4 ms·

Well, the generally-accepted term has been "salesman" for over a hundred years. Whether or not you approve, it's definitely a conscious choice. As an aside, c

Well, the generally-accepted term has been "salesman" for over a hundred years. Whether or not you approve, it's definitely a conscious choice. As an aside, can someone explain why a generic "-man" suffix is taken to indicate only the masculine by some people? It's no different than using the masculine for indefinite gender, so why the objections?

JoeAltmaier 6y ago
Well, because it says "man" and that means a male. Never mind its from the German where 'man' meant 'person'; today in English we are where we are. And 'a hundred years' is not much of a defense. Women couldn't sign a mortgage in the US in the 70's. I imagine folks defended that too - "Its the way we've always done it."
- vkowalski 6y ago
  Hupersons, personkind etc. This is not where we are in English.
  - polynomial 6y ago
    We'll get there! Baby steps...
    - 0-_-0 6y ago
      A small step for person, a giant leap for personkind!
- thursday0987 6y ago
  > Women couldn't sign a mortgage in the US in the 70's. yeah you're going to need to provide a source for such a ridiculous claim. My grandmother has owned her house for much longer than that. * edit: all you downvoters need to look at the claim being made instead of bringing up different issues. credit cards are not mortgages. "couldn't sign" is not the same as "needed a cosigner" or "discounted rates". the original claim implies that women could not own houses through a bank loan, which is very much false.
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    Sure, own one by inheiriting or paying outright. Its the credit issue that prevented borrowing to buy one. Our recently deceased Supreme Court Justice was instrumental in securing that right. Here's a brief history for the Google-challenged: https://www.directlendingsolutions.com/women_and_credit.htm https://www.directlendingsolutions.com/women_and_credit.htm
    - thursday0987 6y ago
      the link you provided is talking about credit cards and needing cosigners. there is nothing in your link that says that women couldn't sign a mortgage. the original claim is that "women couldn't even sign a mortgage in the US until the 70s." this claim is false.
      - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
        That smacks of pedantry. Sure, its correct, but says nothing about the issue of women buying property, and how they actually couldn't until the '70s. How is it informing this discussion, exactly? Other than earning imaginary internet points?
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - D-Coder 6y ago
    > yeah you're going to need to provide a source for such a ridiculous claim. My grandmother has owned her house for much longer than that. Maybe not mortgages but this article from 2013: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/25-years-since-women-need_b_4164299 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/25-years-since-women-need_b_4... "25 Years Since Women Needed a Male Co-Signer". (Link should end "b_4164299".)
    - thursday0987 6y ago
      the link you provided is talking about business loans, not mortages. the original claim was "women couldn't even sign a mortgage in the US in the 70s". that is a false claim.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- nisse72 6y ago
  Gerperson, please. Not to mention wopeople...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
polynomial 6y ago
Look buddy, if you don't understand that certain things just mean certain things, I don't know what to tell you. Stop making everything complicated and just get with the plan.
- mmm_grayons 6y ago
  I'm not going to "get with" anyone's plan before I know what it is and why I should support it.
- dokem 6y ago
  How has this line of reasoning ever convinced anyone of anything. It’s painfully obvious you’re pushing an opinion.
  - polynomial 6y ago
    I only wish the sarcasm was as painfully obvious.
    - mmm_grayons 6y ago
      If that was sarcasm, apologies. In a better world, I'd indeed assume it was, but social justice warriors have spoken to me in that manner with a straight face, and it's hard to know for sure.
      - polynomial 6y ago
        "Look buddy" was supposed to be the tell.
- unknownkadath 6y ago
  Look buddy, it is natural for an NP-Complete problem to be outside of your comfort zone (probably). e: well? he's polynomial
root_axis 6y ago
> Well, the generally-accepted term has been "salesman" for over a hundred years Who cares? Did your ancestors coin the term or something? You can keep writing "salesman" whenever you write things yourself. "Salesperson" doesn't seem at all offensive, and I think it's bizarre to nitpick such a trivial and irrelevant aspect of the article. It reads to me like political virtue-signaling since the article has nothing to do with the gender of the traveling agent.
- mmm_grayons 6y ago
  I wasn't complaining about the use of the term, I was simply rebutting the parent's claim that the framing of "salesperson" as the deviant term rather than "salesman" was disingenuous given that "salesman" is the status quo.

JoeAltmaier 6y ago

Well, because it says "man" and that means a male. Never mind its from the German where 'man' meant 'person'; today in English we are where we are. And 'a hundred years' is not much of a defense. Women couldn't sign a mortgage in the US in the 70's. I imagine folks defended that too - "Its the way we've always done it."

vkowalski 6y ago
Hupersons, personkind etc. This is not where we are in English.
- polynomial 6y ago
  We'll get there! Baby steps...
  - 0-_-0 6y ago
    A small step for person, a giant leap for personkind!
thursday0987 6y ago
> Women couldn't sign a mortgage in the US in the 70's. yeah you're going to need to provide a source for such a ridiculous claim. My grandmother has owned her house for much longer than that. * edit: all you downvoters need to look at the claim being made instead of bringing up different issues. credit cards are not mortgages. "couldn't sign" is not the same as "needed a cosigner" or "discounted rates". the original claim implies that women could not own houses through a bank loan, which is very much false.
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  Sure, own one by inheiriting or paying outright. Its the credit issue that prevented borrowing to buy one. Our recently deceased Supreme Court Justice was instrumental in securing that right. Here's a brief history for the Google-challenged: https://www.directlendingsolutions.com/women_and_credit.htm https://www.directlendingsolutions.com/women_and_credit.htm
  - thursday0987 6y ago
    the link you provided is talking about credit cards and needing cosigners. there is nothing in your link that says that women couldn't sign a mortgage. the original claim is that "women couldn't even sign a mortgage in the US until the 70s." this claim is false.
    - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
      That smacks of pedantry. Sure, its correct, but says nothing about the issue of women buying property, and how they actually couldn't until the '70s. How is it informing this discussion, exactly? Other than earning imaginary internet points?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- D-Coder 6y ago
  > yeah you're going to need to provide a source for such a ridiculous claim. My grandmother has owned her house for much longer than that. Maybe not mortgages but this article from 2013: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/25-years-since-women-need_b_4164299 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/25-years-since-women-need_b_4... "25 Years Since Women Needed a Male Co-Signer". (Link should end "b_4164299".)
  - thursday0987 6y ago
    the link you provided is talking about business loans, not mortages. the original claim was "women couldn't even sign a mortgage in the US in the 70s". that is a false claim.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nisse72 6y ago
Gerperson, please. Not to mention wopeople...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

polynomial 6y ago

Look buddy, if you don't understand that certain things just mean certain things, I don't know what to tell you. Stop making everything complicated and just get with the plan.

mmm_grayons 6y ago
I'm not going to "get with" anyone's plan before I know what it is and why I should support it.
dokem 6y ago
How has this line of reasoning ever convinced anyone of anything. It’s painfully obvious you’re pushing an opinion.
- polynomial 6y ago
  I only wish the sarcasm was as painfully obvious.
  - mmm_grayons 6y ago
    If that was sarcasm, apologies. In a better world, I'd indeed assume it was, but social justice warriors have spoken to me in that manner with a straight face, and it's hard to know for sure.
    - polynomial 6y ago
      "Look buddy" was supposed to be the tell.
unknownkadath 6y ago
Look buddy, it is natural for an NP-Complete problem to be outside of your comfort zone (probably). e: well? he's polynomial

root_axis 6y ago

> Well, the generally-accepted term has been "salesman" for over a hundred years Who cares? Did your ancestors coin the term or something? You can keep writing "salesman" whenever you write things yourself. "Salesperson" doesn't seem at all offensive, and I think it's bizarre to nitpick such a trivial and irrelevant aspect of the article. It reads to me like political virtue-signaling since the article has nothing to do with the gender of the traveling agent.

mmm_grayons 6y ago
I wasn't complaining about the use of the term, I was simply rebutting the parent's claim that the framing of "salesperson" as the deviant term rather than "salesman" was disingenuous given that "salesman" is the status quo.