4 ms·
Not named after a woman (or rather, named after not-a-woman): https://github.com/janet-lang/janet#why-is-it-called-janet https://github.com/janet-lang/janet#why
by empthought 5y ago
Not named after a woman (or rather, named after not-a-woman): https://github.com/janet-lang/janet#why-is-it-called-janet https://github.com/janet-lang/janet#why-is-it-called-janet
- Barrin92 5y ago>not-a-woman given that the character of the show in question is an archetypal secretary arguing it's not a woman is a fairly big stretch. Not only is it a woman, it's a woman embodying a female stereotype, (in line with the purpose of the language, being an easy helper), and the 60s art deco woman's magazine style logo
- avgcorrection 5y agoCan’t decide if “if it looks like a female secretary then it’s a woman” is progressive or backwards.
- Barrin92 5y agoI suppose that depends on whether you think women should be doomed to the role but it takes some extraordinary imagination to pretend the stereotype doesn't exist, or that one gets around it by making the woman in question an artificial one kinda like if I made a software called arnold with a picture of he-man as a logo I doubt one would be considered backward for thinking I had a guy in mind
- blacktriangle 5y agoCalling working as a PA "doomed" is probably the most offensive thing said yet in this thread.
- empthought 5y agoJanet is canonically not a woman. It is said many times. Also not a robot.