4 ms·
Of course we know that using master/slave terminology doesn't actually perpetuate harm. But the reason to change it is because a lot of people don't like heari
by Gunax 6y ago
Of course we know that using master/slave terminology doesn't actually perpetuate harm. But the reason to change it is because a lot of people don't like hearing it or saying it.
It feels like a punch to the gut when I have to hear master/slave being applied to hard drives. It's perhaps a difficult thing to describe if you have not felt it.
I know some of you will think I am being dramatic. I know some of you will flub your lips at it. Yes, I am aware it's just words, and you aren't literally advocating for slavery.
But it really does cause me discomfort to have to talk about masters and slaves.
Maybe that isn't enough justification for you. But I assure you I am not a theoretical person conjuring ways to make the world more PC just to virtue signal. There really are some people who would rather avoid those terms.
- 0xy 6y agoWhy do you think that your discomfort about a word which you've applied the wrong definition to should result in the censorship for everyone of that purely innocent word? There are people offended about many things in life, but that doesn't mean we should try to accommodate every single person offended over every little thing (especially when you use the wrong definition to perpetuate it). Git is software that provides a level playing field for developers of all creeds, and had zero bad intentions when naming elements of the software. "Master" isn't even a slavery reference at all. To say that it is is to claim that words cannot have multiple meanings, something which is patently false. Master (the definition invoked by Git) has no negative history, and no negative connotations.