3 ms·
The downside is the cost to communication. I didn't know what a PitM was. After a bit I guessed it was Person, i.e. man in the middle, but I wasn't sure that it
by dash2 6y ago
The downside is the cost to communication. I didn't know what a PitM was. After a bit I guessed it was Person, i.e. man in the middle, but I wasn't sure that it didn't mean something else.
I'm not sure how big the gain is here. Are people really going to read "man in the middle" and assume that no woman could ever do this?
- baobabKoodaa 6y agoAlso: where are the people who were offended by "man-in-the-middle"? Can you point to a single non-man who was offended that the evil-doer in this example was identified as a man? Or can you point to a single man who was offended for the same reason?
- mcbits 6y agoThere are people who object to all gender-neutral uses of "man", probably more from the belief that it perpetuates bias than from personally taking offense.
- zwog 6y agoWell, now you know. And I bet the first time you read 'MitM' you didn't know what it was either.
- dash2 6y agoRight, but learning and memorising multiple terms for the same thing has a cost. Maybe that cost is outweighed by the benefits of making terminology less sexist, that is what I'm unsure about.