4 ms·

Oh, right, you're one of those "social justice" people.

10 points by gnosis 16y ago

moskie 16y ago
Agree with others here that this is post is a bit... dramatic. But I think of this as a shortcoming of the English language. The fact that a gender-neutral pronoun for a person doesn't exist (or exists, but isn't widely used) is forcing this to be an issue. Options exist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#English http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#English), but none of them are widely accepted.
tzs 16y ago
"I spoke to one of my friends about this issue today, a girl in the Computer Science major". Girl? Shouldn't that be "woman" if you are concerned about gender treatment in language?
- abyssknight 16y ago
  Not to mention ageism. There are so many -isms we can apply here.
jdp23 16y ago
"Using sexist language in educational materials today produces a body of workers that will be active in the workforce for decades that thinks that sexist language is professional." Indeed.
- gnosis 16y ago
  This is a good point, but I think a minor one in the context of the post. The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone). And this contempt came from someone who feminists and "social justice people" were concerned with helping. Instead of any kind of constructive or even thoughtful comment on the issue, the author's friend simply contemptuously dismissed her and everyone who cares about any of these issues. That's the larger problem. Contemptuous dismissal of people who are actually interested and motivated to help move society forward.
  - blueben 16y ago
    I think it's very clear that people do not understand why this matters. If people consistently don't understand your cause, then it's your fault for failing to convey it in a manner they can grasp internalize. "I'm here to save you from unfair gender association because it's unprofessional!" Really? That's the story? That's what is supposed to persuade people to support your cause? How do you associate that with real problems? Who is hurt by this? What is the solution and why is it better? How does this help me personally, and society as a whole? Those are the questions that need clear, simple and concise answers.
    - gnosis 16y ago
      Feminists and "social justice people" certainly share some of the blame in not effectively communicating their points of view. But they're not completely (or perhaps even largely) to blame. What most people know about feminism and "social justice" comes not from feminists or "social justice people", but from the media. That's probably why the poster's friend off-handedly and contemptuously dismissed her concern. There's a ton of conservative and reactionary backlash against both feminism and social justice in the largely conservative-dominated media in the US. So it's really not that surprising that expressing concern about these issues would garner such a negative response. It is sad, however.
  - jdp23 16y ago
    Good point.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
trotsky 16y ago
I miss college.
gacba 16y ago
I appreciate the tone and substance of the article, but... "College is where we form our ideas about what is going to be acceptable in the 'real world'." No, actually, college is where you gain the illusion that you know what the real world is like...And then reality whacks you in the head sharply upon graduation.
catshirt 16y ago
I know this won't be a popular response, but there are so many problems of greater significance (sexist or otherwise) to worry about than the pronoun usage of your outdated textboook in your outdated cs introduction. Is it distasteful? Sure. Is it tactful or responsible? Not very, on either count. Was it intended to hurt anyones feelings? Probably not. Will it prevent this person from reaching their maximum potential, professional or otherwise? Probably not. Given the above I can't help but emphasize the word choice of her friend's response: why care?
krakensden 16y ago
I'm struck by two things: her completely un-ironic dismissal of people with different views and backgrounds, and the fact that this blog post is going to show up everywhere. She is going to be deluged with bile, and nobody deserves that crap.
sledge 16y ago
Thanks for wasting my time with this.
pmiller2 16y ago
I don't think this was worth nearly as many words as were devoted to it. (Indeed, the irony of me adding to that number by making this post is not lost on me.) Use of the word "he" to describe an abstract, indefinite person ("a programmer," for instance) does not imply the gender of that person, for the simple reason that abstract, indefinite people don't have gender. Alternatively, look at it this way. You've got basically three choices: 1. Use "he" as the default. 2. Use "she" as the default. 3. Alternate between the two somehow. #1 is still considered the most standard usage, although #2 is certainly acceptable. As for #3, some writers might consider it progressive or gender-neutral, but I consider it simply jarring and won't use it. When I write, I generally choose "he." I certainly hope I haven't offended any nameless, abstract, genderless persons by this practice! There are certain exceptions; for instance, if I were referring to a dental hygienist (over 90% of whom are female), I might choose "she," but, overall, I stick with the rules of English without any compiler-specific extensions.
- johnny22 16y ago
  lots of folks go for "they"
  - catshirt 16y ago
    I opt for they/their when possible. Although this post helped me realized I could instead just construct a fictional character with a defined gender. Can't argue with that. "Yes, that's right. (S)he's a (s)he."
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- wlievens 16y ago
  You could go all transhumanist and use e. (http://www.orionsarm.com http://www.orionsarm.com)
guiseppecalzone 16y ago
Maybe we should just change the default to "she". Why? -I'm a male and ambivalent about "he" being the default. But, if it's an important issue for some woman, I'm happy to oblige. -"They" doesn't work grammatically for singular nouns. -Creating a new pronoun for gender neutral situations probably wouldn't catch on.
gnosis 16y ago
By focusing on the gender pronoun thing, most of the replies here seem to be missing the more important point. The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone) that the poster's friend demonstrated. And this contempt came from someone who feminists and "social justice people" were concerned with helping. Instead of any kind of constructive or even thoughtful comment on the issue, the author's friend simply contemptuously dismissed her and everyone who cares about any of these issues. That's the larger problem. Contemptuous dismissal of people who are actually interested and motivated to help move society forward.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone). Like it or not, many people who self-describe as feminists are actually seeking a privileged position for women. Many people who self-describe as seeking "social justice" are actually far left wing extremists pushing fairly radical proposals. Extremists in these groups tend to use minor offenses as a club to tar their political opponents [1], and the rest of the world is treating the entire group as the boy who cried wolf. It's hardly an issue restricted to feminists or social justice types. The Tea Party faces similar issues - they didn't immediately kick the racists out when they started and now the entire movement is viewed as racist. [1] I don't think the author of this blog post is necessarily one of them. She is just a young kid who took the rhetoric of her tribe too seriously. By the way, why the double post?
  - gnosis 16y ago
    "Like it or not, many people who self-describe as feminists are actually seeking a privileged position for women." This is a media distortion. "Many people who self-describe as seeking "social justice" are actually far left wing extremists pushing fairly radical proposals." I could see how that might seem to be the case in a country that's been driven as far to the right as the US has. Where Jimmy Carter, Clinton, and Obama are also branded "far-left radicals" and "socialist Nazis". Wanting people to be treated fairly is now seen as an "extremist", "radical" position. "By the way, why the double post?" Because the first post was just a reply to the first person who got distracted by the gender pronoun point to the exclusion of the more important point I addressed in my post. Then a whole bunch of other people effectively started saying the same thing. So I decided to post a general reply instead. I would have deleted the original reply, but it already had a reply, so I kept it.
thefeaze 16y ago
Hi, I wonder how gnosis found my blog? Anyway: I grew up in New York City, and relatively recently moved to Baltimore County. Something I've been coming to understand a little more every month is the difference between my understanding of what feminism is and what other people's understanding of what feminism is. To me, being a feminist means being not-sexist, and thinking that sexist things are unfortunate, in much the same way that being a normal person means being not-racist and thinking that racist things are unfortunate. It has been my experience that sexism, like homophobia and Islamophobia but unlike racism or ableism, is often accepted in quasi-professional circles. I think that none of those things should be accepted. I understand that many people's perspective of feminism is that it is in some ways man-hating or implies the superiority of women. As there is no official Feminist Institution with a Feminist Charter giving out Feminist membership cards/tattoos, I understand that what people think feminism is will be dictated by the literature and rhetoric with which they grew up. I think that the real issue is not that people are 'not feminists' but that people dismiss legitimate issues concerning equity as 'being feminist'. There is an attitude that caring is for 'social justice people' and that real technical people don't concern themselves with these issues. I personally think that it would be positive for people in technical fields not to dismiss a critical approach to these issues. I personally think the 'he' thing is somewhat damaging (as is the tone in the department that 'easy problems are for girls' and the charge leveled at me by my TA that 'you only got to skip prerequisites because you have tits') but I am open to disagreement on the subject. Refusing to be critical about sexist or potentially sexist perspectives at all because feminism is an ideology you don't like is a far deeper problem.
- gacba 16y ago
  I understand that what people think feminism is will be dictated by the literature and rhetoric with which they grew up Actually, my view of feminism is taken directly from experiences with self-professed feminists. And they often are looking for preferential treatment, not equal. Most women I know have a distinct distaste for the term 'feminist', mostly because of that. Including my wife. And her mother. Both of whom are liberal, educated, very strong and independent women. The broad brush applicability of feminism doesn't work outside the reality distortion field of academia. I personally think the 'he' thing is somewhat damaging (as is the tone in the department that 'easy problems are for girls' and the charge leveled at me by my TA that 'you only got to skip prerequisites because you have tits') The gender pronoun issue, in common parlance, is not nearly as serious as the examples you provided afterward. Those are clear instances of harassment and potential discrimination against women. I'd be fighting that battle first, because you've got better odds at winning it. The former is more of a nuisance by comparison. Something that you'll find is that it's very difficult to change other people's thinking. If they're sexist creeps, your rhetoric will have little, if any, effect on them. Better to fight battles to get rid of those jerks in the first place than complain about their output.

10 points by gnosis 16y ago

Agree with others here that this is post is a bit... dramatic. But I think of this as a shortcoming of the English language. The fact that a gender-neutral pronoun for a person doesn't exist (or exists, but isn't widely used) is forcing this to be an issue. Options exist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#English http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#English), but none of them are widely accepted.

tzs 16y ago

"I spoke to one of my friends about this issue today, a girl in the Computer Science major". Girl? Shouldn't that be "woman" if you are concerned about gender treatment in language?

abyssknight 16y ago
Not to mention ageism. There are so many -isms we can apply here.

jdp23 16y ago

"Using sexist language in educational materials today produces a body of workers that will be active in the workforce for decades that thinks that sexist language is professional." Indeed.

gnosis 16y ago
This is a good point, but I think a minor one in the context of the post. The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone). And this contempt came from someone who feminists and "social justice people" were concerned with helping. Instead of any kind of constructive or even thoughtful comment on the issue, the author's friend simply contemptuously dismissed her and everyone who cares about any of these issues. That's the larger problem. Contemptuous dismissal of people who are actually interested and motivated to help move society forward.
- blueben 16y ago
  I think it's very clear that people do not understand why this matters. If people consistently don't understand your cause, then it's your fault for failing to convey it in a manner they can grasp internalize. "I'm here to save you from unfair gender association because it's unprofessional!" Really? That's the story? That's what is supposed to persuade people to support your cause? How do you associate that with real problems? Who is hurt by this? What is the solution and why is it better? How does this help me personally, and society as a whole? Those are the questions that need clear, simple and concise answers.
  - gnosis 16y ago
    Feminists and "social justice people" certainly share some of the blame in not effectively communicating their points of view. But they're not completely (or perhaps even largely) to blame. What most people know about feminism and "social justice" comes not from feminists or "social justice people", but from the media. That's probably why the poster's friend off-handedly and contemptuously dismissed her concern. There's a ton of conservative and reactionary backlash against both feminism and social justice in the largely conservative-dominated media in the US. So it's really not that surprising that expressing concern about these issues would garner such a negative response. It is sad, however.
- jdp23 16y ago
  Good point.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

trotsky 16y ago

I miss college.

gacba 16y ago

I appreciate the tone and substance of the article, but... "College is where we form our ideas about what is going to be acceptable in the 'real world'." No, actually, college is where you gain the illusion that you know what the real world is like...And then reality whacks you in the head sharply upon graduation.

catshirt 16y ago

I know this won't be a popular response, but there are so many problems of greater significance (sexist or otherwise) to worry about than the pronoun usage of your outdated textboook in your outdated cs introduction. Is it distasteful? Sure. Is it tactful or responsible? Not very, on either count. Was it intended to hurt anyones feelings? Probably not. Will it prevent this person from reaching their maximum potential, professional or otherwise? Probably not. Given the above I can't help but emphasize the word choice of her friend's response: why care?

krakensden 16y ago

I'm struck by two things: her completely un-ironic dismissal of people with different views and backgrounds, and the fact that this blog post is going to show up everywhere. She is going to be deluged with bile, and nobody deserves that crap.

sledge 16y ago

Thanks for wasting my time with this.

pmiller2 16y ago

I don't think this was worth nearly as many words as were devoted to it. (Indeed, the irony of me adding to that number by making this post is not lost on me.) Use of the word "he" to describe an abstract, indefinite person ("a programmer," for instance) does not imply the gender of that person, for the simple reason that abstract, indefinite people don't have gender. Alternatively, look at it this way. You've got basically three choices: 1. Use "he" as the default. 2. Use "she" as the default. 3. Alternate between the two somehow. #1 is still considered the most standard usage, although #2 is certainly acceptable. As for #3, some writers might consider it progressive or gender-neutral, but I consider it simply jarring and won't use it. When I write, I generally choose "he." I certainly hope I haven't offended any nameless, abstract, genderless persons by this practice! There are certain exceptions; for instance, if I were referring to a dental hygienist (over 90% of whom are female), I might choose "she," but, overall, I stick with the rules of English without any compiler-specific extensions.

johnny22 16y ago
lots of folks go for "they"
- catshirt 16y ago
  I opt for they/their when possible. Although this post helped me realized I could instead just construct a fictional character with a defined gender. Can't argue with that. "Yes, that's right. (S)he's a (s)he."
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
wlievens 16y ago
You could go all transhumanist and use e. (http://www.orionsarm.com http://www.orionsarm.com)

guiseppecalzone 16y ago

Maybe we should just change the default to "she". Why? -I'm a male and ambivalent about "he" being the default. But, if it's an important issue for some woman, I'm happy to oblige. -"They" doesn't work grammatically for singular nouns. -Creating a new pronoun for gender neutral situations probably wouldn't catch on.

gnosis 16y ago

By focusing on the gender pronoun thing, most of the replies here seem to be missing the more important point. The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone) that the poster's friend demonstrated. And this contempt came from someone who feminists and "social justice people" were concerned with helping. Instead of any kind of constructive or even thoughtful comment on the issue, the author's friend simply contemptuously dismissed her and everyone who cares about any of these issues. That's the larger problem. Contemptuous dismissal of people who are actually interested and motivated to help move society forward.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
yummyfajitas 16y ago
The larger and more important issue is the utter contempt for feminism (which, at its best simply strives to have women be treated no worse than men), and the contempt for "social justice people" (ie. people who actually care about justice for everyone). Like it or not, many people who self-describe as feminists are actually seeking a privileged position for women. Many people who self-describe as seeking "social justice" are actually far left wing extremists pushing fairly radical proposals. Extremists in these groups tend to use minor offenses as a club to tar their political opponents [1], and the rest of the world is treating the entire group as the boy who cried wolf. It's hardly an issue restricted to feminists or social justice types. The Tea Party faces similar issues - they didn't immediately kick the racists out when they started and now the entire movement is viewed as racist. [1] I don't think the author of this blog post is necessarily one of them. She is just a young kid who took the rhetoric of her tribe too seriously. By the way, why the double post?
- gnosis 16y ago
  "Like it or not, many people who self-describe as feminists are actually seeking a privileged position for women." This is a media distortion. "Many people who self-describe as seeking "social justice" are actually far left wing extremists pushing fairly radical proposals." I could see how that might seem to be the case in a country that's been driven as far to the right as the US has. Where Jimmy Carter, Clinton, and Obama are also branded "far-left radicals" and "socialist Nazis". Wanting people to be treated fairly is now seen as an "extremist", "radical" position. "By the way, why the double post?" Because the first post was just a reply to the first person who got distracted by the gender pronoun point to the exclusion of the more important point I addressed in my post. Then a whole bunch of other people effectively started saying the same thing. So I decided to post a general reply instead. I would have deleted the original reply, but it already had a reply, so I kept it.

thefeaze 16y ago

Hi, I wonder how gnosis found my blog? Anyway: I grew up in New York City, and relatively recently moved to Baltimore County. Something I've been coming to understand a little more every month is the difference between my understanding of what feminism is and what other people's understanding of what feminism is. To me, being a feminist means being not-sexist, and thinking that sexist things are unfortunate, in much the same way that being a normal person means being not-racist and thinking that racist things are unfortunate. It has been my experience that sexism, like homophobia and Islamophobia but unlike racism or ableism, is often accepted in quasi-professional circles. I think that none of those things should be accepted. I understand that many people's perspective of feminism is that it is in some ways man-hating or implies the superiority of women. As there is no official Feminist Institution with a Feminist Charter giving out Feminist membership cards/tattoos, I understand that what people think feminism is will be dictated by the literature and rhetoric with which they grew up. I think that the real issue is not that people are 'not feminists' but that people dismiss legitimate issues concerning equity as 'being feminist'. There is an attitude that caring is for 'social justice people' and that real technical people don't concern themselves with these issues. I personally think that it would be positive for people in technical fields not to dismiss a critical approach to these issues. I personally think the 'he' thing is somewhat damaging (as is the tone in the department that 'easy problems are for girls' and the charge leveled at me by my TA that 'you only got to skip prerequisites because you have tits') but I am open to disagreement on the subject. Refusing to be critical about sexist or potentially sexist perspectives at all because feminism is an ideology you don't like is a far deeper problem.

gacba 16y ago
I understand that what people think feminism is will be dictated by the literature and rhetoric with which they grew up Actually, my view of feminism is taken directly from experiences with self-professed feminists. And they often are looking for preferential treatment, not equal. Most women I know have a distinct distaste for the term 'feminist', mostly because of that. Including my wife. And her mother. Both of whom are liberal, educated, very strong and independent women. The broad brush applicability of feminism doesn't work outside the reality distortion field of academia. I personally think the 'he' thing is somewhat damaging (as is the tone in the department that 'easy problems are for girls' and the charge leveled at me by my TA that 'you only got to skip prerequisites because you have tits') The gender pronoun issue, in common parlance, is not nearly as serious as the examples you provided afterward. Those are clear instances of harassment and potential discrimination against women. I'd be fighting that battle first, because you've got better odds at winning it. The former is more of a nuisance by comparison. Something that you'll find is that it's very difficult to change other people's thinking. If they're sexist creeps, your rhetoric will have little, if any, effect on them. Better to fight battles to get rid of those jerks in the first place than complain about their output.