3 ms·

You say “experiencing the awkwardness of the results”. For the other side, this awkwardness might be pure discrimination. It is difficult to be always right an

You say “experiencing the awkwardness of the results”. For the other side, this awkwardness might be pure discrimination. It is difficult to be always right and never offend anyone. And yet, we should try. Addressing someone by marital status is one of those easy things to simply abandon without loosing anything from conversation.

jka 5y ago
It's a challenging and complex topic so I don't know how much to respond in a short text-based reply. In the context of this article, you're correct, I shouldn't have called this mere awkwardness (although depending on the circumstances, it might be), and I accept that was a mistake. Generally I agree and hope that people accept responsibility when they understand they've caused offence, can apologize and/or make amends, and improve and adapt their behaviour over time. There are a wide swathe of cultural, neurodiversal and experiential effects that can factor into situations. It also seems wise to guard against circumstances where it is impossible to become angry or critique an authority class or figure(s). That anger and frustration can be justified and if it isn't allowed or listened to, then that is a problem.
- openplatypus 5y ago
  > It also seems wise to guard against circumstances where it is impossible to become angry or critique an authority class or figure(s). That anger and frustration can be justified and if it isn't allowed or listened to, then that is a problem. Agreed. 100%!
  - jka 5y ago
    Hey - I don't know if you'll read this, but I was thinking this through given the ongoing launch of this feature by Microsoft, and a comment I was making regarding text communication on another thread. I understand that this could be a particular problem because so many people communicate purely by text nowadays; writing emails or documents to send to others. In that context -- where it's unlikely the sender will notice the reaction of the recipient, and may be difficult for the recipient to call out the sender on their behaviour, a feature like this makes a lot of sense (thanks for causing me to think this through).

jka 5y ago

It's a challenging and complex topic so I don't know how much to respond in a short text-based reply. In the context of this article, you're correct, I shouldn't have called this mere awkwardness (although depending on the circumstances, it might be), and I accept that was a mistake. Generally I agree and hope that people accept responsibility when they understand they've caused offence, can apologize and/or make amends, and improve and adapt their behaviour over time. There are a wide swathe of cultural, neurodiversal and experiential effects that can factor into situations. It also seems wise to guard against circumstances where it is impossible to become angry or critique an authority class or figure(s). That anger and frustration can be justified and if it isn't allowed or listened to, then that is a problem.

openplatypus 5y ago
> It also seems wise to guard against circumstances where it is impossible to become angry or critique an authority class or figure(s). That anger and frustration can be justified and if it isn't allowed or listened to, then that is a problem. Agreed. 100%!
- jka 5y ago
  Hey - I don't know if you'll read this, but I was thinking this through given the ongoing launch of this feature by Microsoft, and a comment I was making regarding text communication on another thread. I understand that this could be a particular problem because so many people communicate purely by text nowadays; writing emails or documents to send to others. In that context -- where it's unlikely the sender will notice the reaction of the recipient, and may be difficult for the recipient to call out the sender on their behaviour, a feature like this makes a lot of sense (thanks for causing me to think this through).