19 ms·

I understand that there are a lot of people who are hurting right now, and I empathize with their pain, but how can we share out most wonderful and beautiful id

I understand that there are a lot of people who are hurting right now, and I empathize with their pain, but how can we share out most wonderful and beautiful ideas with each other or convey important information to the public if we believe there might be serious reprisals against us if we "say the wrong thing". For example, I personally helped work against slavery on the Black Market in the Middle East, and I wanted to raise awareness of this issue. But now I have to be worried that I'll insult people by using the term Black Market, and will also insult people by giving off the impression that the the Middle East is a 3rd world primitive place where they buy and sell slaves. There is no "right" way to convey the issue above without offending someone. So what should I do? Just shut my mouth and don't say anything? Then the slave trade will continue to operate freely... All speech besides threats of violence needs to be free, or we can't progress as a society.

imgabe 6y ago
Part of the issue is that some people consider any speech they disagree with as a threat of violence or "endangering my safety".
- AHappyCamper 6y ago
  Again, I empathize with the feelings of people who may feel emotionally threatened by a derogatory comment, but some speech deals with people whose lives are in imminent mortal danger (e.g. those about to be sold on Black Market) and if we can't quickly discuss their cases and potential responses to rescue them, then they will be doomed to a life of untold misery. In such situations, there is no time to filter every comment and every email for potential sources of offense - we need to convey info as fast as possible.
  - Guthur 6y ago
    This has become a problem because the internet social networking has opened up the potential of mob justice tar and feathering that is causing people real harm in terms of their livelihood and I'd imagine mental well being.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    Could you just say “slave market” or “illegal market”? Of course, black in this context refers to the transactions being performed in the shadows, and has nothing to do with the colour of the skin of the participants in the market. It’s all a bit absurd, but it’s also a trivial change to adopt. And now I’ve offended adopties. I jest.
    - cglace 6y ago
      I don’t think it’s trivial if we are to the point where we are censoring completely benign words.
      - CraigJPerry 6y ago
        >> where we are censoring completely benign words Are you saying in any context? That's not the proposal as i read it. >> >> Could you just say >> censoring For censoring to be the case, it must be that you can't use particular words. I read the case as 1. the GP's post expressing a desire to show heightened care to a reader 2. your parent posting a possible solution Taking this to an extreme, if both behaviours above were to become a social norm then some words in some contexts would become extremely frowned upon to the point that you would personally choose not to use them. They'd still not be censored though. Documents would continue to be written with the offensive terms by those who seek to offend. The words would be used in the socially unacceptable way in service of making a stronger point.
        cglace 6y ago
        I was using "we" to mean "we" would be self-censoring.
        CraigJPerry 6y ago
        self-censor? Your original post makes no sense then, how can you self-censor a word that you self deem to be benign? You’d have to recognise that the word wasn’t benign in that context first?
  - zarkov99 6y ago
    You are right and I do not think you should waste a single thought on the easily offended. They suck. There is no hope for that kind of faked fragility. Somewhere will always claim to be offended by something you say or do, to the point that the only safe thing for you to do is nothing at all (maybe). Much better stay true to your heart and plow ahead with the good work your are doing. Good people will see it and as to the others, fuck them.
    - neilparikh 6y ago
      > I do not think you should waste a single thought on the easily offended. Unfortunately, this strategy doesn't work, because these people have the power to have a significant negative impact on your life (get you fired, ruin your reputation etc).
  - bluntfang 6y ago
    Is there a term for when someone says something, followed by 'but', then something that completely invalidates the first sentence?
    - giardini 6y ago
      Either "contradiction" or "self-contradiction" would serve.
- Shivetya 6y ago
  Because it works. Because instead of discussing an issue they have found they can hurt anyone who does not wholly agree with their position. Then they celebrate that damage and are encouraged to continue to do so with impunity never once imagining they will be on the other side. The recent news stories about it happening in newsrooms and businesses should be no surprise when those stories were occurring with colleges for years prior. They learned they can take their heckler's veto to beyond silencing to the point of causing real damage. People used to throw up the bogeyman of the religious right silencing the masses but instead we have the tyranny of the left to whom ideas are weapons and justification comes by laying claim that physical threat exists in mere thoughts and that justifies real punishment. Be honest, I can guarantee many here are enjoying it to the point of glee but that is because you have been market researched manipulated by politicians into a certain pattern of thinking and reaction. Now that reaction is turning violent and it will eat both sides.
- sam_goody 6y ago
  On HN, if you disagree with a comment, you downvote it and punish the author. (Or, at least, that is the common way to respond, and for good reason - the only "disagree" button is the one that hurts the credit of the OP) This especially hurts new commenters, whose credit is fragile (and who don't know the cap on down-votes). Which keeps the conversation "safe", and the lurkers quiet. Cynical me thinks this is a reflection of a society that thinks we need to quiet (and punish) everyone who disagrees with them. EDIT: Replaced "he" with a gender neutral term to be safe.
  - jstanley 6y ago
    > (Or, at least, that is the common way to respond, and for good reason - the only "disagree" button is the one that hurts the credit of the OP) I don't think that's a good reason. You should downvote if you think someone is arguing disingenuously or otherwise writing nonsense that doesn't belong on HN. If you merely disagree, you should upvote instead, and articulate your disagreement in a reply.
    - mellosouls 6y ago
      I agree with this. It's very frustrating to see people downvoted (even when I disagree with them) when they have articulated their argument eloquently or made an original point. It happens a lot here, and it doesn't reflect well on those doing it IMO.
    - sam_goody 6y ago
      I agree with you 100%, and that is what I try to do myself. I think it is wrong of HN to not have a disagree but great comment button, hence my complaint about it reflecting a negative aspect of society. But, the common practice is to do as I described. Case in point, my comment was down-voted! I clearly agree with you, and am pointing out an unfortunate fact, but since someone don't like that fact, I lost a point.
- kiplkipl 6y ago
  These are weasel words
phkahler 6y ago
>> There is no "right" way to convey the issue above without offending someone. You are not responsible for those people being offended. If people actually respond that way to your efforts they look stupid. Just carry on doing what is right. Most of them are not actually offended but are claiming you may be offensive to someone else.
- kanox 6y ago
  > You are not responsible for those people being offended. This is objectively false, you can get fired for offending people both at your job or outside it.
  - kmlx 6y ago
    some of those companies don't really deserve to be trading. i remember how back in my youth if i said something offensive against the government i would lose my job and be sent to a forced labour camp. that was during communism. history keeps repeating itself.
    - johnsonjo 6y ago
      I mean it’s like people forget the gulags were only like 70 years ago. When people were wrongfully imprisoned for no good reason just to meet police quotas from the soviets government super powers. I definitely don’t disbelieve what you are saying.
  - mpweiher 6y ago
    No, it is absolutely right. The fact that people and companies don't understand this is a separate, though obviously important matter. So you obviously need to be aware of the (imho crazy) environment we are in, but also need to distinguish "might" from "right".
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    You can be certain that companies who did that will be reprimanded for it by consumers.
Thorrez 6y ago
You could always say "underground market". Just make sure there aren't any hobbits around.
- AHappyCamper 6y ago
  Ha! There is nothing illegal about an underground market. And the real issue is: if any use of terminology can get you blacklisted (another potential faux pas) then you end up not being able to say anything. At a certain point, all language becomes not viable because anything could potentially cause offense, so as a result, you just stop talking... even though you're trying to save slaves.
  - eirini1 6y ago
    not all, there are plenty of ways to phrase something without offending people - unless of course the content of what you are saying is itself, offensive :)
    - AHappyCamper 6y ago
      We were dealing with life and death situations. The pressure is beyond intense. If you mess up, a girl will be locked in a cave for much of her life. It's not a "calm" environment where you can nitpick every term for political correctness. You just need to convey the info that you need. Re raising awareness, there is no way to say "We're trying to stop slavery in the Middle East and shut down the human Black Markets" without offending someone.
      - clort 6y ago
        I appreciate your concern about the naming and I think you are right to have that concern. The problem with this (to be obvious) is that 'black' is being used as an perjorative because there are good markets and bad markets but the good ones don't have an adjective, and 'black' is an attribute which is also used to describe people who are born with darker skin (perhaps unavoidably so, for the forseeable future). Is there a reason can't you just call this a Slave Market ? I mean, wikipedia has a page entitled just that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_market. If you wish to disambiguate from historical you could add 'modern', 'contemporary', 'underground', or 'secret' very easily. As to the location, it might be the case that the middle east is where you were involved, but I rather suspect that a) not all the slaves sold remain in that area and b) this does not only happen in that area. Certainly I have read of modern slavery occurring here in the UK and elsewhere in Europe. I have certainly read of women from China, Nigeria and Eastern European countries for instance, being trafficked for prostitution in recent years and I'm pretty sure that this is not the whole story. You are doing great work[0] actively working against slavery, right? If your organisation were successful in the middle east, would it then simply close down? [0] and thank you for that.
cgb223 6y ago
FWIW I would be very interested in hearing about your experiences doing that Sounds like something that had a huge impact on a terrible system in the world that most people aren’t aware of. If you feel comfortable, can you tell us a little bit about it here?
- AHappyCamper 6y ago
  Of course, and thank you for asking. The group I was involved in was repatriating Eastern European women who had been duped. They responded to ads in the paper that were seeking farmhands to spend the summer picking fruit for excellent wages. When the women showed up to the "interview" at the farm, they were drugged and kidnapped. From there, they were transported to Egypt, where they were smuggled close to the border and "conditioned". Conditioning involves repeatedly forcing them to take strong drugs like heroin, so that they become chemically addicted. The drugs act as an effective restraint. If the girl escapes, she has no way to get a fix within 48 hours, and goes into withdrawal. Eventually, they are smuggled into slave markets in various countries there, where they are auctioned off or sold via direct sale. Usually, an auto mechanic is involved - he will build the girl into a car for transport. She will be sewed into the seats in the back of the car, built into the dashboard just behind the engine - it's simply awful. Travel can take several days and many don't survive. I can't say much about how we intervened, but we worked with the authorities to intercept them and repatriate them to their homes in Europe.
  - ponker 6y ago
    fucking hell
  - mynameishere 6y ago
    Well, if you are genuinely worried about terminology you can call that what it is, the "white slave trade". It's ancient, extensive, and completely, 100 percent, not taught in schools. So there's a lesson there too.
    - AHappyCamper 6y ago
TuringTest 6y ago
> how can we share out most wonderful and beautiful ideas with each other The trick is to create channels with limited audiences, where you can set an expectation of which ideas are acceptable and which are not.* It always has been, but the the arrival of new communication methods has disrupted the traditional channels, and now every idea is propagated to a much larger and looser audience, which aren't aware or don't share the expectations of the sender. We need to rebuild the architecture of communication channels around this principle of limited audiences sharing a common understanding, and reshape the current "free" massive communication tools so that they respect this principle instead of exploiting the benefits of popularising aggressive messages for their shock value. This compartmentalisation of channels would do much more for freedom of expression than the current "everyone gets a distorted and contextless version of the original message and can have their say". * By the way, this is the reason why explicit Codes of Conduct are a good thing for online projects. Without them, you simply get a default implicit code of conduct based on the expectations of the dominant group; which is not a good solution for people coming from any other group.
- PopeDotNinja 6y ago
  How do you manage reading every code of conduct and honoring it? The trouble I'm having with social changes, expectations, per person pronouns, and other things is that managing all of these interactions can be a crushing amount of cognitive load. Now that I think about it, it's the same challenge I have with microservices. Formerly simple interactions are now hellza complicated. I'm not fighting the trend. I'm just fatigued.
  - danielheath 6y ago
    Exposure to unfamiliar ideas is exhausting. Doubly so when the social behaviour that typically becomes second nature in adolescence no longer fits (IMO that’s why video calls are exhausting too - the usual subtle social cues don’t apply).
    - PopeDotNinja 6y ago
      That's the truth. New + important = hard.
tarkin2 6y ago
It’s not just threats of violence. It’s also speech that incites violence.
darkblackcorner 6y ago
Context is everything.
trabant00 6y ago
There's people trying to get things done and then there's people trying to get in the spotlight with virtue signaling. And yes, they are willing to do actual harm to the first group's livelihood to get in that spotlight.
nonsince 6y ago
Genuine question - I hang around in some pretty seriously left-wing, often social-justice-obsessed circles and I've never heard anyone complain about the term black market, or want to pretend that slavery doesn't go on in the middle east. Have you got examples of this kind of thing being commonplace? I have heard people complain that people complain about these things, but never first-hand experienced people's complaints about language beyond stuff that seems pretty benign like "don't use ableist or racist slurs". I would say that I'd be the most likely to see stuff like this - I spend a lot of time online, mostly in leftist and social justice circles, and most of my friend group in the real world aren't too different. I think that the idea that free speech is under attack is entirely a fabrication, and the idea that people get "offended" at this stuff is no more real. The term "triggered", which is so often used by the right to refer to people offended over nothing, is a term specifically referring to people with PTSD or trauma. You'd understand that they might want to be careful with subjects that might "trigger" them - i.e. set off episodes of PTSD - and when people give content or trigger warnings that's what they're talking about. No-one who liberals and the right might call a SJW cares about "offensive" content, and if anything leftist and social justice circles LOVE offensive content, they just hate when people openly and deliberately punch down. It is definitely true that leftists will criticise use of language, but when they do it's often that there's a good reason that is deliberately ignored by those who rail against this criticism (see use of "retard" or "spastic", or the fact that "aspergers" is named after a nazi who wanted to commit genocide on those with autism) but this idea that it's arbitrary or that everything is offensive isn't borne out by reality.
- dependenttypes 6y ago
  > I've never heard anyone complain about the term black market It is not the most used term in the world. Why not try gimp, git, white/blacklist, etc? > or want to pretend that slavery doesn't go on in the middle east To be frank I was unaware that slavery was a thing in the middle east until I stumbled upon the GP's post so I presume that such a thought is not that rare. Are you sure that you just did not talk about the topic with your friends? > I think that the idea that free speech is under attack is entirely a fabrication This is probably due to your personal beliefs. I presume that you consider it free speech as long as your own beliefs are not being censored. Just in another post in this thread you talked about how firing that professor would be an ok thing to do https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23638867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23638867 As for examples of free speech being attacked. Check out the whole Stallman case from last year, or the Assange case, or the Damore case, or https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23635384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23635384 - there was even a case with a ruby github project not that long ago. I personally was accused of being a pedophile and there was a "petition" to ban me from a server that I dwelled on (by someone who was not even a member) because I dared to defend Stallman's right to speech. > if anything leftist and social justice circles LOVE offensive content As long as it is offensive against the people who they dislike, yes. > there's a good reason ... see use of "retard" or "spastic", or the fact that "aspergers" is ... It is not a fact of nature that there is a good reason to avoid these terms, rather, it is your personal opinion - accusing them of ignoring what you consider as a good reason when they do not consider it as such one is not logically inconsistent.
NohatCoder 6y ago
>All speech besides threats of violence needs to be free, or we can't progress as a society. The problem with that simple rule is that there is no simple way to distinguish threats. Take a statement like "I don't think black people deserve to live", technically not worded as a threat, but the sentiment is no different. Similar examples varying in strength, obfuscation and contextual meaning can be produced in unlimited quantities. No hard rule can deal with all this, so have to debate what should and should not be allowed.
- whiddershins 6y ago
  No. That’s logically flawed. We’ve seen this already, where this argument is being used to arbitrarily curtail all sorts of speech. By this argument almost any idea you disagree with could be considered a threat, and honestly, it seems like it is human nature to sort of behave as if ideas that are ‘bad’ are a threat to my safety. It takes effort to fight that impulse. We need very narrow exceptions to free speech: specific incitements to violence seem to be one.
  - svara 6y ago
    Your argument is already assuming its conclusion, i.e. that all speech should be free. But then you also recognize that, no, actually, some kinds shouldn't be (i.e direct threats). The point is: that line you're drawing is arbitrary. You can define it narrowly and precisely, and I think that's what you tried to do here, but at the end of the day you chose where to draw it.
    - whiddershins 6y ago
      I’m not sure. I hear what you’re saying, and I need to think about it. It doesn’t feel arbitrary, but I might be fooling myself.
jmchuster 6y ago
You can definitely choose to go down a route of "these people get offended and it's completely irrational and unjustified, and they are wrong to do so, so to teach them a lesson i'm going to shut my mouth and complain to everyone about how they are bad people that are forcing me to self-restrict my freedom of speech and as a result they are actively helping the slave trade". Or you might also consider the route of "these people get offended and i don't understand why so i'm going to work to listen to them and talk with them one by one until i do understand on a core level how they feel and where those feelings are derived from, and based on that i will do my best to share my thoughts in a way that is considerate of my deep connection and understanding of all the people around me, and because everyone has built a personal connection to me, they too will be able to accept my feelings and assume charity." Just depends on which route you derive more self-satisfaction from. You can assume an air of superiority and righteousness in either direction, and that's something that all humans love to feel.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  I don't think this is feasible since you would need constant appeasement and the source of offense often cannot be deconstructed by argument. For an idealistic approach it is well intentioned, but that would gradually shift the level of accepted speech towards a form of orthodoxy. The stigmatization of feeling superior for more eccentric speech is an example of that actually. Look at history where the "moral" authority suppressed speech, it will end up just like that. There are also people that lie about being offended. Reaching out is falling into a trap in that case. The dichotomy of these "routes" is wrong. A discussion must not be an argument, even if internet exposure lets you believe otherwise, but it can be.
- Diggsey 6y ago
  > I'm going to work to listen to them and talk with them one by one until i do understand on a core level how they feel and where those feelings are derived from, Many of the people who are actually condemned for being offensive are condemned by the media or by some third party who's being offended on behalf of someone else, who we never get to actually hear from, and who might not even exist.
ngcazz 6y ago
You do realise that that is your prerogative, right? To hold the dissemination of your work against slavery hostage because of a concern that "black market" might be offensive? I don't understand these priorities.
hbarka 6y ago
I’m having a hard time believing that you helped work against slavery, as you say, because to me your follow-comments don’t reconcile with someone empathetic to fighting against an injustice yet dismiss those who have a connection to the injustice as just a PC problem. Did you mean to say that you were just devising an example for argument’s sake?
- cglace 6y ago
  Wow
yadco 6y ago
I somehow think that the people who get insulted and make a big deal about such terms aren't people who actually do something to help with these issues so you wouldn’t need to care about reaching them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dahfizz 6y ago
  People lose jobs and suffer threats and harrassment if the cancel culture mob turns it's sights on you. It's not something you can just not care about.
wolfgke 6y ago
> But now I have to be worried that I'll insult people by using the term Black Market, and will also insult people by giving off the impression that the the Middle East is a 3rd world primitive place where they buy and sell slaves. Let the cry-babies cry and feel insulted.
JoeAltmaier 6y ago
Couch it like that, not using throwaway ambiguous phrases but describing it more precisely?
bluntfang 6y ago
>There is no "right" way to convey the issue above without offending someone. I really disagree with your defeatist attitude.
ones_and_zeros 6y ago
First, good on you for helping the world be a better place. I have to ask, why use "Black Market"? It doesn't make sense whether you are involved in these issues or not. Modern day slavery is universally known as human trafficking within law enforcement, social justice and international peace groups. This isn't a word police thing, it's just not accurate or common. Seems like using "Black Market" just makes things confusing.
- nec4b 6y ago
  Because the words "Black Market" literally mean and describe the place which the GP was talking about every where in the world. This is not only an American or English thing, many of other languages use the same expression (black + market) to mean the same thing.
  - ones_and_zeros 6y ago
    Wait, maybe I am missing something. So there is an actual physical place called the Black Market?
- garraeth 6y ago
  It means/implies under the cover of darkness, or within a "black" box - un-seeable...A market place for anything illegal. Going full on, we could remove the word "black" from our vocabulary. So hex #000000 would now be "abuefho" (some random made-up word) until people conscript that for their own designs and use it pejoratively: "you 'abuefho' jerk!"... and then round and round we go...
- trabant00 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market I am amused you don't know what it means but you made your mind it's wrong :)
x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
Is this "Black Market" in line with what people are talking about when saying offended? And I assure you, the slave trade will continue or discontinue with or without your efforts.
- AHappyCamper 6y ago
  Wait, are you saying that we shouldn't be trying to save slaves and stop slavery? That's like saying we should close down hospitals and stop all surgeries because death will continue with or without our efforts... I don't understand your first sentence. Please re-iterate.
addicted44 6y ago
Free does not mean devoid of consequence in the private domain. Otherwise, if I am ever rejected by a company in an interview it would be a clear violation of my free speech rights. It wasn't violent. And I shouldnt be afraid to disclose my opinion that bubble sort is indeed the fastest sort algorithm under all conditions and scenarios.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
AndrewKemendo 6y ago
The reality of this is that no matter what, someone is going to be upset with whatever you do. The bigger a voice you are the louder the boos become. There are plenty of groups that I am ok with being disliked by. It comes down to your individual values, what you stand for and what your intentions are. If someone you don't know is attacking you, well that's probably not someone to listen to.
ianmobbs 6y ago
What? In what world would anyone find that offensive? It sounds like you're making up a situation, then using it defend not speaking up about things.
pizzazzaro 6y ago
As one of those SJW commies that "cancels" folks for "being Nazis"? The more up-to-date term is "Human Trafficking". And anyone who knows anything about it? Understands that it often crosses continents, and becomes more severe where governments exist in a state of semi-collapse. Im mad at myself for not considering that the Middle East could be a region where, thanks to foreign intervention, those conditions exist. Also, Im even more angry that I dont know how to help. Anyone who would "cancel" you for that without asking you to consider updating your language is just counterproductive to our goals.
dkdk8283 6y ago
I personally don’t care if I offend someone but the reality is if I do it with my real identity i’m putting my job on the line. So, I withdraw and let the few strongly opinionated ones have their 15 mins.
robomartin 6y ago
When highly educated people allow themselves to be pinged into outrage, controversy and violence time and time again, yes, the best option is to remain quiet. Taking a different path could expose someone to the most severe personal and business consequences. It saddens me to say this because it means we got to a place I never thought possible.
lozenge 6y ago
I just googled it and found the terms shadow economy or underground economy. You can just use those? Are you really afraid you'll be "cancelled" for using a term that is still extremely common, and if so isn't the answer to use a different term?
imtringued 6y ago
Really the only thing I can say is help as many people as possible. If you talk with 10 people and 4 will hate you for the rest of your life and 6 will actually do something to contribute to the cause then you are still ahead compared to staying silent.
Siira 6y ago
The Middle East IS a hellhole. Speaking directly from there. Rich people in the West just don’t want to admit that, so they can do nothing for their fellow humans and still take the moral high ground. The current left survives only on privilege.

imgabe 6y ago

Part of the issue is that some people consider any speech they disagree with as a threat of violence or "endangering my safety".

AHappyCamper 6y ago
Again, I empathize with the feelings of people who may feel emotionally threatened by a derogatory comment, but some speech deals with people whose lives are in imminent mortal danger (e.g. those about to be sold on Black Market) and if we can't quickly discuss their cases and potential responses to rescue them, then they will be doomed to a life of untold misery. In such situations, there is no time to filter every comment and every email for potential sources of offense - we need to convey info as fast as possible.
- Guthur 6y ago
  This has become a problem because the internet social networking has opened up the potential of mob justice tar and feathering that is causing people real harm in terms of their livelihood and I'd imagine mental well being.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  Could you just say “slave market” or “illegal market”? Of course, black in this context refers to the transactions being performed in the shadows, and has nothing to do with the colour of the skin of the participants in the market. It’s all a bit absurd, but it’s also a trivial change to adopt. And now I’ve offended adopties. I jest.
  - cglace 6y ago
    I don’t think it’s trivial if we are to the point where we are censoring completely benign words.
    - CraigJPerry 6y ago
      >> where we are censoring completely benign words Are you saying in any context? That's not the proposal as i read it. >> >> Could you just say >> censoring For censoring to be the case, it must be that you can't use particular words. I read the case as 1. the GP's post expressing a desire to show heightened care to a reader 2. your parent posting a possible solution Taking this to an extreme, if both behaviours above were to become a social norm then some words in some contexts would become extremely frowned upon to the point that you would personally choose not to use them. They'd still not be censored though. Documents would continue to be written with the offensive terms by those who seek to offend. The words would be used in the socially unacceptable way in service of making a stronger point.
      - cglace 6y ago
        I was using "we" to mean "we" would be self-censoring.
        CraigJPerry 6y ago
        self-censor? Your original post makes no sense then, how can you self-censor a word that you self deem to be benign? You’d have to recognise that the word wasn’t benign in that context first?
- zarkov99 6y ago
  You are right and I do not think you should waste a single thought on the easily offended. They suck. There is no hope for that kind of faked fragility. Somewhere will always claim to be offended by something you say or do, to the point that the only safe thing for you to do is nothing at all (maybe). Much better stay true to your heart and plow ahead with the good work your are doing. Good people will see it and as to the others, fuck them.
  - neilparikh 6y ago
    > I do not think you should waste a single thought on the easily offended. Unfortunately, this strategy doesn't work, because these people have the power to have a significant negative impact on your life (get you fired, ruin your reputation etc).
- bluntfang 6y ago
  Is there a term for when someone says something, followed by 'but', then something that completely invalidates the first sentence?
  - giardini 6y ago
    Either "contradiction" or "self-contradiction" would serve.
Shivetya 6y ago
Because it works. Because instead of discussing an issue they have found they can hurt anyone who does not wholly agree with their position. Then they celebrate that damage and are encouraged to continue to do so with impunity never once imagining they will be on the other side. The recent news stories about it happening in newsrooms and businesses should be no surprise when those stories were occurring with colleges for years prior. They learned they can take their heckler's veto to beyond silencing to the point of causing real damage. People used to throw up the bogeyman of the religious right silencing the masses but instead we have the tyranny of the left to whom ideas are weapons and justification comes by laying claim that physical threat exists in mere thoughts and that justifies real punishment. Be honest, I can guarantee many here are enjoying it to the point of glee but that is because you have been market researched manipulated by politicians into a certain pattern of thinking and reaction. Now that reaction is turning violent and it will eat both sides.
sam_goody 6y ago
On HN, if you disagree with a comment, you downvote it and punish the author. (Or, at least, that is the common way to respond, and for good reason - the only "disagree" button is the one that hurts the credit of the OP) This especially hurts new commenters, whose credit is fragile (and who don't know the cap on down-votes). Which keeps the conversation "safe", and the lurkers quiet. Cynical me thinks this is a reflection of a society that thinks we need to quiet (and punish) everyone who disagrees with them. EDIT: Replaced "he" with a gender neutral term to be safe.
- jstanley 6y ago
  > (Or, at least, that is the common way to respond, and for good reason - the only "disagree" button is the one that hurts the credit of the OP) I don't think that's a good reason. You should downvote if you think someone is arguing disingenuously or otherwise writing nonsense that doesn't belong on HN. If you merely disagree, you should upvote instead, and articulate your disagreement in a reply.
  - mellosouls 6y ago
    I agree with this. It's very frustrating to see people downvoted (even when I disagree with them) when they have articulated their argument eloquently or made an original point. It happens a lot here, and it doesn't reflect well on those doing it IMO.
  - sam_goody 6y ago
    I agree with you 100%, and that is what I try to do myself. I think it is wrong of HN to not have a disagree but great comment button, hence my complaint about it reflecting a negative aspect of society. But, the common practice is to do as I described. Case in point, my comment was down-voted! I clearly agree with you, and am pointing out an unfortunate fact, but since someone don't like that fact, I lost a point.
kiplkipl 6y ago
These are weasel words

phkahler 6y ago

>> There is no "right" way to convey the issue above without offending someone. You are not responsible for those people being offended. If people actually respond that way to your efforts they look stupid. Just carry on doing what is right. Most of them are not actually offended but are claiming you may be offensive to someone else.

kanox 6y ago
> You are not responsible for those people being offended. This is objectively false, you can get fired for offending people both at your job or outside it.
- kmlx 6y ago
  some of those companies don't really deserve to be trading. i remember how back in my youth if i said something offensive against the government i would lose my job and be sent to a forced labour camp. that was during communism. history keeps repeating itself.
  - johnsonjo 6y ago
    I mean it’s like people forget the gulags were only like 70 years ago. When people were wrongfully imprisoned for no good reason just to meet police quotas from the soviets government super powers. I definitely don’t disbelieve what you are saying.
- mpweiher 6y ago
  No, it is absolutely right. The fact that people and companies don't understand this is a separate, though obviously important matter. So you obviously need to be aware of the (imho crazy) environment we are in, but also need to distinguish "might" from "right".
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  You can be certain that companies who did that will be reprimanded for it by consumers.

Thorrez 6y ago

You could always say "underground market". Just make sure there aren't any hobbits around.

AHappyCamper 6y ago
Ha! There is nothing illegal about an underground market. And the real issue is: if any use of terminology can get you blacklisted (another potential faux pas) then you end up not being able to say anything. At a certain point, all language becomes not viable because anything could potentially cause offense, so as a result, you just stop talking... even though you're trying to save slaves.
- eirini1 6y ago
  not all, there are plenty of ways to phrase something without offending people - unless of course the content of what you are saying is itself, offensive :)
  - AHappyCamper 6y ago
    We were dealing with life and death situations. The pressure is beyond intense. If you mess up, a girl will be locked in a cave for much of her life. It's not a "calm" environment where you can nitpick every term for political correctness. You just need to convey the info that you need. Re raising awareness, there is no way to say "We're trying to stop slavery in the Middle East and shut down the human Black Markets" without offending someone.
    - clort 6y ago
      I appreciate your concern about the naming and I think you are right to have that concern. The problem with this (to be obvious) is that 'black' is being used as an perjorative because there are good markets and bad markets but the good ones don't have an adjective, and 'black' is an attribute which is also used to describe people who are born with darker skin (perhaps unavoidably so, for the forseeable future). Is there a reason can't you just call this a Slave Market ? I mean, wikipedia has a page entitled just that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_market. If you wish to disambiguate from historical you could add 'modern', 'contemporary', 'underground', or 'secret' very easily. As to the location, it might be the case that the middle east is where you were involved, but I rather suspect that a) not all the slaves sold remain in that area and b) this does not only happen in that area. Certainly I have read of modern slavery occurring here in the UK and elsewhere in Europe. I have certainly read of women from China, Nigeria and Eastern European countries for instance, being trafficked for prostitution in recent years and I'm pretty sure that this is not the whole story. You are doing great work[0] actively working against slavery, right? If your organisation were successful in the middle east, would it then simply close down? [0] and thank you for that.

cgb223 6y ago

FWIW I would be very interested in hearing about your experiences doing that Sounds like something that had a huge impact on a terrible system in the world that most people aren’t aware of. If you feel comfortable, can you tell us a little bit about it here?

AHappyCamper 6y ago
Of course, and thank you for asking. The group I was involved in was repatriating Eastern European women who had been duped. They responded to ads in the paper that were seeking farmhands to spend the summer picking fruit for excellent wages. When the women showed up to the "interview" at the farm, they were drugged and kidnapped. From there, they were transported to Egypt, where they were smuggled close to the border and "conditioned". Conditioning involves repeatedly forcing them to take strong drugs like heroin, so that they become chemically addicted. The drugs act as an effective restraint. If the girl escapes, she has no way to get a fix within 48 hours, and goes into withdrawal. Eventually, they are smuggled into slave markets in various countries there, where they are auctioned off or sold via direct sale. Usually, an auto mechanic is involved - he will build the girl into a car for transport. She will be sewed into the seats in the back of the car, built into the dashboard just behind the engine - it's simply awful. Travel can take several days and many don't survive. I can't say much about how we intervened, but we worked with the authorities to intercept them and repatriate them to their homes in Europe.
- ponker 6y ago
  fucking hell
- mynameishere 6y ago
  Well, if you are genuinely worried about terminology you can call that what it is, the "white slave trade". It's ancient, extensive, and completely, 100 percent, not taught in schools. So there's a lesson there too.
  - AHappyCamper 6y ago

TuringTest 6y ago

> how can we share out most wonderful and beautiful ideas with each other The trick is to create channels with limited audiences, where you can set an expectation of which ideas are acceptable and which are not.* It always has been, but the the arrival of new communication methods has disrupted the traditional channels, and now every idea is propagated to a much larger and looser audience, which aren't aware or don't share the expectations of the sender. We need to rebuild the architecture of communication channels around this principle of limited audiences sharing a common understanding, and reshape the current "free" massive communication tools so that they respect this principle instead of exploiting the benefits of popularising aggressive messages for their shock value. This compartmentalisation of channels would do much more for freedom of expression than the current "everyone gets a distorted and contextless version of the original message and can have their say". * By the way, this is the reason why explicit Codes of Conduct are a good thing for online projects. Without them, you simply get a default implicit code of conduct based on the expectations of the dominant group; which is not a good solution for people coming from any other group.

PopeDotNinja 6y ago
How do you manage reading every code of conduct and honoring it? The trouble I'm having with social changes, expectations, per person pronouns, and other things is that managing all of these interactions can be a crushing amount of cognitive load. Now that I think about it, it's the same challenge I have with microservices. Formerly simple interactions are now hellza complicated. I'm not fighting the trend. I'm just fatigued.
- danielheath 6y ago
  Exposure to unfamiliar ideas is exhausting. Doubly so when the social behaviour that typically becomes second nature in adolescence no longer fits (IMO that’s why video calls are exhausting too - the usual subtle social cues don’t apply).
  - PopeDotNinja 6y ago
    That's the truth. New + important = hard.

tarkin2 6y ago

It’s not just threats of violence. It’s also speech that incites violence.

darkblackcorner 6y ago

Context is everything.

trabant00 6y ago

There's people trying to get things done and then there's people trying to get in the spotlight with virtue signaling. And yes, they are willing to do actual harm to the first group's livelihood to get in that spotlight.

nonsince 6y ago

Genuine question - I hang around in some pretty seriously left-wing, often social-justice-obsessed circles and I've never heard anyone complain about the term black market, or want to pretend that slavery doesn't go on in the middle east. Have you got examples of this kind of thing being commonplace? I have heard people complain that people complain about these things, but never first-hand experienced people's complaints about language beyond stuff that seems pretty benign like "don't use ableist or racist slurs". I would say that I'd be the most likely to see stuff like this - I spend a lot of time online, mostly in leftist and social justice circles, and most of my friend group in the real world aren't too different. I think that the idea that free speech is under attack is entirely a fabrication, and the idea that people get "offended" at this stuff is no more real. The term "triggered", which is so often used by the right to refer to people offended over nothing, is a term specifically referring to people with PTSD or trauma. You'd understand that they might want to be careful with subjects that might "trigger" them - i.e. set off episodes of PTSD - and when people give content or trigger warnings that's what they're talking about. No-one who liberals and the right might call a SJW cares about "offensive" content, and if anything leftist and social justice circles LOVE offensive content, they just hate when people openly and deliberately punch down. It is definitely true that leftists will criticise use of language, but when they do it's often that there's a good reason that is deliberately ignored by those who rail against this criticism (see use of "retard" or "spastic", or the fact that "aspergers" is named after a nazi who wanted to commit genocide on those with autism) but this idea that it's arbitrary or that everything is offensive isn't borne out by reality.

dependenttypes 6y ago
> I've never heard anyone complain about the term black market It is not the most used term in the world. Why not try gimp, git, white/blacklist, etc? > or want to pretend that slavery doesn't go on in the middle east To be frank I was unaware that slavery was a thing in the middle east until I stumbled upon the GP's post so I presume that such a thought is not that rare. Are you sure that you just did not talk about the topic with your friends? > I think that the idea that free speech is under attack is entirely a fabrication This is probably due to your personal beliefs. I presume that you consider it free speech as long as your own beliefs are not being censored. Just in another post in this thread you talked about how firing that professor would be an ok thing to do https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23638867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23638867 As for examples of free speech being attacked. Check out the whole Stallman case from last year, or the Assange case, or the Damore case, or https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23635384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23635384 - there was even a case with a ruby github project not that long ago. I personally was accused of being a pedophile and there was a "petition" to ban me from a server that I dwelled on (by someone who was not even a member) because I dared to defend Stallman's right to speech. > if anything leftist and social justice circles LOVE offensive content As long as it is offensive against the people who they dislike, yes. > there's a good reason ... see use of "retard" or "spastic", or the fact that "aspergers" is ... It is not a fact of nature that there is a good reason to avoid these terms, rather, it is your personal opinion - accusing them of ignoring what you consider as a good reason when they do not consider it as such one is not logically inconsistent.

NohatCoder 6y ago

>All speech besides threats of violence needs to be free, or we can't progress as a society. The problem with that simple rule is that there is no simple way to distinguish threats. Take a statement like "I don't think black people deserve to live", technically not worded as a threat, but the sentiment is no different. Similar examples varying in strength, obfuscation and contextual meaning can be produced in unlimited quantities. No hard rule can deal with all this, so have to debate what should and should not be allowed.

whiddershins 6y ago
No. That’s logically flawed. We’ve seen this already, where this argument is being used to arbitrarily curtail all sorts of speech. By this argument almost any idea you disagree with could be considered a threat, and honestly, it seems like it is human nature to sort of behave as if ideas that are ‘bad’ are a threat to my safety. It takes effort to fight that impulse. We need very narrow exceptions to free speech: specific incitements to violence seem to be one.
- svara 6y ago
  Your argument is already assuming its conclusion, i.e. that all speech should be free. But then you also recognize that, no, actually, some kinds shouldn't be (i.e direct threats). The point is: that line you're drawing is arbitrary. You can define it narrowly and precisely, and I think that's what you tried to do here, but at the end of the day you chose where to draw it.
  - whiddershins 6y ago
    I’m not sure. I hear what you’re saying, and I need to think about it. It doesn’t feel arbitrary, but I might be fooling myself.

jmchuster 6y ago

You can definitely choose to go down a route of "these people get offended and it's completely irrational and unjustified, and they are wrong to do so, so to teach them a lesson i'm going to shut my mouth and complain to everyone about how they are bad people that are forcing me to self-restrict my freedom of speech and as a result they are actively helping the slave trade". Or you might also consider the route of "these people get offended and i don't understand why so i'm going to work to listen to them and talk with them one by one until i do understand on a core level how they feel and where those feelings are derived from, and based on that i will do my best to share my thoughts in a way that is considerate of my deep connection and understanding of all the people around me, and because everyone has built a personal connection to me, they too will be able to accept my feelings and assume charity." Just depends on which route you derive more self-satisfaction from. You can assume an air of superiority and righteousness in either direction, and that's something that all humans love to feel.

raxxorrax 6y ago
I don't think this is feasible since you would need constant appeasement and the source of offense often cannot be deconstructed by argument. For an idealistic approach it is well intentioned, but that would gradually shift the level of accepted speech towards a form of orthodoxy. The stigmatization of feeling superior for more eccentric speech is an example of that actually. Look at history where the "moral" authority suppressed speech, it will end up just like that. There are also people that lie about being offended. Reaching out is falling into a trap in that case. The dichotomy of these "routes" is wrong. A discussion must not be an argument, even if internet exposure lets you believe otherwise, but it can be.
Diggsey 6y ago
> I'm going to work to listen to them and talk with them one by one until i do understand on a core level how they feel and where those feelings are derived from, Many of the people who are actually condemned for being offensive are condemned by the media or by some third party who's being offended on behalf of someone else, who we never get to actually hear from, and who might not even exist.

ngcazz 6y ago

You do realise that that is your prerogative, right? To hold the dissemination of your work against slavery hostage because of a concern that "black market" might be offensive? I don't understand these priorities.

hbarka 6y ago

I’m having a hard time believing that you helped work against slavery, as you say, because to me your follow-comments don’t reconcile with someone empathetic to fighting against an injustice yet dismiss those who have a connection to the injustice as just a PC problem. Did you mean to say that you were just devising an example for argument’s sake?

cglace 6y ago
Wow

yadco 6y ago

I somehow think that the people who get insulted and make a big deal about such terms aren't people who actually do something to help with these issues so you wouldn’t need to care about reaching them.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dahfizz 6y ago
People lose jobs and suffer threats and harrassment if the cancel culture mob turns it's sights on you. It's not something you can just not care about.

wolfgke 6y ago

> But now I have to be worried that I'll insult people by using the term Black Market, and will also insult people by giving off the impression that the the Middle East is a 3rd world primitive place where they buy and sell slaves. Let the cry-babies cry and feel insulted.

JoeAltmaier 6y ago

Couch it like that, not using throwaway ambiguous phrases but describing it more precisely?

bluntfang 6y ago

>There is no "right" way to convey the issue above without offending someone. I really disagree with your defeatist attitude.

ones_and_zeros 6y ago

First, good on you for helping the world be a better place. I have to ask, why use "Black Market"? It doesn't make sense whether you are involved in these issues or not. Modern day slavery is universally known as human trafficking within law enforcement, social justice and international peace groups. This isn't a word police thing, it's just not accurate or common. Seems like using "Black Market" just makes things confusing.

nec4b 6y ago
Because the words "Black Market" literally mean and describe the place which the GP was talking about every where in the world. This is not only an American or English thing, many of other languages use the same expression (black + market) to mean the same thing.
- ones_and_zeros 6y ago
  Wait, maybe I am missing something. So there is an actual physical place called the Black Market?
garraeth 6y ago
It means/implies under the cover of darkness, or within a "black" box - un-seeable...A market place for anything illegal. Going full on, we could remove the word "black" from our vocabulary. So hex #000000 would now be "abuefho" (some random made-up word) until people conscript that for their own designs and use it pejoratively: "you 'abuefho' jerk!"... and then round and round we go...
trabant00 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_market I am amused you don't know what it means but you made your mind it's wrong :)

x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago

Is this "Black Market" in line with what people are talking about when saying offended? And I assure you, the slave trade will continue or discontinue with or without your efforts.

AHappyCamper 6y ago
Wait, are you saying that we shouldn't be trying to save slaves and stop slavery? That's like saying we should close down hospitals and stop all surgeries because death will continue with or without our efforts... I don't understand your first sentence. Please re-iterate.

addicted44 6y ago

Free does not mean devoid of consequence in the private domain. Otherwise, if I am ever rejected by a company in an interview it would be a clear violation of my free speech rights. It wasn't violent. And I shouldnt be afraid to disclose my opinion that bubble sort is indeed the fastest sort algorithm under all conditions and scenarios.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

AndrewKemendo 6y ago

The reality of this is that no matter what, someone is going to be upset with whatever you do. The bigger a voice you are the louder the boos become. There are plenty of groups that I am ok with being disliked by. It comes down to your individual values, what you stand for and what your intentions are. If someone you don't know is attacking you, well that's probably not someone to listen to.

ianmobbs 6y ago

What? In what world would anyone find that offensive? It sounds like you're making up a situation, then using it defend not speaking up about things.

pizzazzaro 6y ago

As one of those SJW commies that "cancels" folks for "being Nazis"? The more up-to-date term is "Human Trafficking". And anyone who knows anything about it? Understands that it often crosses continents, and becomes more severe where governments exist in a state of semi-collapse. Im mad at myself for not considering that the Middle East could be a region where, thanks to foreign intervention, those conditions exist. Also, Im even more angry that I dont know how to help. Anyone who would "cancel" you for that without asking you to consider updating your language is just counterproductive to our goals.

dkdk8283 6y ago

I personally don’t care if I offend someone but the reality is if I do it with my real identity i’m putting my job on the line. So, I withdraw and let the few strongly opinionated ones have their 15 mins.

robomartin 6y ago

When highly educated people allow themselves to be pinged into outrage, controversy and violence time and time again, yes, the best option is to remain quiet. Taking a different path could expose someone to the most severe personal and business consequences. It saddens me to say this because it means we got to a place I never thought possible.

lozenge 6y ago

I just googled it and found the terms shadow economy or underground economy. You can just use those? Are you really afraid you'll be "cancelled" for using a term that is still extremely common, and if so isn't the answer to use a different term?

imtringued 6y ago

Really the only thing I can say is help as many people as possible. If you talk with 10 people and 4 will hate you for the rest of your life and 6 will actually do something to contribute to the cause then you are still ahead compared to staying silent.

Siira 6y ago

The Middle East IS a hellhole. Speaking directly from there. Rich people in the West just don’t want to admit that, so they can do nothing for their fellow humans and still take the moral high ground. The current left survives only on privilege.