5 ms·

I am incredulous at the "mother" to "birthing person" requirement. I have seen one or two people with such prescriptive views on language but the vast majority

I am incredulous at the "mother" to "birthing person" requirement. I have seen one or two people with such prescriptive views on language but the vast majority of people I know consider it ridiculous. And I am in an incredibly "woke" social bubble.

gfodor 5y ago
The point is previous things you thought were ridiculous were normalized, in a very deliberate process. So to it will go with "mother", if the past is any indication. However, it may not be, because people are (ironically) waking up to this.
augustuspolius 5y ago
Encountering this aspect of the culture war always makes me wonder why are tech companies so focused on these gender minorities and not, say, on the disabled groups. There are more blind, deaf, mute (etc, etc) people in the US than transgender people who will bear a child. It would be equally incoherent to attempt to replace all usages of “see”, “hear” with “perceive”.
- madamelic 5y ago
  Trans people are frequently in tech. Go to any college and you'll see the CompSci department is the one with the most amount of LGBT individuals. The same can't be said for people who are blind or deaf.
  - enriquto 5y ago
    > Go to any college and you'll see the CompSci department is the one with the most amount of LGBT individuals. Do you have any data on that? It does not coincide with my anecdotal experience. I'm in a Math/CompSci department and there's zero trans people here (that I know of), while there are some in other departments. Anyhow, trans people are a tiny percentage of the total population, so it would be hard to have somewhat solid statistics on them.
    - madamelic 5y ago
      Interesting. I don't have data, but it heavily correlates with my school and what I had heard from others. There was like a big cadre of trans people in the CompSci department, then a few in the Math department. There was a smattering in other afaik. I was on the board of the LGBT club so I knew at least the ones who were out / came frequently.
  - jeroenhd 5y ago
    But wouldn't an underrepresentation of disabled people be cause for concern in the industry? There are more legally blind people in the USA than there are Native Americans yet at the political stage there is very little interest in coming up for those people. Several impressive videos on social media have shown that programming without using vision or even hands is perfectly possible, there are very few good reasons why such underrepresentation shouldn't be corrected for. In fact, I believe for many disabilities a job in fields like data science or programming would be much easier to adjust for disabilities than many other sectors where interactivity is key.
  - Mezzie 5y ago
    LGBT people or trans people? I'd bet the theater kids gave CS a run for its money. Or the art kids. Just fewer gay men and lesbians in CS.
- jasonladuke0311 5y ago
  Because the "other side" wouldn't take offense to it. Newton's 3rd law applied to the social sciences.
- DontMindit 5y ago
- duckmysick 5y ago
  Twitch removed the "blind playthrough" tag not so long ago. https://www.eurogamer.net/twitch-removes-blind-playthrough-tag-following-criticism-from-gamers-with-disabilities https://www.eurogamer.net/twitch-removes-blind-playthrough-t...
- Mezzie 5y ago
  Oh, I have OPINIONS about why this might be, as someone who was one of the teenagers on LJ back when this weird ideology (the bastardization of intersectionality/identity politics that's taken over all non-right discussions) started. I'm a disabled lesbian, so I get a front row seat to how some forms of discrimination 'matter' more than others. It boils down to a few things: 1.) A lot of this identity politics is coming from upper-middle class people of color OR white queer people, who are using it to make money and boost their careers. The disabled are, in America at least, far less likely to have careers to boost. This is why the type of disability activism you see in identity politics is usually limited to mental illnesses. 2.) The disabled, to some degree, disprove some of the ideological underpinnings of modern identity politics. Modern identity politics is based on the idea that if we change society/fix discrimination, then everybody (all groups) will have the same rates of success. But even if social discrimination didn't exist, those of us who are disabled literally can't do things able-bodied people can do. There's an undercurrent of 'discrimination is bad BECAUSE all these groups can be normal/productive/participate in capitalism' and the disabled make people confront that they don't actually believe all people are equal. They believe all PRODUCTIVE people are equal, but they can't say that, because then they sound like those 'horrible' right wingers. 3.) Fighting on behalf of the disabled doesn't make people feel like they're 'on the right side of history'. I've experienced a shit ton of sexism and homophobia from right-wingers, but most conservatives would be horrified at insulting me for having MS and agree that I should get help if I need it. They just disagree on how it should be done. That's harder to fight about, which means it's harder for the media to turn into a frenzy, and that's where people on both sides get their 'marching orders'.
  - vba616 5y ago
    >This is why the type of disability activism you see in identity politics is usually limited to mental illnesses You are using the term "mental illness" in a way that seems to exclude people for whom it is obviously a disability. These people are characterized by: 1. One or more hospitalizations that are not voluntary. 2. Diagnosis by medical professionals, not psychologists or oneself. 3. Having to take medications forever, at least in order to be employable or generally take care of themselves, that cause substantial long term effects including diabetes, brain damage, disfiguring tics and involuntary movements, recurring tumors, sudden death, and other problems. The people you are thinking of, who act like it is possible to normalize and be open about mental illness, are, let's say "type A", while I have defined above what I'll call "type B". I just want to call your attention to the fact that "type B" people are erased as much or more by "type A" as the visibly disabled that you acknowledge. You are inadvertently promoting that erasure. "Type B" people bridge both worlds but can't talk about it normally. I do recognize the emotions regarding "type A". I recognize why they do what they do, and I see you embracing their compulsive erasure from existence of "type B". The issue of productivity is difficult, if you think there is a right answer. If someone can work, at incredible cost, should they not take pride? Yeah, it's luck that I, or anyone, can work, but you wouldn't sneer at someone with an intellectual disability that was bagging groceries, would you?
- bentcorner 5y ago
  FWIW, they do. There's constant efforts to ensure apps are accessible if you use a screen reader and to not exclusively rely on sound for notifications. Additionally there's care to not assume people are using keyboards and mice when interacting with something ("tap" vs "click" vs "select" vs "pick", etc.). At least with the teams I've worked with there's a considerable amount of effort done in these areas.
rhino369 5y ago
I've been incredulous to this stuff for 15 years, but violating rules I was incredulous about 5 years ago would be fired and black listed from my industry now. Maybe the pendulum will stop or swing back, but "that's not going to catch on" has been wrong for nearly two decades.
mrosett 5y ago
This gender-neutral terminology seems to be standard in official materials in the ob/gyn academic world
cloutchaser 5y ago
Because saying this stuff is akin to vowing your allegiance to the party in authoritarian regimes. Or repeating the cult dogma in a cult. This isn’t about rationality or what is ridiculous. It is about proving that you are part of a group. And to prove that people have done insane things for thousands of years. Much worse than calling a mother a birthing parent tbh, but it shows you what direction we are headed. And interestingly this seems to apply to corporations too. They too (probably because of management), want to demonstrate they are part of a group/cult.
titzer 5y ago
This front of the culture war is an unwinnable quagmire that seems to elicit ever-increasing smarminess yet has no victory conditions.
redisman 5y ago
I thought that was a joke when I heard about it first from my wife. Sorry I mean non-gendered marital creature
flippinburgers 5y ago
I think it is so extreme as to be just another calling card to "prove" your obedience to the cause. It is dystopian.

gfodor 5y ago

The point is previous things you thought were ridiculous were normalized, in a very deliberate process. So to it will go with "mother", if the past is any indication. However, it may not be, because people are (ironically) waking up to this.

augustuspolius 5y ago

Encountering this aspect of the culture war always makes me wonder why are tech companies so focused on these gender minorities and not, say, on the disabled groups. There are more blind, deaf, mute (etc, etc) people in the US than transgender people who will bear a child. It would be equally incoherent to attempt to replace all usages of “see”, “hear” with “perceive”.

madamelic 5y ago
Trans people are frequently in tech. Go to any college and you'll see the CompSci department is the one with the most amount of LGBT individuals. The same can't be said for people who are blind or deaf.
- enriquto 5y ago
  > Go to any college and you'll see the CompSci department is the one with the most amount of LGBT individuals. Do you have any data on that? It does not coincide with my anecdotal experience. I'm in a Math/CompSci department and there's zero trans people here (that I know of), while there are some in other departments. Anyhow, trans people are a tiny percentage of the total population, so it would be hard to have somewhat solid statistics on them.
  - madamelic 5y ago
    Interesting. I don't have data, but it heavily correlates with my school and what I had heard from others. There was like a big cadre of trans people in the CompSci department, then a few in the Math department. There was a smattering in other afaik. I was on the board of the LGBT club so I knew at least the ones who were out / came frequently.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  But wouldn't an underrepresentation of disabled people be cause for concern in the industry? There are more legally blind people in the USA than there are Native Americans yet at the political stage there is very little interest in coming up for those people. Several impressive videos on social media have shown that programming without using vision or even hands is perfectly possible, there are very few good reasons why such underrepresentation shouldn't be corrected for. In fact, I believe for many disabilities a job in fields like data science or programming would be much easier to adjust for disabilities than many other sectors where interactivity is key.
- Mezzie 5y ago
  LGBT people or trans people? I'd bet the theater kids gave CS a run for its money. Or the art kids. Just fewer gay men and lesbians in CS.
jasonladuke0311 5y ago
Because the "other side" wouldn't take offense to it. Newton's 3rd law applied to the social sciences.
DontMindit 5y ago
duckmysick 5y ago
Twitch removed the "blind playthrough" tag not so long ago. https://www.eurogamer.net/twitch-removes-blind-playthrough-tag-following-criticism-from-gamers-with-disabilities https://www.eurogamer.net/twitch-removes-blind-playthrough-t...
Mezzie 5y ago
Oh, I have OPINIONS about why this might be, as someone who was one of the teenagers on LJ back when this weird ideology (the bastardization of intersectionality/identity politics that's taken over all non-right discussions) started. I'm a disabled lesbian, so I get a front row seat to how some forms of discrimination 'matter' more than others. It boils down to a few things: 1.) A lot of this identity politics is coming from upper-middle class people of color OR white queer people, who are using it to make money and boost their careers. The disabled are, in America at least, far less likely to have careers to boost. This is why the type of disability activism you see in identity politics is usually limited to mental illnesses. 2.) The disabled, to some degree, disprove some of the ideological underpinnings of modern identity politics. Modern identity politics is based on the idea that if we change society/fix discrimination, then everybody (all groups) will have the same rates of success. But even if social discrimination didn't exist, those of us who are disabled literally can't do things able-bodied people can do. There's an undercurrent of 'discrimination is bad BECAUSE all these groups can be normal/productive/participate in capitalism' and the disabled make people confront that they don't actually believe all people are equal. They believe all PRODUCTIVE people are equal, but they can't say that, because then they sound like those 'horrible' right wingers. 3.) Fighting on behalf of the disabled doesn't make people feel like they're 'on the right side of history'. I've experienced a shit ton of sexism and homophobia from right-wingers, but most conservatives would be horrified at insulting me for having MS and agree that I should get help if I need it. They just disagree on how it should be done. That's harder to fight about, which means it's harder for the media to turn into a frenzy, and that's where people on both sides get their 'marching orders'.
- vba616 5y ago
  >This is why the type of disability activism you see in identity politics is usually limited to mental illnesses You are using the term "mental illness" in a way that seems to exclude people for whom it is obviously a disability. These people are characterized by: 1. One or more hospitalizations that are not voluntary. 2. Diagnosis by medical professionals, not psychologists or oneself. 3. Having to take medications forever, at least in order to be employable or generally take care of themselves, that cause substantial long term effects including diabetes, brain damage, disfiguring tics and involuntary movements, recurring tumors, sudden death, and other problems. The people you are thinking of, who act like it is possible to normalize and be open about mental illness, are, let's say "type A", while I have defined above what I'll call "type B". I just want to call your attention to the fact that "type B" people are erased as much or more by "type A" as the visibly disabled that you acknowledge. You are inadvertently promoting that erasure. "Type B" people bridge both worlds but can't talk about it normally. I do recognize the emotions regarding "type A". I recognize why they do what they do, and I see you embracing their compulsive erasure from existence of "type B". The issue of productivity is difficult, if you think there is a right answer. If someone can work, at incredible cost, should they not take pride? Yeah, it's luck that I, or anyone, can work, but you wouldn't sneer at someone with an intellectual disability that was bagging groceries, would you?
bentcorner 5y ago
FWIW, they do. There's constant efforts to ensure apps are accessible if you use a screen reader and to not exclusively rely on sound for notifications. Additionally there's care to not assume people are using keyboards and mice when interacting with something ("tap" vs "click" vs "select" vs "pick", etc.). At least with the teams I've worked with there's a considerable amount of effort done in these areas.

rhino369 5y ago

I've been incredulous to this stuff for 15 years, but violating rules I was incredulous about 5 years ago would be fired and black listed from my industry now. Maybe the pendulum will stop or swing back, but "that's not going to catch on" has been wrong for nearly two decades.

mrosett 5y ago

This gender-neutral terminology seems to be standard in official materials in the ob/gyn academic world

cloutchaser 5y ago

Because saying this stuff is akin to vowing your allegiance to the party in authoritarian regimes. Or repeating the cult dogma in a cult. This isn’t about rationality or what is ridiculous. It is about proving that you are part of a group. And to prove that people have done insane things for thousands of years. Much worse than calling a mother a birthing parent tbh, but it shows you what direction we are headed. And interestingly this seems to apply to corporations too. They too (probably because of management), want to demonstrate they are part of a group/cult.

titzer 5y ago

This front of the culture war is an unwinnable quagmire that seems to elicit ever-increasing smarminess yet has no victory conditions.

redisman 5y ago

I thought that was a joke when I heard about it first from my wife. Sorry I mean non-gendered marital creature

flippinburgers 5y ago

I think it is so extreme as to be just another calling card to "prove" your obedience to the cause. It is dystopian.