see the path to an advanced level in an industry where they are a minority. It's inspiring. It keeps them trying despite meeting a roadblock that their other peers may not encounter. It may not be realistic, but representation is welcoming to minorities, and not really harmful to well-represented folks. Just because it doesn't help you, doesn't mean it doesn't help anyone, which is a good thing to keep in mind in general.

gizzlon 8y ago
"You're free to dislike it, but your conclusion "it does not help anyone" is objectively false." Well, you think that, but you don't actually know. Even if it helps in some ways it could have downsides (for the individuals or the society at large) making it a net loss. "Seeing people like themselves represented.." Probably, and that's all fine and dandy. It's possible to do that without pretending. It's the misrepresentation of reality id dislike, not the diversity itself or even the highliting of it. "Just because it doesn't help you.." That's very condescending. Also, I'm sure I'm in some minority if I look hard enough :P
- lallysingh 8y ago
  Falsifying "it does not help anyone" is pretty easy.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- patcon 8y ago
  Minority in any meaningful sense, which is what we're discussing here, is something felt. Seeing reality distorted toward your representation is something you can feel, because it's otherwise been off-kilter and absent throughout the rest of your spacetime, in a million little ways. If you don't feel it -- or think you have to dig deep and look, as you suggest -- then, I love you, but you don't really understand what is being talked about here. That's not a barb or a take-down, nor anything the you should feel bad about, but it is a fact about the conversation you're trying genuinely to have. No pressure, but this is a really good read! https://sindeloke.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/37/ https://sindeloke.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/37/ It was the very first thing I accidentally came across back when I used to moderate a forum, before I realized there was anything to figure out about these conversations. I'm grateful for any consideration or attention you've given to this comment, as I know that we're all stupid-busy and distracted in this world of our. Cheers :)

dotancohen 8y ago

I think that it depends on audience. In the United States, you could use almost any culture's name and it would be plausible. But using e.g. an Irish name in a Saudi setting would require a bit of explanation. Of course, a good author could use that twist to his advantage. But it could easily be overdone, more than a single "not like the others" characters would distract from the rest of the book if it is not central to the story.

gizzlon 8y ago
Exactly. But no-one would argue that you should use Irish sounding names in your Saudi blog about Saudi people.

belorn 8y ago

I have no issue with that section except that I doubt it will be universally applied. Julianna would also usually not be used to describe a person that sacrificed families and friends for money only to die alone and rejected, or Julianna the cheap antagonist that is a one-sided character of pure evil with zero depth. Reversing gender roles is usually only fun as long it falls within current cultural accepted norms.

nabnob 8y ago
There's tons of popular stories with an evil witch or stepmother...
- belorn 8y ago
  Those are within the current cultural accepted norms. A evil witch is not evil because the woman choose it, but rather because she got possessed by the devil which is then driving actor. Evil which is rarely if ever used interchangeable with a "bad guy" antagonist. Similar but different, a evil stepmother is not evil because she chosen to be evil, but rather always coupled together with context that is not interchangeable with the "bad guy" antagonist. Often this is used to demonstrate the downfall of over-protectiveness of ones own offspring over those of others. Try replace any of the antagonist in TV or movies with "evil witch or stepmother" and you have not just changed the gender but likely warped the story. Thanos would look a bit odd as a evil stepmother (and how would his motive for the Infinity Stones work?), and Ebenezer Scrooge as the evil witch would change the meaning of Charles Dickens story.

claudiawerner 8y ago

Perhaps, then, the point is to annoy people and challenge their assumptions - if they are so annoyed to see it, perhaps this will in the more thoughtfully inclined people make them question why they find it so annoying. A big idea in philosophy is that challenging our ideas generates some discomfort, so doing philosophy isn't a purely hedonist activity. I think at least in this case blogging could learn a thing from philosophy.

Veen 8y ago

Although you have to be careful if you want to avoid being spanked for cultural appropriation or some such nonsense.

sethammons 8y ago

I prefer they just use gender neutral values. They, them, their. Avoid he, she, him, her. I've heard from a couple of folks that the "I have a friend, let's call them $NAME,..." really grates them. Skipping all of that is fairly trivial.

humanrebar 8y ago
On the other hand, I have found making "they" more ambiguous about number to be grating. There are several forms of passive voice if they are needed. One could just get used to that.

patcon 8y ago

It's late, and I don't have the energy to engage fully as I'd hope to in my better life, but I have to admit that I'm hugely disappointed in the substance of your comment. I'm sure you're a kind person, but this comment feels very callous to my sensibilities. I mean, I understand NOT understanding, but I fail to understand the confidence exhibited here. "readers will be annoyed"? What readers? What sort? All I can assume is that maybe you and I have slightly different neurotypes, and that for you, somehow a factual sense of "truth" of the world is more urgent to represent than a harmless distortion in the name of unrealized justice. It feels like you're saying we shouldn't pre-emptively apply reality distortion fields on the way to a more just world. Because reasons. Sorry, I'm being testy, and I shouldn't be. I retract. Rather, it feels like you're saying we shouldn't because it might annoy neurotypes who are annoyed by it. I should add that the sort of analytical neurotype who would be annoyed, is _actually_ having a shining moment of power through accessible tech knowledge, and so that makes it even more disappointing that this is how people with this neurotype are processing the world. I'm not trying to come across as insulting. I'm just sad and frustrated about your views. You are entitled to have them, and I am entitled to be sad about that.