97 ms·
Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
- DerSaidin 4y ago> Instead of: African-American > Consider using: Black Was this previously the other way around?
- Mindless2112 4y agoYeah, well, it sort of falls apart once people start pointing out that Elon Musk is the richest African-American.
- nomel 4y agoBut what about mix raced, or just lighter skinned “black” people?
- Mindless2112 4y agoRace is crude social construct. It's practically useless and needs to be phased out.
- nomel 4y agoThere seems to be very strong resistance to the concept of "racial color blindness". I don't think this will happen within our lifetimes.
- Ekaros 4y agoI'm waiting for the time we go back to some variant of the Latin word for colour black. At this point, it might be possible.
- Throwawayaerlei 4y agoYes, in the 1970s plus or minus black was the preferred term.
- CoastalCoder 4y agoBloom County covered this pretty well in 1988 [0]. [0] https://2.bp.blogspot.com/3DPJBMraNogoZ4jNUjGALP_eaVRdd0RroTaytlOAmepI6dX8TjTeRFsdq0g_49fBHFmszzTDwlYCvaN837ktE4QkEiekMQMl57OghYOk6KWFnQ2Doxuk1z6n-zOvtWKkLoImg-8jvg=s0 https://2.bp.blogspot.com/3DPJBMraNogoZ4jNUjGALP_eaVRdd0RroT...
- hedora 4y ago"Black" was similarly offensive ten years later. This was especially awkward in English speaking countries other than the US.
- refurb 4y agoColored used to be the preferred term, then negro, then black, then African-American, now we're back to "black" being preferred...I guess? According to this article, it was various political/social leaders who pushed for new words. https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/question/2010/october.htm https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/question/2010/octo...
- foofoo4u 4y agoCalling some groups by a color is OK. Calling other groups by their color, not OK. Capitalization of the color should be used when referring to one group. But for a different group, capitalization is not to be made. There is no logically consistency. I was raised with the philosophy that calling a person Black was offensive and that I should always use the term African-American. I always respected this. But apparently this changed in the matter of two years. So not only are we faced with a logical inconsistency, but we are also on a language treadmill. It's creating landmines everywhere in general discourse.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> I was raised with the philosophy that calling a person Black was offensive and that I should always use the term African-American. I always respected this. But apparently this changed in the matter of two years No, it was never right in the first place, it didn’t change in 2 years. Racial labels have always been a matter where there are a variety of strong preferences shaped by different personal experiences. The actual rule is listen to abd be respectful of your specific audience; being aware of the general discourse and issues (of which, any particular author's preferred terminology alone is the least important bit) is part of doing that for general or new audiences.
- za3faran 4y agoSo now that "chief" is considered offensive, what do we use instead of the C-suite CEO/CFO/COO/etc. positions?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- uejfiweun 4y agoIn different times, the people responsible for things like this would be put in the stockades at the center of town, and we would all go throw rotten tomatoes at them. Maybe we should bring that back, to dissuade people from this sort of idiocy.
- mpalmer 4y ago> "Indian Summer" - This term infers that Indigenous people are chronically late. I can find zero supporting evidence for this. Also it's "imply".
- skaushik92 4y agoI was really confused by this as well because—as a Indian myself (from India)—I was under the impression that this was referencing the stereotype that Indians (from India) are chronically late.
- selimthegrim 4y agoIt has similar offensiveness to “Indian giver”
- ryzvonusef 4y agoCategories include: Ableist Ageism Colonialism Culturally Appropriative Gender-Based Imprecise Language Institutionalized Racism Person-First Violent Additional Considerations
- Khelavaster 4y agoIs this initiative being evaluated for inclusivity of people with language processing conditions, including autism spectrum disorder, to make sure it doesn't cause discriminatory strain on these folks?
- tosc 4y agoWorse than that, the list itself perpetuates the idea that autism is associated with retardation.
- papandada 4y agoCan you explain this a bit more or give an example? I'm curious about this.
- Jensson 4y agoIt is like requiring people to jog at the job, and then say that being wheelchair bound isn't an excuse to skip the jogging exercise. Some people have a much harder time with abstractions and words, they have learned the ones on the left, remapping all of that to the words on the right is a ton of work and maybe some of them will never manage to do it.
- Khelavaster 4y agoThat's really insightful!
- blep_ 4y agoAs one of those people, no, probably not. At best, they consulted the loudest few autistic p... people with autism they could find, and decided that represented all of us. (I'm in a couple of other minority groups, it's a common pattern.) Specifically, I'm the "parse everything hyperliterally unless I consciously try not to" type, which means I do not see the problem with many of these, and just have to remember a list of words I can't use professionally. Amusingly, most of the list of words I'd always been told I couldn't use professionally get used all the fucking time.
- tosc 4y agoEven if you agree with the basic principle, as I do, this list is riddled with poor interpretations. Also, they either don’t understand the difference between ‘imply’ and ‘infer’, or they are intentionally misusing the word ‘infer’.
- pannSun 4y ago> Instead of "blind review", consider using "anonymous review". Context: Unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture. But.. disability is abnormal and negative? How tortured of a definition of 'normal' must one use to make blindness normal? And I suspect if the author of that sentence were offered, say, $100,000 to undergo a painless but irreversible blinding surgery, they would very quickly admit blindness is a negative - a greater negative than missing out on $100,000. In fact I suspect most people wouldn't accept that offer even if it had many more zeros. But still we must pretend? > Instead of "committed suicide", consider using "died by suicide". Context: Ableist language that trivializes the experiences of people living with mental health conditions. And with this they tip their hand. The mental contortions required to conclude that "committed suicide" trivializes something, but "died by suicide" doesn't, are so extreme that I cannot believe anyone honestly holds that opinion. That leaves as the most likely conclusion that this document is not an honest effort to eliminate 'harm', but a mine-field, a list of sins and prohibitions, to be used as ammo against opponents.
- hulitu 4y agoIt's just normal newspeak. And some people still consider that Orwell wrote fiction.
- tiahura 4y agoIs it time for our two minutes of Musk hate?
- kkoncevicius 4y ago"blind review" is good - better than "non-blind review". So in some sense they are eliminating phrases where "blind" is used in a positive light.
- kgwgk 4y ago“Blind review” has blind once but view twice. Ableist!
- 4y ago
- kkoncevicius 4y agoI read though the suggestions. So "trigger warning" is now problematic and the proper alternative is "content note". And "Preferred pronouns" is hate speech, because you imply that pronouns are merely a preference, as if the person can choose their identity. Godspeed.
- gpderetta 4y agoAs the website doesn't work for me, I genuinely cannot tell if your examples are sarcasm or come from the website.
- silvestrov 4y agoQuoted from site: > Instead of: trigger warning > Consider using: content note > Context: The phrase can cause stress about what's to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person. So the examples are not sarcasm, they are literal.
- hedora 4y agoReferring to literature and scientific works as "content" triggers a negative emotional response in me because I associate it with the corporatization and commoditizstion of speech. Please use the phrase: "Words that describe subsequent words may follow this disclaimer." (Except "follow" could have negative religious connotations.)
- gpderetta 4y ago"Word" as well. Better "sequence of characters", although that might discriminate against ideogram centric cultures. Wow, this is though!
- crackercrews 4y agoI was surprised this wasn't because it could evoke thoughts of gun violence.
- 4y ago
- kepler1 4y agoI mean, if you ever wanted to get on the bandwagon of why we have so many college administrators responsible for raising the cost of college and creating work for themselves by stoking culture wars, just read through the list on that page. ------- ">Instead of: Philippine Islands >Consider using: Philippines or the Republic of the Philippines >Context: The term is politically incorrect and denotes colonialism. Some people of Filipino heritage might use the term, though." --------- ">Instead of: "preferred" pronouns >Consider using: pronouns >Context: The word "preferred" suggests that non-binary gender identity is a choice and a preference." --------- ">Instead of: Karen >Consider using: demanding or entitled White woman >Context: This term is used to ridicule or demean a certain group of people based on their behaviors." (Have we landed in backwards land? So "white" is ok to use here?) --------- ">Instead of: blackbox >Consider using: hidden, mystery box, opaque box, flight recorder >Context: Assigns negative connotations to the color black, racializing the term." --------- ">Instead of: red team >Consider using: cyber offense team >Context: "Red" is often used disparagingly to refer to Indigenous peoples, so its use in this context could be offensive to some groups." --------- ">Instead of: war room >Consider using: situation room >Context: Unneccesary use of violent language." ----------
- snakeboy 4y ago>>Consider using: demanding or entitled White woman It's insane that this is one of the most explicitly racist examples and it's in the "Consider using" column...
- bigmattystyles 4y agoThe black and red examples are silly. I’m white so I get that I’ve not had the lived experience but we might as well make the color itself unusable. I have no evidence but I think that this is some white person’s idea of what is offensive, infantilizing everyone involved. But I guess that in lieu of actual policy that will help people this will do….(that last line is sarcasm)
- lofatdairy 4y ago>red team Baffled by this inclusion, never in my life have I made that association. I'm also hugely against sports teams naming themselves after Native American stereotypes, but here it's literally just a color. >Karen Totally agree with your points, in what world is white okay to use there when they're arguing against "blackbox". Also, Karen has a lot more connotations beyond just race, there's a class/aspirational class connotation. There's a reason it's not "Madelynn". Not saying it's okay, but it's part of a trend in this list of not understanding connotation and context, and a general lack of thought in their alternatives.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- coeneedell 4y agoReading through the suggestions a lot seem out of date, ignorant of the actual experience of people, and insufficiently justifies the change. It’s true that many of these things have been accepted by peer institutions but that was long ago (some of these suggestions track to the 1950s and have little to no salience in 2022).
- humanistbot 4y agoNote that this is a voluntary resource guide of recommendations and suggestions.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y agoIt’s voluntary now, but this is something meant to establish a precedent. The mindset that produced this initiative actively wants this to become the new standard. Those that think the language needs to be changed in order to prevent harm are not going to be content with these suggestions merely being optional. Activists will push for this to become a new criterion for proper writing, probably on the same level as style guides.
- humanistbot 4y agoSo you're advocating censorship of these voluntary guidelines? There is a reason why "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy. If Stanford ever proposed to enforce this, then that is an easy off-ramp to the slippery slope.
- zoklet-enjoyer 4y agoWhy did they even waste the resources on creating this? I'd be upset if my tuition was going to pay for people to waste time making things like this.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago>”So you're advocating censorship of these voluntary guidelines?” Censorship, no. But I’ll be upfront and say that I think the vast majority of the suggestions in this guide are unjustified, unnecessary, and serve to provide a chilling effect on how people are allowed to speak about the world. I do believe the ultimate goal is not just to police language, but to police how people think. A cursory look at the rationale behind each suggestion supports this. Therefore, I hope likeminded people speak out about how this guide should not be followed. And that people vociferously oppose that this document be referenced in any official guidelines. Just as there is no legal requirement to write using Chicago or AP style, they have become de facto requirements. So I worry that just having it be “voluntary” will lead to academics pushing it as a soft requirement that eventually becomes a hard one that is voluntary in name only.
- hexomancer 4y agoThis list is extremely non-verbal.
- drumhead 4y agoNewspeak in other words.
- 1shooner 4y agoSoon discrimination will be impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.
- golemotron 4y agoGotta love how the page for "Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative" has a content warning: "Content Warning: This website contains language that is offensive or harmful. Please engage with this website at your own pace." It's not going well so far.
- satisfice 4y agoThe content warning is reasonable and it works: because I ain’t reading that crap. I have standards. I prefer to avoid being angry with fools, today.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago>” I prefer to avoid being angry with fools, today.” That is my inclination as well, but truth be told something feels very unsettling and insidious about this document. I can get on board with some word choice changes if they seem reasonable. However just about everything in this list seems unjustifiable and purely driven by some neo-puritanical moralism. One day I can envision this list being codified into the grammar and spell check programs we use for word processing and email. If people don’t speak up, this will end up becoming something that gets enforced. Not legally enforced, mind you, but first it will become mandatory in academia, then in journalism, then in the business word, and eventually new generations will speak it natively.
- golemotron 4y ago> That is my inclination as well, but truth be told something feels very unsettling and insidious about this document. The problem is: it never ends. There will be new words and phrases next year, and the year after.
- cperciva 4y agoI wholeheartedly support the elimination of harmful languages. There's just no good reason these days for anyone to use C++.
- gpderetta 4y agoWe were always at war with C++
- ohCh6zos 4y agoThe proper term is double-plus-C
- oxfeed65261 4y ago…then what is double-plus-un-C? A lisp? (and is “lisp” problematic?)
- cudgy 4y agoViolation. Using the term “we” implies agreement among all present.
- return_to_monke 4y agocorrect. only big brother must agree.
- onetimeusename 4y ago> not referring to a specific standard of C++ This is a violation and implies that all of the C++ language is the same which may be offensive to users of a specific standard such as ISO/IEC 14882:2017. Referring to C++ generically ignores any differences between specifications. Instead, referring to a specific standard, for example, C++11 is more appropriate to members of the ISO/IEC 14882 community.
- CoastalCoder 4y ago
- Rayhem 4y agoJonathan Haidt's "Two incompatible sacred values in American universities"[1] seems particularly relevant here. He argues (among other things) that modern universities are undergoing a truth/social justice schism, and that attempting to advance both inevitably perverts both. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gatn5ameRr8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gatn5ameRr8
- foofoo4u 4y agoWhich is an unfortunate state of affairs. But I believe he is right. Given this schism, he sees the way to proceed forward is likely by creating a separation. Similar to what we already have today with the separation of religious universities from secular universities. We likely will need to have social-justice universities. Religious universities continue with their core values of God, faith, and devotion. Social justice universities can operate under their own diversity, equity, and inclusion values. And secular universities and return to their values that we all used to think were good and noble until yesterday, which are equality, fairness, and meritocracy. A discussion between Niall Ferguson and Lex Fridman [1] captures the first signs of this new separation. The discuss the introduction of a new university coming to Austin. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glz9lKobyZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glz9lKobyZY
- zoklet-enjoyer 4y agoWelcome to Clown World
- ohCh6zos 4y ago> “A fire broke out backstage in a theatre. The clown came out to warn the public; they thought it was a joke and applauded. He repeated it; the acclaim was even greater. I think that's just how the world will come to an end: to general applause from wits who believe it's a joke.” - Kierkegaard
- mkl95 4y agoSome people have too many resources and free time on their hands.
- 323 4y agoYou are assuming things about the lived experiences of other people. That is harmful.
- anodari 4y ago> "User" consider using "client". While often associated with one who uses (software, systems, services), it can also negatively be associated with those who suffer from substance abuse issues or those who exploit others for their own gain.
- kgeist 4y ago>client. Short for client state >client state. A state that is economically, politically and/or militarily dependent on another, more powerful state I think "client" falls under their colonialism category and should be avoided as well. "Customer" then?
- chmod775 4y ago> "Customer" then? No. Albeit obsolete, that used to be slang for "lewd woman" or... consults table "person who engages in sex work". How about "human"?
- jbverschoor 4y agoSo let’s get rid of the word “black”, as it means scorched (blakeren). Very harmful.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y agoAre humans no longer capable of recognizing context? How is "he mastered the material in the lecture" invoking centuries of internalized slavery and causing harm in the process?
- handlr 4y agoI think this is the crux of the issue. Modern media makes an art of decontextualization, to the point where most of us experience the world as a series of disconnected narratives emerging from the ether only to dissipate just as quickly as they come. In this milieu the quixotic and paradoxical attempt to perfect language in the service of justice seems like a reasonable, plausible, and achievable goal.
- throwawayfear 4y agoIt’s not. What we are witnessing is the last gasp of an unproductive class of hall monitors and moral busybodies trying to control everyone else and appear productive and enlightened while doing it.
- unionjack22 4y agoAs an elder millennial, it really doesn’t seem like a last gasp. These academic attempts are perfect for conspicuous signalling at no cost and such signals usually get repeated by my generation and zoomers. What I’m trying to say is that based on the past few years it seems these busybodies are winning.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y agoI agree with this point. If my mortgage depended on writing this kind of content 40 hours a week, believe me, I would crank out so much harm reduction gobledygook that you would have no chance due to volume alone. And now that ChatGPT is around, I have a practically infinite supply of starter content to expand on. There's a fundamental asymmetry at work here: the DEI bureaucrats have all of the time and incentives in the world to make more of this and ram it through the right channels. This is their paycheck. Supporting this is perceived as virtuous in many circles regardless of validity. And who is pushing back? Not anybody in a position where their opinion would matter. Instead all we get is a WSJ article and a few dozen anonymous posters on web boards. Doesn't bode well. Lots of analogies here with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
- rendall 4y agoOne mustn't use the term "busy body" because it is ableist. Some people do not have bodies, but are ghosts floating upon the ether. Also, it is too often applied to us here in the Department of Thumb Twiddling and it hurts our feelings. Instead use the term "insufferable twatwaffle".
- dj_gitmo 4y agoThere would be less emphasis on symbolic politics, such as this project, if we could make material progress on social inequity. It does not cost any money to change language. It would be difficult and costly to seriously reinvest in people who have been left behind. For example, if it was politically possible guarantee schools in poor neighbourhoods were funded just as well as schools in wealthy neighbourhoods, do you people would organize around education equality, or would they organize to change language? Also the website doesn't work in Firefox.
- dantheman 4y agoThe problem with schools in poor neighborhoods has nothing to do with funding. You can see charter schools in the same neighborhood which get less funding radically outperform.
- blep_ 4y ago> You can see charter schools in the same neighborhood which get less funding radically outperform. Per student, or total? Legitimately asking, because this is surprising to me.
- Gigachad 4y agoHigh performing schools usually achieve their results by kicking out the idiots and disrupters. Not only does this obviously boost averages by removing the bottom results, but everyone else is able to learn better by having disruptions removed. Of course then some public school has to be the one to attempt to educate these people.
- dantheman 4y agohttps://nyccharterschools.org/policy-research/fact-sheets/charter-facts/ https://nyccharterschools.org/policy-research/fact-sheets/ch... $17,626 Per pupil funding (2022-23 School Year) NYC averages for public schools: $32,757 per pupil The only reason there aren't more charter schools is because there is a cap on the number of them. We should attach the funding to the pupil and their needs, and then let the parents choose the school for them to attend. This is commonly referred to funding students and not systems, or backpack funding. There will alway be problems with education - challenges with parents, children, faculty, curriculum. The state can provide funding and provide testing, let the parents choose the school that they want.
- selfhifive 4y agoThere's a great George Carlin bit on how changing the names to less severe sounding terms can actually be harmful. He gives the example of shell-shock being changed to PTSD which sounds more benign and doesn't capture how horrible the condition is. Also the race baiting in black box and red team is so unintentionally hilarious.
- Glyptodon 4y agoSome of these suggestions are so euphemistic I wouldn't necessarily know what someone using them is trying to say... Plenty of cases where the client isn't actually the user, plenty of cases where saying something is "surprising" doesn't give the same subtext as saying something is "insane..." and that's just scratching the surface. GF is 100% Mexican descent, first gen US citizen, w/ advanced degree and she despises Latinx as a term (can't even pronounce it in Spanish she says).
- spritefs 4y ago> GF is 100% Mexican descent, first gen US citizen, w/ advanced degree and she despises Latinx as a term (can't even pronounce it in Spanish she says). I mean, the whole """Latinx""" thing is just non Latino whites replacing a Spanish word (Latino) with an English word, then telling the demographic it refers to to use this English word to refer to themselves I have no idea how this dynamic doesn't manage to piss off more people
- Eleison23 4y agoSpanish words ending in "o" are, by default, inclusive. For centuries, it has been a linguistic idiom (not just in Spanish) that references to mixed-sex groups of people are done in the masculine. Women understood this perfectly and were not slighted by the custom, because it would not lead to an assumption that a group of people were homogeneously male or an assumption that women were "lesser" than men or excluded from the conversation. If a group of people is uniformly female then the feminine declensions can be used, and fluent speakers will easily shift from one to the other based on group composition. It's very much the same sort of situation that we've used words like "mankind" and "peace on Earth, good will towards men" and women have always understood that "men" included them implicitly. It's only recently that women have chosen to take linguistic offense and rise up and complicate the language in search of manufactured equity.
- cuteboy19 4y agoI don't understand why Latino would be problematic but actor wouldn't
- 10000truths 4y agoAnd so the euphemism treadmill turns. A basic axiom of linguistics is that language evolves to suitably convey what people wish to convey. The “harm” in harmful language lies not in the words themselves, but the intent behind them and the context of their usage.
- IceHegel 4y agoWould be interesting to see Stanfords list of banned ideas.
- twoodfin 4y agoFrom a sociological & political perspective, I’m most concerned here by the expansive notion of “harm” embedded in these guidelines. Harm is a serious thing: It represents the line where my rights end at yours. If using an inappropriate but common cultural idiom harms someone as opposed to being simply rude, that has a potentially revolutionary significance.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- yucky 4y agoI think that's their goal though, right? The first step to controlling thought is controlling language.
- themodelplumber 4y ago> Harm is a serious thing: It represents the line where my rights end at yours. That's the only definition of harm you think is valid?
- Gigachad 4y agoI’d struggle to accept there is a reasonable definition of harm that includes using the word “brave” as harmful.
- oxfeed65261 4y agoTo be clear, TFA objects to “brave” as a noun, not as an adjective.
- barbariangrunge 4y ago"braving" in "braving a storm" uses "brave" as a (nominalized) noun
- rasengan0 4y agoI can't even believe this is 2022; truly seminal! opps leading, groundbreaking. ChatGPT is going to have a field day.
- WesolyKubeczek 4y agoAll words are harmful in some context or other. I suggest we abandon language and return to good old argument by flinging feces at one another.
- zoklet-enjoyer 4y agoThat's ableist.
- rendall 4y agoI heard a theory that woke is actually a class marker of manners, indicating that someone has the time and privilege to track the constantly shifting, baroque signals of what is and is not acceptable to say during any given season. If someone were to make that case, this could be evidence in favor.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y agoIt's a decent interpretation of at least some of the phenomenon. E.g. "latinx" has become an upper middle class shibboleth with close to zero participation from the people "being protected from harm" by the neologism. https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in-four-u-s-hispanics-have-heard-of-latinx-but-just-3-use-it/ https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in...
- sleazy_b 4y agoCatherine Liu's short book Virtue Hoarders has this thesis, arguing that the class that this language is a marker of is the professional managerial class (PMC), a social class originally posited by the John and Barbara Ehrenreich in the 70s. I can't recommend the book too highly but I think it was correct in most of its observations.
- erichocean 4y ago> a social class originally posited by the John and Barbara Ehrenreich in the 70s The professional managerial class was also identified and studied quite a bit earlier. James Burnham wrote about it extensively in 1941 in The Managerial Revolution, and that was based (in part) on ideas from Vilfredo Pareto in the early 1900s about "elite theory."
- kortex 4y agoSorry, "woke" is ableist and biased against folks living with narcolepsy, sleep apnea, and other sleep disorders^W abnormalities^W^W somnodivergence.
- KMag 4y ago
- markus_zhang 4y agoMaybe just remove English from IT altogether. I'm sure one can find harmful roots everywhere given enough time and research.
- booleandilemma 4y agoI'm offended by how they assume visitors to the page will all be literate. Why is there no audio or, for the hearing impaired, a video of a person signing?
- ajaimk 4y agoThis is starting to become verbal gaslighting: if you don't mention it, it doesn't exist.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ryanfreeborn 4y ago> Brave | do not use | This term perpetuates the stereotype of the "noble courageous savage," equating the Indigenous male as being less than a man. Should we get rid of bravo then as well? I assume people making these lists have good intentions, but efforts like this really get lost in the sauce. They are effectively parodying themselves.
- selimthegrim 4y agoThe problem here is that term was often used with squaw and papoose which are undeniably derogatory
- chmod775 4y agoI can get behind some of these, because it's always been common sense not use them, but it feels like they're just mixed in there to lend legitimacy to the nonsense next to them.
- School-Cotton 4y ago“You guys” is the plural form of “you” for most speakers of colloquial American English, and is completely ungendered, in an empirical sense: if you observe native speakers speaking naturally and colloquially, you will find that everyone who uses it (regardless of gender) uses it consistently to address groups of multiple people (regardless of gender). It’s derived from the noun “guy”, which is indeed often gendered. But etymology doesn’t determine meaning. Otherwise we would have to conclude that “woman” is male-gendered because it etymologically derives from “man”. Making “you guys” taboo seems to be a cultural phenomenon specific to certain industries. I’ve asked several of my friends, and never encountered one outside of tech or academia who thought “you guys” was problematic at all. In fact, the vast majority had never even heard of the issue or imagined that it could be controversial.
- JimTheMan 4y agoI was thinking about this the other day. You can approach a group of women and say " hey guys", that is fine. To a group of men," hey gals", and that is not fine. "Hey guys" to a mixed group, why... You've now 'elevated' the women to men so everyone is ok with it. It all implies that being a woman is somehow lesser. And so that is why I'm going to stick to everyone or folks. Although I don't begrudge or ask anyone to change.
- School-Cotton 4y agoYour argument is dubious for two reasons: 1. You assume that “guys” is the male equivalent of “gals”. It’s not — the latter is much more strongly gendered. Your argument is circular, because you assume that “guys” is gendered as one of your axioms. 2. You are talking about “hey guys”, whereas I was talking about “you guys”. The whole point of my post was that you can’t understand the meaning of “you guys” simply by referencing the meaning of “guys”. They are completely different words, and their only relationship is historical, even though one is a substring of the other. Even if “hey guys” is mildly gendered (which I’m not sure of, but I’m at least willing to believe it’s possible), “you guys” absolutely isn’t, empirically.
- 4y ago
- superb-owl 4y agoI'm going to take the minority position here (no pun intended), and say that I think these initiatives are in fact helpful and important. I recently joined an engineering team where there's a cultural norm of not using the word "guys" to address a group. When I first heard this, I kinda rolled my eyes but got on board. It took a tremendous amount of mental effort to weed that word out of my vocabulary, but it's had a tangible effect on my mentality. It has completely reaffirmed my belief in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis--our language influences how we think. Intentionally changing the words and phrases we use is one of the most powerful tools we have for changing our behavior, and correcting both logical and social biases.
- _Algernon_ 4y ago>Intentionally changing the words and phrases we use is one of the most powerful tools we have for changing our behavior, and correcting both logical and social biases. If what you're saying is true, that also has the implication that manipulating language at a societal scale is a great way to manipulate society into thinking the way you want. Is that really what we want? To have a minority manipulate our language in order to influence our thoughts?
- bentley 4y ago> it's had a tangible effect on my mentality. What tangible effects did it have on your mentality?
- ohCh6zos 4y agoI'm not OP, but it spurred me to find a better job, which was pretty tangible.
- peanutcrisis 4y agoMakes you feel good about "doing good", without actually doing good.
- adamrezich 4y ago> It took a tremendous amount of mental effort to weed that word out of my vocabulary, but it's had a tangible effect on my mentality. It has completely reaffirmed my belief in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis--our language influences how we think. this requires elaboration because without further context it is impossible to understand what demonstrable benefits you have achieved by altering your language use thusly, aside from getting along with your team better, due to your compliance with their language-use mandate.
- concinds 4y agoAll this stuff comes from "critical discourse analysis", a pseudointellectual and almost cult-like movement within academic research, which is receiving no pushback because no one knows about it. People are too busy focusing on the end-product (this Stanford webpage, or some politicians' tweets, or a Smithsonian exhibit) rather than the root cause. Ridding academia of pseudoscience goes beyond fixing p-hacking. These academic fringes are intellectually defective and have large real-world influence. Academia tolerates pseudoscience far too much, and that should be addressed.
- yarg 4y agoThere's no pushback because it's career suicide.
- alar44 4y agoWoah woah woah, career death, please be considerate. /s
- baandang 4y agoI will not be surprised at all if many of these words are simply not used in 10 years. Stanford is about as influential an institution as we have. When tarball and gray hat are seen as racist there are no bounds. The bold black aggressive lettering on a white background on that Stanford page is next. I am surprised no one noticed that actually.
- dmonitor 4y agoI'd be surprised if they weren't. Many of them, like crazy dumb or stupid, are just too ingrained in the cultural lexicon. Retarded is a bit different, since that's a common and unfortunate affliction, but nobody is going to admit that they're afflicted with stupid and would prefer the term to not be used casually.
- 908B64B197 4y ago> rather than the root cause. It's impossible to address the true root cause, at least, not in a politically correct way. Some people are simply incapable of producing good quality research that is repeatable. Or just can't quite cut it in technical fields [0]. These initiatives around "inclusive language" and "bias" are just a way for these folks to keep the academic grift going on longer. It's political suicide to talk against these people or question the validity of their research because they won't hesitate to band against someone to "cancel" him or her [1] (and it's essential for their survival; since there's no proof of what they are pushing, it's impossible to defend otherwise!). [0] https://syncedreview.com/2020/06/30/yann-lecun-quits-twitter-amid-acrimonious-exchanges-on-ai-bias/ https://syncedreview.com/2020/06/30/yann-lecun-quits-twitter... [1] https://www.boston.com/news/college/2021/10/07/chicago-professor-mit-lecture-canceled-blames-twitter-outrage-mob/ https://www.boston.com/news/college/2021/10/07/chicago-profe...
- spritefs 4y ago> whitespace > Assigns value connotations based on color (white = good), an act which is subconsciously racialized. How exactly is whitespace good? It's like they pick out every word where "white" is used and say "but wait1!!!11! you can't use this because you're reinforcing the dynamic that white=good" It's like they're telling people "don't think of the white elephant" with this white=good thing. Nobody was thinking about it before they brought it up, now we're thinking about it In order for anyone to "get the message" of this and be able to create their own rules, they have to internalize the idea of white=good. Wasn't this the exact reason for creating the rules in the first place, that is to say not telling people white=good? edit: I don't think the point of this is to come up with a system that makes sense, the point is to come up with a system that doesn't make sense. The point is to be as contradictory and annoying as possible in order to get as much attention as possible. If stupid people in academia want to be annoying and act like children, they should just be ignored and treated like the children they are. We're in the wrong here even giving these people attention to begin with
- kgwgk 4y agoI don’t think I had seen those before: tarball [use instead: tar archive] While the term refers to an archive that has been created with the tar command, it can be negatively associated with the pejorative term tarbaby. whitespace [use instead: empty space] Assigns value connotations based on color (white = good), an act which is subconsciously racialized. Some of the “solutions” are funny: Hispanic [use instead: Latinx, use country of origin] Although widely used to describe people from Spanish-speaking countries outside of Spain, its roots lie in Spain's colonization of South American countries. Where do they think that the roots of the usage of Latin lie? immigrant [use instead: person who has immigrated, non-citizen] Using person-first language helps to not define people by just one of their characteristics. Saying “non-citizen” is still defining people by just one of their characteristics!
- el-salvador 4y ago> its roots lie in Spain's colonization of South American countries. They forgot Central American countries :(
- kgwgk 4y agoSouth of the border, down Mexico way...
- School-Cotton 4y agoAnd North American ones (Mexico and the Caribbean).
- eru 4y agoAlso much of the US.
- outside1234 4y agoAnd California where they are :)
- erichocean 4y ago
- Pigalowda 4y agoI remember when MTV used to put out silly PSA like this in commercial form when I was a teen. This is just more of the same crap - funny it comes from Stanford and not MTV this time. Oh how the cookie crumbles.
- bluedino 4y agochecks date Hrmph. It's not April 1st. They must be serious.
- GauntletWizard 4y agoNeither good nor bad satire is constrained to April 1st, as academics constantly prove.
- nfw2 4y agoThe inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group what they must call themselves because "we know what's best for you" is considered totally fine.
- woooooo 4y agoThe kicker for me is if we want to anglicize Spanish because we know better than them... we could just say Latin! It's already a word! But it doesn't come with ingroup signaling and so here we are..
- shrimp_emoji 4y agoRight?! Kublai was on this train 700 years ago: https://youtu.be/FJUueJzLr54?t=169 https://youtu.be/FJUueJzLr54?t=169
- el-salvador 4y agoWhen you read Latinx in Spanish it reads as "Latín Equis". "Equis" is a word we use when talking about something or someone irrelevant. Like the x in an algebra formula. https://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=equis https://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=equ...
- illuminerdy 4y agoI will make it a point to use all of the "harmful language" in that article as much as possible from now on. I will not blindly follow these nonsensical rules. They're so lame. I may start a fatwa against them. I will only bury the hatchet if they agree to scrap these rules and never speak of them again. Also, I'd like to visit the Philippine Islands someday soon.
- shitlord 4y agoOne way to put an end to language policing is to do the opposite. This stuff is used for virtue signaling, so you can just ruin the SNR. Share these sorts of guides with the worst people around - ethnic supremacists, fascists, etc. They're not allowed to use certain words/phrases in polite society, such as "retard". Thankfully academia has come to their aid, and now they can just call that person "neurodivergent" instead. We all know what they really mean.
- madsbuch 4y agothis is great. homogenising all communication and making strict formal guidelines makes it much easier to make a competing platform that scales. Stanford is doing the transition from a learning platform based in identity to one based I scalability. My guess, however, is that it is to their detriment.
- Animats 4y ago"Do you have a term you'd like added to the list? Please fill out our suggestion form." I wonder how many people Stanford has working on this. Much of this is disconnection from reality. Something an educational institution should not be pushing. As an alum, I'm embarrassed.
- CoastalCoder 4y agoI wonder which suggestions that choose to adopt vs. reject, and on what basis.
- boredumb 4y agoThis is absolute insanity - I do not mean surprising/wild, I mean the people/organizations who have curated this page of random innocuous words and contexts have completely lost touch with reality and should be relieved of any serious positions in higher learning. You can't use the word brave anymore? What in the hell is going on with academics?
- akomtu 4y agoNot everyone who looks like an adult is an adult mentally. Some get stuck in college, some in high school, some in kindergarten. I believe that most of the woke types are the kindergarten type: they are doing the right thing, but in their local coordinate system.
- pinusc 4y agoThey discourage use of "brave" as a noun, which does mean "a Native American Warrior" (Free Dictionary). I never heard the word used as a noun, but I'm not a native speaker. Doesn't look like they have a problem with brave as an adjective.
- l3uwin 4y ago
- jarbus 4y agoAnother reason to not go into academia. Really surprised at how far reaching these things are, they really tried to think of as many things as possible despite almost nobody complaining. Like "tarball". Really? Double plus ungood, stanford.
- akomtu 4y agoI'd compare them with a gang that blocks roads to collect fees. Each word is like a road, and these types want to install toll boths on some words.
- _fat_santa 4y agoWhen it comes to technical writing, many of these replacements just wont work. Take "user" for example which they want you to replace with "client", so "system user" will turn into "system client" which would not work because "clients" are something else entirely in programming. Another one is "man-in-the-middle" which is often used to describe MITM attacks. Sure "person in the middle attack" might de-gender the phrase, but everyone know the MITM acronym and putting PITM instead would only confuse a reader. And that last one is "submit" should be changed to "process", well those things are totally different when talking about a server that you "submit" things to and that then "processes" the thing.
- jdthedisciple 4y agoTells you all you need to know about the actual technical background of the person writing this. My guess is all they have is an arts degree in gender studies.
- sovietmudkipz 4y agoDoes anyone have any good alternative to saying "dad joke?" The term "dad" in "dad joke" excludes anyone who doesn't, is incapable, or chooses not to have children (procreating?) and who also identifies (explicitly or implicitly) as a member of the category "male" (a vestigial term from the sex-assigned binary heterodoxy). I don't think calling "dad jokes" just "jokes" is precise enough language because people typically are trying to refer to a genre of joke when they use the term. Maybe "cringe funnies?" Although "cringe" is more of a slang term from the internet and isn't robust enough to survive into perpetuity... I'm actually serious... What are some good alternatives?
- markus_zhang 4y agomiddle-aged joke
- sovietmudkipz 4y agoAgeist...
- JimTheMan 4y agoAgeist!
- markus_zhang 4y agoMiddle-aged people are the only group of people that can be PC abused, laughed at, etc. Better if they are of middle class. No one cares about them, even themselves think they are pitiful.
- gpderetta 4y agoItalians. Apparently we Italians can be still the butt of jokes and stereotypes with impunity.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- yarg 4y agoDied by suicide? Suicide is a self-inflicted act; committed suicide is correct - and I say this as a man living on the edge. To diminish that is to refuse to accept the underlying cause, which is a bad fucking way to stop it from happening again (or at least to someone else). This whole damned list is retarded. Most of the elements aren't even accurate; they're euphemisms. Someone with OCD isn't 'detail-oriented' they're detail obsessed. > walk-in: Ableist language that trivializes the experiences of people living with disabilities. Come on. Seriously? Anyone who is offended by that is offended for a hobby.
- yarg 4y agoAlso: > ballsy: Attributes personality traits to anatomy. The balls literally produce testosterone, which literally increases risk taking behaviour. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
- too-real-4-u 4y agoWorse: you are taking “non-confrontational” pills like many of your peers. The insanity is real, that no one confronts and tries to stymie the madness is the true disease.
- kgwgk 4y agoWhat about using "brainy" or referring to functioning brains at all? It perpetuates the myth that anencephaly is abnormal or negative.
- _Algernon_ 4y ago"Commit suicide" has the same vibes as "masturbation is self-rape". It doesn't make sense, as an act against oneself is by definition happening with consent. They're both acts of bodily autonomy.
- yarg 4y ago
- 4y ago
- Mizza 4y agoIf somebody is demanding you to say "property owner" rather than "landlord", that person is your enemy.
- alpaca128 4y ago> on the warpath - mad, on the offensive So "sanity", "crazy" and "handicapped" are offensive language, but "mad" is a preferred alternative for something else? > victim - person who has experienced..., person who has been impacted by... Person who has been impacted by murder? Many of those suggestions are so verbose and impersonal. Those alternatives would just become the new slurs, just like people are called Karen nowadays this list would make people call others "boring" instead of retard. And then we have one problem more: how do you then call something boring without sounding offensive? I find this list very unenlightened.
- imgabe 4y ago"mad" in the US English sense of angry, not in the UK English sense of crazy.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- daveslash 4y agoMany of these look like good guidelines for someone, especially one in a position of public communications, to use as guidelines. Or for some sort of social worker, I can see these being some reasonable guidelines to consider. But I would recoil at the idea of these being hard and fast rules considered for everyday speech. And the idea that casual, every day speech must be as equitable as possible doesn't sit right with me either. I would push back on any notion that use of these words/phrases would necessarily constitute a micro-aggression (they may in context, but not universally). For example, they have "straight" listed as a word that should be replaced by "heterosexual". Okay -- I get how this recommendation might make sense in a social worker setting, but the word "straight" by itself it not a micro-aggression ("the plane flew in a straight line"). If you're speaking publicly or on behalf of an organization - be careful, considerate, and deliberate with your language. If you're having a quick huddle with the 3 or 5 folks on your product team about today's activities -- always be considerate, but there's a lot more leeway. And hopefully you know the folks close to you well enough that there's mutual respect, even if a word used might not be ideal. I think with some comment sense applied, this list is good guidance. As something to be applied with draconian enforcement, this would be nightmarish.
- Spivak 4y agoYeah, this thread is nuts to me how many people in this thread are mad. Sure, some of the words are a bit of a stretch but while going through the most I was nodding along being like, “yeah, makes sense.” Like nobody is gonna string you up not following the guidelines but in my own writing I follow these pretty much naturally because, yeah, it’s kinda weird that we describe things with limited or reduced functionality as crippled.
- kgwgk 4y agoIs it also weird that we describe things that completely cease to function as dead?
- Spivak 4y agoI think if a race of aliens saw us calling our phones dead when they break they would be a little confused since they were never alive; so in that sense yes. The reason language has to constantly evolve for certain topics is that every time people come up with new words that don't carry stigma people invariably start using them in everyday language; so $word that was coined specifically to be neutral becomes $word (pejorative). So for example if people would just stop using whatever word is used to describe people with intellectual disabilities as an insult the vocabulary wouldn't have to keep changing. * "What are you blind (pejorative)?" * "What are you deaf (pejorative)?" * "They're delusional (pejorative)!" * "They're deranged (pejorative)!" * "She's hysterical (pejorative)." * "He's demented (pejorative)." * "They're absolutely mental (pejorative)." * "She kind of a skitso (pejorative)." * "They're special (pejorative)." * "What, do you need a handicap (pejorative)?" I don't think it's a good idea to use those words even after they fall out of fashion. It just seems cruel for no reason and it's easy enough to just say something different.
- pschuegr 4y agoI would dearly love to see this list correlated with the percentage of the offended demographic who agree that it is harmful.
- tbrownaw 4y ago> to call a spade a spade/ calling a spade a spade > to call something what it is / calling something what it is > Although the term has its origins in Greek literature, the subsequent negative connotations with the word "spade" means that the phrase should be used with caution or not at all. I have no idea what this is referring to. . > white paper > position paper > Assigns value connotations based on color (white = good), an act which is subconsciously racialized. Whitepapers are considered good now? I thought they were vendor marketing material. . > whitespace > empty space > Assigns value connotations based on color (white = good), an act which is subconsciously racialized. If they'd said it discriminates against dark-mode users they might almost have a point.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago"Spade" has been used as a derogatory term for blacks. "White space" is treating white as good? You're replacing white with "empty", no content, meaningless, and you think white is being used to indicate good? Nope. You (Stanford, not the parent) just took a list of phrases and grepped for "white", but didn't actually think.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Ekaros 4y agoI would consider use of whitespace as negative to white. As it is useless space that is wasteful...
- nomel 4y agoIf you think white space is useless, try reading a document without any.
- CoastalCoder 4y ago> If you think white space is useless, try reading a document without any. So, Perl?
- fergie 4y agoI generally support the initiative, but they seem to have omitted the most important category: class bias.
- hellfish 4y ago> but they seem to have omitted the most important category: class bias. Likely because the list itself is the product of class bias "White space" is offensive but "white trash" isn't?
- oehtXRwMkIs 4y agoSome are obvious and others surprising to me, but I'm very glad they mention the way "American" is used in the US. It always ticked me off but I never felt like I could mention it due to how widespread it is. Now I have somewhere to point to if I want to bring it up, kind of like how French people can point to the DGLFLF if someone uses the term nègre nowadays.
- richbell 4y ago> How could two whole continents > Lose their name to one constituent > Where were we when the U.S. went > And took the word American away > But to be fair to them > Their other name options > Like U.S.A.ers and United Statesians > Were pretty bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7iqSMy4CzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7iqSMy4CzE
- bentley 4y agoWhy does it tick you off? It seems to me like a simple cultural/language difference related to how we count the continents. In the Anglosphere (not just the USA) children are brought up thinking of seven continents, including North and South America, while in Spanish‐speaking countries they think of six, including simply America. Neither is really right or wrong, because there’s no formal definition of what a continent is—it’s merely convention. (Some people consider Eurasia a single continent, some people don’t consider Antarctica a continent…) Because of this difference in convention, the word “América” in Spanish is more accurately translated to English as “the Americas” than “America.” Is this actually a problem that needs fixing in English? Is it a problem at all? Are there any Canadians out there offended at not being called Americans despite making up a major part of [North] America? The suggested alternative of using “United States” to refer to America‐the‐country overlooks that there is another country (even another North American country!) with that name: Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
- TMWNN 4y ago>Some are obvious and others surprising to me, but I'm very glad they mention the way "American" is used in the US. The United States of America is the only country in the world with the word "America" in its name.
- 4y ago
- richbell 4y ago> Grandfather: This term has its roots in the "grandfather clause" adopted by Southern states to deny voting rights to Blacks. > Red team: "Red" is often used disparagingly to refer to Indigenous peoples, so its use in this context could be offensive to some groups. > Blackbox: Assigns negative connotations to the color black, racializing the term. > Brave (do not use): This term perpetuates the stereotype of the "noble courageous savage," equating the Indigenous male as being less than a man. This is the pseudo-intellectual equivalent banning any word that contains "ass" because "ass" is a bad word. Anyone involved in the production of this document should be embarrassed and ashamed.
- KMag 4y agoSomeone's going to go ballistic when they run into lecture notes on red-black trees. Skip lists are also ableist. Hopefully we don't find anything troubling in the pasts of Adelson-Velsky and Landis, or AVL trees will also be on the chopping block. At least they'll probably be able to lecture about treaps.
- nemo44x 4y agoDon’t even try and talk about a binary search. I only search on a spectrum now.
- soundnote 4y agoI have to congratulate them: That brave bit at least is new.
- ancapsfascists 4y agoIt's definitely not, the braves have faced criticism over their name and iconography for a long time
- AustinDev 4y agoBravo
- 4y ago
- adrice727 4y agoDid you know that Linda's husband became devoted to Oxycontin after his shoulder surgery?
- baobabKoodaa 4y agoConsider using "Linda's partner" instead. Oh never mind, forgot I was not supposed to say "using" anymore...
- JoeyBananas 4y ago"The yokels who invented everyday speech are wrong. Deliberately adopt our elite dialect and political views. "
- faeriechangling 4y ago>retard (n) person with a cognitive disability, person with autism, neurodivergent person Well it's great that Stanford thinks "Person with Autism" is synonymous with "Retard". Given the specific target audience of this IT department, the nomenclature "Person with Autism" is especially controversial and likely to cause offence and the phrasing "Autistic Person" would be preferable (See [1] for more details). So the language they're suggesting in a reference is a poor choice. The person who authored this really hasn't meaningfully consulted with the relevant groups in question enough. They would be well served reading the better style guides which already exist such as [1] which by comparison give actually useful guidance which evidently Stanford failed to find during its research [2]. Notice how this guide, which only covers one section of what Stanford was trying to cover, is longer than Stanford's entire guide. Notice also how this is presented as a GUIDE, as suggestions, rather than simply decrying certain terms as harmful. I will note that this appears to be an internal IT department effort, so I would try to keep into context this is likely the work of some busybody who likely had no reason to anticipate international social media scrutiny. I do have to admit though, this effort simply isn't well executed enough to be advisable, and the tone is way too hardline. [1] https://ncdj.org/style-guide/#Autism https://ncdj.org/style-guide/#Autism [2] https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/ehli#footnote-3 https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/ehli#footnote-3
- ksec 4y agoI guess it is philosophically good that I will forever be an amateur. Since I can never be a master of my craft. And any company / startup didn't change their branch from Master to Main would fail to hire anyone from Stanford. And I was surprised Stanford still invited Peter Thiel for their Conference last month.
- KurvaKing 4y ago
- steve76 4y ago[dead]
- peanutcrisis 4y agoRelevant comedy sketch from the past: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKkb0qXbyUY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKkb0qXbyUY
- remarkEon 4y ago>Content Warning: This website contains language that is offensive or harmful. Please engage with this website at your own pace. From an anthropological perspective, it’s fascinating how the weakest and most sensitive people possible are now the ones in charge of policing language. Talib was right about this, on a long enough timeline most things do become a dictatorship of the small minority. https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
- archagon 4y agoWhat makes you think they are weak?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Rebelgecko 4y agoI'm not the above commenter, but it's very surprising to me that people can undergo such serious harm just from reading phrases like "trigger warning" or "tarball"... Or even the existence of languages with gendered nouns. Why are we coddling xenophobes who are afraid of Spanish grammar rules? IMO that's not a fear that is healthy or rational.
- benj111 4y agoaddicted: consider using: hooked. How is hooked 'better'? They both mean the same?!?
- 10g1k 4y agoThat's just embarrassing.
- ACV001 4y agoWow! Have you seen the list of words? This is completely stupid. Most of them anyway. Some of them are legit - eg. it annoys me when someone addresses a group of girls and says - "guys". But this is just a mistaken slang, it is not an established word. Imagine - don't use the word "brave" - which is a really strong positive word. Or take this - replace "stupid" with "boring, uncool" - you must be joking! uncool? Is there such a word? I bet many linguists and dictionaries authors must be going mad when seeing this article.. Ah but then I read this (first line in the article): The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI) is a multi-phase, multi-year project to address harmful language in IT at Stanford. So this is just a restrained group of people. Not sure why is this posted here anyway.
- DrNosferatu 4y agoJust gonna leave this here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pejorative#Pejoration_and_melioration https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pejorative#Pejoration_and_me...
- DrNosferatu 4y agoWhat happens when the minorities themselves break these rules to talk about themselves?
- JetAlone 4y ago
- Khaine 4y agoThis is just demonstrating American's need for euphemisms as pointed out by George Carlin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSp8IyaKCs0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSp8IyaKCs0
- DrNosferatu 4y agoPerfectly timed for the festive season classic, the Stoning Scene from Monty Python’s The Life of Brian: https://youtu.be/FQ5YU_spBw0 https://youtu.be/FQ5YU_spBw0
- fxde 4y ago> "Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative" I wonder if they keep this title. Fits right in with > Unneccesary use of violent language
- DrNosferatu 4y agoRemember, U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy was also just trying to signal and climb a hierarchy of virtue…
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- layer8 4y agoCurious they don’t ban “git”, given that it can be interpreted as referring to a mentally challenged person in a negative way.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- alphachloride 4y agoThere are too many suggested replacements that I find are overly prescriptive, contextually blind, and needlessly aggrandizing. Some, I admit, have merit. (Senile, grey-beard etc.) To me they are common sense. Perhaps, the rest of the terms were common sense to the authors. Several suggestions about cultural appropriation are hypocritical. People of all cultures say the Lord's name in vain all the time. But saying guru or totem pole or spirit animal is an infringement. Why? There are many turns of phrase where the offensive implication is not even implicit. "Bury the hatchet", "take a shot", "rule of thumb". Does anyone have to do mental labor to separate the violence in the words from their meaning? Some replacements are suggested to prevent a word from singularly describing a person, because people have multiple characteristics. Yet the verbosity makes the attempt more conspicuous. "Immigrant -> person who immigrated". Why?
- josteink 4y ago> Some, I admit, have merit. (Senile, grey-beard etc.) To me they are common sense. Speak for yourself. To me "grey beard" is a word which refers to someone with great authority on a subject, whose experience is certain to exceed anyone else. If someone were to refer to me as a gray beard, I would consider that a sign of respect.
- alphachloride 4y agoYes, I am speaking for myself.
- throwaway675309 4y agoThese types of linguistic obfuscations remind me of the increasingly complex bodies of law in America. (like tax code for example). It seems like they're designed specifically so that one can always go after one's enemies by interpreting whatever they say in the worst possible faith.
- usosmat 4y agoInstead of “Karen” is “entitled white woman.” Which is racist & sexist. You’re a Karen if you disagree.
- jacooper 4y agoCalifornia gonna California
- FrontierPsych 4y agoI hate it when people use the word "slave." It comes from the people in Eastern European countries, the Slavs, or Slavic people. It was used because other people thought Slavic people were the ideal slaves and Europeans enslaved the Slavs. So because everyone thought Slavs were the best slaves, they just morphed to slave. It is highly offensive to me that people use the word "slave" because this means that they are automatically saying that I am naturally fit to be a slave and not a human being. "The oldest written history of the Slavs can be shortly summarised -- myriads of slave hunts and the enthralment of entire peoples. The Slav was the most prized of human goods. With increased strength outside his marshy land of origin, hardened to the utmost against all privation, industrious, content with little, good-humoured, and cheerful, he filled the slave markets of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It must be remembered that for every Slavonic slave who reached his destination, at least ten succumbed to inhuman treatment during transport and to the heat of the climate." https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave Because of this, Slavs are still seen as inferior throughout the Middle Ages, and even now, as seen by dumb Polack jokes. By the 1800s, Slavs were subjected to expulsions and massacres by Germanic groups. This anti-Slavic sentiment followed the predictable trajectory of Germanic racism and, a century later, reached its natural conclusion: almost 11 million Slavs were murdered in Hitler’s long list of murdered “subhumans.” Why were Slavs targeted by the Nazis? They were seen as intellectually inferior and invaders who were living on stolen Germanic land. The German's plan was to eliminate 30 million (!!) Slavs, create room for the expanding Aryan race in the Eastern territories, and enslave the remaining Slavic population So.....is everyone here, and especially the wokish people, going to immediately and forever stop using the world "slave?" So, that's right...you cannot describe black people brought to the USA as "slaves." Never use the world "slave" as it is known by me as the s-word, and makes me exceptionally angry, just like the n-word for black people. Use another word for the s-word, I don't care what it is, and it's not my job to find one.
- CoastalCoder 4y ago> It is highly offensive to me that people use the word "slave" because this means that they are automatically saying that I am naturally fit to be a slave and not a human being. I fail to see how someone unfamiliar with that history could be conveying that meaning.
- 1shooner 4y agoBalls to the wall means completely opening the throttles on a plane.
- hnarn 4y agoCan someone please steelman the argument that language can be harmful, because I just don’t get it. There’s physical and psychological harm, clearly it’s not physical so it’s saying that people are being harmed in a psychological way from a certain type of language. Ok, so are they developing disorders, or what kind of harm are we talking about? My understanding is that we’re talking about language that causes offense, discomfort, things of that nature. So if you’re going to pursue this line of thought, where do you draw the line? Whose discomfort do you take into account, what offense is enough?
- CoastalCoder 4y ago
- 4AoZqrH2fsk5UB 4y agoLooking at it from a different angle, I don’t like the more wordy suggestions. > convict…person who is/was incarcerated > senile…person suffering from senility Before I hit send I try to make my writing clear, concise, and full of meaning. I do it in the hope that the folks on the other end read and understand me. Swapping one term for a slightly longer one won’t be a breaking point, but sentences like: > I went to visit the incarcerated person suffering from senility build up cruft that you don’t get with something shorter. > I went to visit the senile convict. Maybe they should punctuate the article as Orwell did in his rules for writing: > Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous
- crackercrews 4y agoThe verbose alternative also draws more attention to the condition being described. Since most of these are negative conditions, you could argue that you're emphasizing the negative by dedicating so many words to it.
- himinlomax 4y agoIt's also wrong, because someone can have been incarcerated without having been convicted.
- kaapipo 4y agoWhile I am a little surprised by some of the words on the list, as a WEIRD [1] white hetero male I do not think my opinion on some of the terms is earned. What I would really like to know, however, is if people from various backgrounds have been consulted. If not, the authors of that list have fallen to the very same fallacy I described: only a person of background X should have the right to decide whether an expression is hateful or otherwise undesirable towards group X. If this is not the case, we get this [2] kind of hypocrisy. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD_bias 2. https://mooseyanon.medium.com/github-f-ck-your-name-change-de599033bbbe https://mooseyanon.medium.com/github-f-ck-your-name-change-d...
- shrix 4y agoUsed to consciously avoid it when I was a kid, but if we could do it completely that'll be so great :)
- tsimionescu 4y agoThe comedy of this list is perfected by them banning the use of the phrase "calling a spade a spade".
- CoastalCoder 4y agoExpanding on the parent comment: [0] [0] https://grammarist.com/idiom/call-a-spade-a-spade https://grammarist.com/idiom/call-a-spade-a-spade
- jmadler 4y agoNever go full Sapir–Whorf.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago"Content Warning: This website contains language that is offensive or harmful. Please engage with this website at your own pace."
- ghostpepper 4y agoSome of these are very strange to me - is really preferable (or even appropriate) to say that someone is devoted to heroin instead of addicted?
- jujibaiuosdfg 4y agoIt's badly written. They are saying that you shouldn't use the term "addicted" for anything except actual addiction. They object to, for instance, saying you are addicted to a TV show.
- mindslight 4y ago<thumbsup> Facebook likes this.
- nullc 4y agoMany of the examples appear to be ignorant and even outright offensive-- but in that case I believe it's suggesting an alternative usage for non-addiction contexts. E.g. Don't say that you're addicted to CheezePuffs(tm) say you're ... devoted. Uh well not the best but you get my point. The motivation for that one is to avoid conflating something someone likes a lot with heroin like addiction.
- ghostpepper 4y agothanks for explaining, that actually makes some sense (if you accept the premise that we should change words that people might be offended by).. but then don't you immediately run into the problem of deciding which addictions are real and which are trivial?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- fjkdlsjflkds 4y agoWorse. The mechanism through which "substance addictions" and "behavioral addictions" happen (and are maintained) pretty much involves the same neurotransmitter paths: "Preclinical evidence has demonstrated that marked increases in the expression of ΔFosB through repetitive and excessive exposure to a natural reward induces the same behavioral effects and neuroplasticity as occurs in a drug addiction." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction#Behavioral_addiction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction#Behavioral_addiction) The way I see it, it is literally harmful to try to make it seem like "behavioral addictions" are any less dangerous than (or significantly different from) "substance addictions", because they are not.
- adamnemecek 4y agoBalls to the wall is not from testicles.
- bryan0 4y agoThat's besides the point. someone might think of testicles if you were ever to say such a thing, which could be psychologically damaging to those that have a fear of balls.
- troll555 4y ago
- version_five 4y agoWhy would you expect any of this to be rational? It's just people trying to exert power over others, because we collectively let them behave in this way.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- neonate 4y agohttp://web.archive.org/web/20221219160303/https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/ehli http://web.archive.org/web/20221219160303/https://itcommunit... https://archive.ph/8puIG https://archive.ph/8puIG https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/stanfordlanguage.pdf https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/stanfordlanguag...
- lost953 4y agocommitted suicide -> died by suicide: even in death we are removing their agency.
- lostNFound 4y agoAgreed, I actually found this one the most interesting of the list. What is the reasoning for this one? What is avoided by this change? I was surprised by the fact I actually agreed with much more of the list than I thought I would. Maybe a bit over half. The worst of the list (as in, the one I agree the most and which irks me the most) is OCD. Probably because I have slight OCD but it’s still the extremely specific medical term why use it for when you like pink post-its?
- kirab 4y agoIt's interesting to see that you agree the most with the one term you are actually personally afflicted with. Maybe it's the same for so many other terms when the people are actually affected?
- lostNFound 4y agoThe one I agree with the least in the entire list is also the one I’m affected personally. So it’s a toss up? Stop trying to make latinx a thing. Any latino or latin american would be horrified by that term.
- AxEy 4y agoFrom what I've heard (and a quick DDG search confirms this) the switch was actually to get away from the fact that killing oneself has actually been a crime (that one "committed") in the past.
- lost953 4y agoI guarantee you that most of those actually affected by suicide care far more about the passivization of their loved one's final act than a tortured etymological concern.
- poisonarena 4y agoI believe it is wrong to make people feel bad about themselves with insensitive or culturally offensive language but with every article I see like this I become less and less interested in thinking about what I say. Also why do all articles like this have the same art style? How do people get paid to make these kind of articles and how much do they get paid?
- henrikschroder 4y agoThe art style is called "corporate memphis", and it's usually an excellent predictor of empty platitudes and useless bullshit whenever you encounter it.
- erik_seaberg 4y agoIt’s been discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27107820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27107820
- poisonarena 4y agothis really shined the light, thanks for this.. I find it strange how people would use this, it is a political art style or something
- poisonarena 4y agoThank you, I hate this.
- jmadler 4y agoNever go full Sapir–Whorf
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- testfoobar 4y agoThey apparently spider and scan their own websites for "harmful" language: I just find this wild. How and when did language itself become so dangerous to this degree? Along with most adults in my social circle, I care and think about my health, my family, my friends, my work, my dog, my environment, my community, etc. I could not give a flying fuck about language policing. Language isn't going to protect me on my bike from speeding cars on my street. Language isn't going to fill the dams in a drier and drier California. Language isn't going to do jackshit about 400+ ppm CO2 levels. And on and on. These language policing idiots, and I am choosing my language here, are fucking clueless about the real challenges we face as individuals and as a society. Even worse, they are redirecting valuable resources to stupider and stupider bullshit. How do we close this Pandora's box? How do we go back to debating meaningful problems and solutions and tell these language policing idiots to do something useful? https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/news/poc-it-2022-progress-and-looking-ahead-2023 https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/news/poc-it-2022-progress-a... "EHLI Scans In addition to the educational website, EHLI involves scanning Stanford University domains and sites to determine where and how identified harmful language is being used. The end goal is to help individuals and units eliminate harmful language that could be perpetuating stereotypes, inequality, violence, and racism. Seven web domains authorized by the CIOC were scanned in a pilot phase to test the process of receiving, analyzing, and addressing scan results. This pilot phase led to a change in how terms are categorized from the scans, using these three priority levels: Most egregious terms that need to be addressed immediately Terms we do not expect to find on our sites but will scan for due diligence Terms that can be used in a non-harmful way, generating many false positive results For the seven domains in the pilot, baseline scans have been recorded, and scan results are now recorded monthly. The process for working with content owners for remediation is still in a planning phase. Additional domains to be included in the scanning process are being evaluated, in close partnership with the CIOC."
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sacnoradhq 4y agoFashions will change and fade, and find fault with every word like grasping at straws to find something to be offended over. I'm sorry, that term is now racist: grasping at threads. I'm sorry, that term is now sexist: grasping at leaves. Ad infinium.
- henrikschroder 4y agoThe corporate memphis art and the content warning is just the cherry on top of this steaming pile of crap. Projects like this are doomed, because they fundamentally ignore how language works, how language evolves, and how humans work. My favourite example is "idiot". Once upon a time it was a clinical diagnosis used by physicians to describe people. This word of course turned into a slur, so the diagnosis word had to be changed, and people at that time chose "retard". ...Which promptly became a slur, forcing people to yet again pick a new word. Is "mentally handicapped" ok these days? This list suggest "people who have a cognitive disability", that sure rolls easily off the tongue. But it's interesting to note that even though this list calls out "retard", it doesn't call out "idiot". Because the time that word was replaced by its politically correct replacement is so long ago that the people who made this list aren't aware of it and therefore think it has always been a slur, and that it's therefore, somehow, magically not disparaging towards the cognitively disabled. Another great example of idiocy (!) from this list is "basket case". They're claiming you shouldn't use it because it's offensive to quadriplegics, because that's what it originally meant. WHEN?!? IN THE 1800's?!? That expression hasn't meant or referenced quadriplegics in a long, long time. But apparently someone with a stick up their ass dug up the etymology of it and decided to include it in the list. But forgot about "idiot". This is white-knighting feel-good slacktivism at its finest. You haven't accomplished anything by putting together this list.
- mcphage 4y ago> But apparently someone with a stick up their ass dug up the etymology of it and decided to include it in the list. Don’t you realize what “a stick up their ass” originally meant?!
- robocat 4y agoPresumably comes from the upright posture taught as good bearing - no etymology I saw suggested anything different - comment implies it isn’t that old either: https://www.reddit.com/r/etymology/comments/38mzi9/comment/crwngx8/ https://www.reddit.com/r/etymology/comments/38mzi9/comment/c...
- mindslight 4y agoSee also: The college administration cancer and cost disease in general. I think to myself "man these people must be fun at parties", then I remember one of their main self-appointed goals is to prevent things like parties. It seems they've been successful enough at it to move on to other forms of humans' interaction. Alternatively, let culture exist and evolve. Call shitheads out as shitheads, including shitheads [0] who grandstand by tone policing. Assume good faith [1]. Endeavor to punch up. Accept mistakes, both by others and your own. Also, I have to hope there is growing dissent to this nonsense by normal society, that doesn't devolve into beating the "woke" strawman and other societally-destructive spite. That's the ultimate rub with this hyperpolarized off-in-the-weeds online-driven nonsense culture - as a person who generally wants to be left alone, I don't want to sign up for either the blue or red flavored cults of idiotic memes. [0] Sorry, I've realized that was offensive to those with feces in their head, that don't have a head, feces, and feces enthusiasts. I promise that I've paid for an indulgence. [1] Someone will inevitably call this out as contradictory with the previous sentence. The world is full of contradictions. Embrace them.
- CoastalCoder 4y ago> Endeavor to punch up. I'm skeptical of the concept of "punching up" in general. It seems to assume a single sorting criterion. As a counter-example, suppose someone high up in an organization is from a historically disenfranchised ethnicity. Is attacking them "punching up" or "punching down"?
- mindslight 4y agoThere is obviously no single sorting criterion for people. I do agree there is a huge moral hazard where people in privileged positions (eg college administrators) want to fall back on a less-relevant "identity" to deflect legitimate criticism. Ultimately, it's not about the person, but rather what you're attacking. Are you attacking their position and policies, or are you attacking their ethnicity? The former is punching up, the latter is punching down. If you're attacking their ethnicity because you don't like their policies, that's essentially still punching down, and makes for a terribly ineffective criticism of their policies. If you're attacking their policies because you don't like their ethnicity, you could be trying to punch down while cloaking it in an aura of punching up. But your criticism would still need to be evaluated on its own merits regardless. It's likely that your criticism of the policies won't be that great, and people will see right through them.
- dmonitor 4y agoit's unfortunate that a lot of the words I would use to describe this list also appear on the list.
- goatlover 4y agoWe wouldn't want to cause harm to Stanford. They might be reading this thread and get offended.
- chiefalchemist 4y agoAside from words, human communication has context, as well as intention. And yes, sometimes body language. While some are understandable, others feel like they were scrapped off The Onion (or similar).
- za3faran 4y agoToo bad that your username is considered offensive as per the list. Consider changing "chief" /s
- 1970-01-01 4y agoSJWs are alive and well at Stanford. Oh sorry, they/them are existing in a non-unsatisfactory status.
- Manuel_D 4y agoSome of these seem like legitimate improvements. A lot are inconsequential (e.g. "homeless person" vs "a person without a home"). But some are genuinely degrading our ability to communicate. E.g. "paraplegic" and "quadriplegic" should both be replaced with: "person with a spinal cord injury, person who is paralyzed" But this lacks the old term that distinguished paralysis below the waist with paralysis below the neck. A non-powered wheelchair is only going to help the former. Not to mention "person with a spinal cord injury severing the nerves to their legs, but not their arms" is a bit of a mouthful. If only there were a pair of words, perhaps using the roots to denote 2 and 4, that could convey these two things more concisely...
- anhner 4y agoIt feels like this whole list was compiled by one or very few people with no actual expertise. Why don't they ever consult the people about what words should make it on the list? I bet you most of the terms on that list are not even found offensive by those who they allegedly describe.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- philsquared_ 4y agoTaking issue with any word with the word "man" in it is pretty dumb. Specifically "mankind" they suggest using the word "humankind". So if everyone starts using this word eventually slang will shorten it to "mankind" which means the same exact thing anyway...
- sacnoradhq 4y agoYou know a society maybe unraveling when a duopoly of unreason competes for mindshare.
- hobbitstan 4y agoYeah, don’t use ‘he’ or ‘she’ in case someone takes offense. Orwell wrote that this politispeak was used to make palatable the most disturbing actions. We see it more and more every day.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- than3 4y agoThis kind of initiative lacks a core understanding of the requirements for thinking and intelligence in general, and by its nature of compulsion is subversive. In order to think, you must risk being offensive, in order to learn you must risk being offended. In either case, you must have the freedom to do either, and compulsion is evil. By compelling speech like that, you are indoctrinating future generations, and doing so along a path where they will be at a disadvantage and won't think because they have been brought up in an environment where the priority given is that it is more important to say the politically correct/right thing than it is to risk being offensive or do anything. If you can't question anything, can you even form a basis for real thought? Do you have any value as a person if all you do is parrot what someone else says? Not only that, but it also shares some of the same philosophy that lead to the deaths under Mao. This makes me fear for the future because Stanford people are supposed to be intelligent, and yet this is just so utterly... stupid, borderline brainwashing, and it likely violates core institutional mandates/ethos. That this is even getting any traction, you have to wonder wtf is going on up there. Clearly someone, more likely many need to be fired. Unbelievable.
- russdill 4y ago
- rsj_hn 4y agoI think most people are fine with a style guide discouraging "retards". That's not the issue here at all, and I'm really surprised that you think this is what people are objecting to. Do you really believe this is the problem? On the other hand, a style guide discouraging "users" or "master" is a problem, especially for a school that offers Masters of Science degrees -- how exactly is their website supposed to cover that? How are software usage guides supposed to be posted online if "user" is not allowed? Or "submit"? People turn to the web for information and need to be able to obtain this information. Stanford should understand this.
- DiggyJohnson 4y agoThis is an egregious example of assuming the worst about those you disagree with, combined with a failure to recognize nuance.
- sometimeshuman 4y agoThis got dark quick: "basket case" Originally referred to one who has lost all four limbs and therefore needed to be carried around in a basket. I've only heard of basket case from the context of barely ridable motorcycle in a constant state of repair with its random parts in a basket. I wish it was my job to make this sort of document. I'd make up all sorts of crazy backstories for slang no one has ever heard of.
- geomark 4y agoSame with me when I was a teen and all my friends had motorcycles, several ending up being basket cases.
- dqpb 4y agoI didn't know that. And now that I do know it, I feel harmed.
- HideousKojima 4y agoI only know it thanks to the Green Day song of the same name.
- TexanFeller 4y agoI always thought it came from insane asylums using basket weaving as an activity/therapy.
- crypot 4y agoI feel like someone that had no limbs would still be too heavy to carry around in a basket. What is the weight of a delimbed torso?
- Nasrudith 4y agoIt varies by person. A quick search of body weight percentage is about 4-5% per arm and 16-17% per leg. For a 150 lb while intact man that would be about 70ish to 80ish pounds. Baskets may be carried by multiple people or dragged though. Apparently according to one source the basket case origin was a result of rumor telephone and loss of context. https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2014/08/basket-case.html https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2014/08/basket-case.html
- timonoko 4y agoNone/do not use!
- Mindless2112 4y agoThe WSJ article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stanford-guide-to-acceptable-words-elimination-of-harmful-language-initiative-11671489552 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stanford-guide-to-acceptabl...
- neonate 4y agohttps://archive.ph/YJWo7 https://archive.ph/YJWo7 For 16,937 students, Stanford lists 2,288 faculty and 15,750 administrative staff.
- karmasimida 4y agoWow...Glad some publicity is spent to showcase how out of touch some people in the administration had become ...
- dang 4y agoThis thread started a day ago, but only had about an hour on the front page. Reposts keep appearing, so there is obviously an appetite for this story. Instead of a duplicate/split discussion, I've re-upped the original thread and merged the others hither. If you're going to comment, please make sure you're up on the site guidelines and that your comment is within them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
- jacquesm 4y agoI suspect the appetite has something to do with how ridiculous this whole thing is. Having a meaningful discussion about this is going to be very hard without occasionally bursting out in laughter.
- timonoko 4y agoI remember English teacher lady being slightly offended because I kept referring she as "he". I could not help it, native language has no grammatical genders. But this was 50 years ago, could not imagine what would happen today. Judging by Youtube-videos bodily harm would be almost certain.
- soundnote 4y agoI'm eternally grateful that it doesn't have grammatical gender and that we call everyone "it". Spares us from some of the nonsense getting imported from the States.
- hedora 4y agoIn the US, doing that is considered derogatory. "I saw your girlfriend. It was buying something at the corner store." Is approximately as bad as "The bitch was at the corner store." Because "it" is reserved for animals and inanimate objects. If you have an obvious accent, people will generally understand the "it" was a grammatical error.
- pico303 4y agoDoes anyone else find it amusing that I shouldn’t use phrases with “trigger” in them, as they promote violent imagery, but then the reason why I shouldn’t say “killing it” uses “trigger” to describe why it’s bad?
- plandis 4y ago> American How exactly is this confusing? What other country uses American as a demonym?
- hedora 4y agoSpanish has separate words for "North American", "United States citizen", and "from North, Central or South America". The latter is "Americano" and hardly ever used to describe people. ("Eurasian" is similarly useless in English)
- gtbcb 4y agoIt’d be funny if “conspiracy theorist” was on the list as critical of people with poor education, people less able to form rational thoughts about how the world works, people easily deceived, people unable to discern truth. I suspect conspiracy theorists find this term derogatory. Thoughts on what replacement they’d prefer? I also suspect though that they wouldn't want to be identified as a group at all. What do you do when there's group that doesn't want to be referred to as a group?
- onionisafruit 4y ago“theorist” has a sophisticated sound to it. I can’t think of a better sounding alternative.
- Zircom 4y agoI believe truthers is what they call themselves.
- azraeldv 4y agopeople with dissenting opinion.
- hendrikrassmann 4y agoIn Germany they're calling them selves 'Querdenker' (lateral thinkers).
- anshumankmr 4y ago"Guru" is offensive lmao... It literally means "teacher" or "expert". Gurukuls were what were schools were once called during the Vedic period in India.
- exodust 4y ago"Long time no see" is bad. Their suggested replacement: "I haven't seen you in so long." Wow. "No can do" is out, replaced with "I can't do it". OMG. "Prisoner" replaced with "person who is incarcerated". It goes without saying that "prisoner" is someone with many characteristics, who happens to be in prison - a significant life situation. When released, they are no longer prisoners. In regards to "blackbox", the meaning is about absence of light, not "black is bad". The Stanford list is embarrassing, and I would argue harmful. One on the list I agree with is "stand-up meeting". Literally standing up in a meeting doesn't improve the quality of the meeting. Happy to see that go. Inviting someone in a wheelchair to a "stand-up" would be a low point for everyone involved. This is an exception on the list. Things like "sanity-check" are not the equivalent because "sanity" is very broad, not as clear-cut or narrow as "sit/stand".
- bmc7505 4y ago"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it." —George Orwell, 1984 (1949)
- thoiu23o43243 4y agoMore importantly, you'll be so obsessed with words that you'll miss burning hate even when it hits you in your face. All these language games are about power ultimately, and about securing the status quo.
- coffeeblack 4y agoPrecisely. And in the meantime, it’s great to recognise friend from foe. Are you using all the new “correct” words? Are you a good “party member”?
- phist_mcgee 4y agoInterestingly the theory of restricting language to control thought has been debunked. But personally, I do think that our range of acceptable speech can impact our thoughts in more subtle ways both positive and negative.
- bmc7505 4y ago“The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked by fact-checkers at the Ministry of Truth and determined to be fake news.” Well, how reassuring!
- erklik 4y agoIs there a source for this debunking? I'd love to read it.
- phist_mcgee 4y agoI honestly can't find the article that cited the sources right now, so it's gonna have to be a trust me on this one. My google skills are failing me right now.
- hbrn 4y agoAbsolutely disgusting. I can't even imagine how corrupted the minds of those who come up with such lists. Having thick skin is a good thing. Actively showing off your fragility isn't. Treating people charitably is a good thing. Actively looking for gotchas isn't.
- margalabargala 4y agoSet someone up to fail, and you will succeed.
- crystalmeph 4y agoAt some point, weakness became a virtue.
- klabb3 4y agoThis has nothing to do with fragility, and there is nothing bad about showing honest fragility (although “showing off” is rarely productive). This is about controlling speech and revisionism, while using sensitive people as an excuse for it. Why? Because it makes you more relevant, if you set the agenda. You get to choose who is good or bad in this absurd moral system where words, not their meaning or your actions, is the basis for judgment. Ironically, this is about good old self-interest and power. Moralism seems to be inherent in humans, there are always those who self-select to police the behavior of other people. What’s scary with this stuff is that this particular flavor of it has a blind spot (apologies for ableist language, 10 lashes for me) among our current intellectual gate keeping class – most of them just let this pass through and even think it’s a good idea. That’s the only reason this BS can get amplified in influential institutions.
- ARandomerDude 4y ago> master (v) > become adept in > Historically, masters enslaved people, didn't consider them human and didn't allow them to express free will, so this term should generally be avoided. I assume Stanford now hands out an Adept Degree at the end of grad school.
- sn41 4y agoI personally would prefer a Journeyman exit degree option :)
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y agoJourneyperson, thank you very much. Actually, journeyperchild.
- Traubenfuchs 4y agoThe usage of "person" erases the existence of otherkin and pronoun users that reject the "person" label. Please use "entity" instead. Journeyentity.
- ngc248 4y agoJourneyentity means that they are capable of moving/travelling ... what about those who cannot move about?
- AustinDev 4y agoThose people are called invalids and they can travel. Please use the correct term.[1] [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_carriage https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_carriage
- laserdancepony 4y agoI would not want some snotty academics to devalue my trade school degree.
- outside1234 4y agoCan we talk about Latinx? This is entirely something that English speakers have made up for Spanish speakers. My wife, who works in healthcare for the state, and largely with farm workers, regales me constantly with stories that essentially have the punchline “Que es Latinx?” in which she has to explain to them that this means them and that it was made up (perhaps at Stanford) out of some crazy attempt to remove -a and -o endings FROM THEIR LANGUAGE because it hurts their English ears.
- antegamisou 4y agoEnglish speakers from the US that is, btw.
- outside1234 4y agoYes - good point.
- luuuzeta 4y ago>English speakers from the US that is, btw. To be more precise, usually white liberal English speakers from the US.
- cipheredStones 4y agoIt's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want to avoid, like "manpower" - Words that have long since lost any stigmatizing meaning by virtue of the original use being so ancient ("lame", "dumb", "stupid") - Words that, if you look into their history, originally had something to do with some racist practice ("grandfather" something in) - Words that never had anything to do with racism, but someone who was really on high alert might wonder if they ever did ("tarball" for "archive made with the tar tool") - Anything that might be derogatory to anybody ("Karen": "This term is used to ridicule or demean a certain group of people based on their behaviors.") - Terms that I genuinely have no idea how anyone could view as harmful in their actual context: "user" ("it can also negatively be associated with those who suffer from substance abuse issues"), "submit" ("Depending on the context, the term can imply allowing others to have power over you.") Very much an "arson, murder, and jaywalking" approach.
- horns4lyfe 4y agoIt’s make-work. Stanford has nearly as many administrators as students, and they have to justify their paychecks somehow. This is just a resume padding exercise for some unscrupulous ladder climber.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- pclmulqdq 4y agoThey just don't want to be called "Karens" for imposing a speech code on the school. It's 100% illegal in CA to do this thanks to Leonard's Law.
- photochemsyn 4y agoI can think of a few more! "register" - might indicate that someone has to register as a second-class citizen, enemy alien, etc. "bit" - might imply that someone is only a 'bit player', leading to feelings of inferiority. "tool" - an obviously offensive word meaning that someone is only fit to be used by others. "terminal" - we need to be sensitive about words that bring up the concept of death, to avoid triggering effects. "inheritance" - individuals are not the product of their ancestry! "class" - we don't need a class-structured society, that's a leftover from a feudal past. "polymorphism" - too close to hermaphrodite, must be eliminated.
- ugh123 4y agoFodder for years to come, from Republicans. So unnecessary
- flenserboy 4y agoNo wonder they're so dedicated to the task: any regime so threatened by words rests on a greatly unstable foundation and is in constant danger of collapse.
- carabiner 4y agoLet me remind all citizens of the dangers of magical thinking. We have scarcely begun to climb from the dark pit of our species' evolution. Let us not slide backward into oblivion, just as we have finally begun to see the light.
- jjslocum3 4y agoLooks like the inmates are running the asylum at Stanford. <ducks and runs for cover>
- hedora 4y agoYour statement is offensive to victims of nuclear war, and also some types of birds.
- fallingknife 4y agoYou mean temporarily incarcerated persons?
- andsoitis 4y agoThe fragility of the American mind.
- azraeldv 4y agothey should've put word "dark horse" because it assigns positive connotation to dark color (dark = good)
- causi 4y agoThank God I hung out in online spaces growing up where acting foolish resulted in being brutally insulted. I cannot imagine the fragility of ego that results from growing up with your ears wrapped in cotton like this.
- gedy 4y agoBest we can do is stop feeding this monster, I know my kids won't be going to Stanford now at least.
- tgv 4y agoThere's a pretty large group of institutions you'll have to avoid then. Better teach them to think for themselves.
- yunwal 4y agoProbably what you should take away from this is not “wokism gone crazy” (err, sorry “wild”). The more important lesson here is that the bloat in academic institutions has gotten so outrageous that people start bullshit time-consuming initiatives to justify their positions and the positions of their reports. Absolutely no one will take this seriously including the person who wrote it but they will be able to put it on their performance review that they removed exclusive language from Stanford web pages.
- SanjayMehta 4y agoIt will be used as a convenient tool against anyone who goes against the groupthink of the day.
- yunwal 4y agoI doubt even this much is true. I truly believe this document will never be referenced outside of a promo doc or people making fun of it.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y agoit will take very little time in the current climate for this to spread from the academic circles into the corporate world, where all the HR/ethics/etc deadweight departments have people with those worthless degrees next thing you know, master is now main, blacklist and whitelist are allowlist and denylist, and so on
- vgatherps 4y agoA friend of mine's mother is a researcher at a University and is in conflict with one of the department heads. She was denied some sort of career advancement over "You mentioned to someone that you liked the way they did their hair. This made your working environment unsafe for minorities as person could be reminded that their hairstyles are different than majority white styles [fwiw she also has exceptionally messy curly hair]". Obvious nonsense, and the person who she complimented agreed. But when an administrator doesn't like someone, and needs to find a reason to cause them problems, this sort of list is a very useful tool. Maybe you don't even have to say it - "Professor X was found in repeated violation of our racial safety standards, and we just can't have racist staff". I'll add that I don't have an issue with removing racist/bigoted language - but this list largely consists of obvious slurs that nobody needs a ruleset to avoid, or mundane words where no person would even begin to feel racist/offended outside of an administrator finding excuses to make more rules.
- PopePompus 4y agoI got yelled at by a female graduate student for using the term "rule of thumb". The Standford page says: "Although no written record exists today, this phrase is attributed to an old British law that allowed men to beat their wives with sticks no wider than their thumb.", which I translate as "this is bullshit, but some people have decided to be offended by it".
- Sniffnoy 4y agoTo be clear, this supposed etymology is absolutely false. Wikipedia has an entire page about this myth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb
- coffeeblack 4y agoSadly, it’s about feelings, not facts. That’s how indoctrination works.
- at_a_remove 4y agoUsed in a similar fashion in Boondock Saints.
- laserdancepony 4y agoUsing this as a reputable secondary source in the OP document would not surprise me the least.
- M3L0NM4N 4y agoSo you're telling me you don't get offended at a phrase originating from an old story in a completely different context your friend told you that you didn't bother to fact check?
- stableandrom 4y agoOpposable thumbs are what separate my species from others, therefore it's a huge part of my identity. If someone resists there phrase "rule of thumb", they're attacking me personally.
- WirelessGigabit 4y agoOCD is not the same as detail oriented. OCD is the disorder of having to have certain things in a certain way. Detail oriented is just that, you care about details. Like someone who paints your house can go fast on the large surfaces, but you get the detail-oriented person to do your window trims in a different color without it splattering over the white facade.
- varajelle 4y agoYes that's right. The thing is that people have been using the term OCD as a pejorative term for someone who is "detail oriented" and that need to be avoided. (When not referring to the disorder specifically)
- ancapsfascists 4y agoYou are correct, this list is suggesting the casual is the problem. Eg, "oh my gosh, I'm soooo OCD about my Starbucks order".
- gpsx 4y agoWhat strikes me from reading this, aside from of words like "user" and "tarball", is how short the list is. Given that, inclusion on the list seems almost arbitrary. I don't think they have put much work into this yet.
- cabaalis 4y ago> I don't think they have put much work into this yet. Thank goodness, there's still a chance they can come to their senses.
- c4ptnjack 4y agoIt's unfortunate how this conflates a lot of confounding things with sensible ideas. "People first" language is a concept I'm actually a fan of; here it's used arbitrarily in the most ridiculous ways. This type of thing just sets back progress towards an actually inclusive culture. And ignores the reality of how language and the meanings of words change over time.
- bloppe 4y ago"Moron" was once considered a technical term for mental disability. Then, kids starting using it, and it became offensive. It was replaced by "mental retardation". We all know how that term evolved in kind. Many people now use "disabled" (including this list's suggestions), but that is now often seen replaced by "differently abled". If I were a betting man, I'd say that in 5 years even "differently abled" will be co-opted by the crude and become offensive. It is an endless treadmill.
- bsimpson 4y agoA euphemism treadmill, in fact https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/euphemism_treadmill https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/euphemism_treadmill
- jjav 4y agoThe George Carlin bit on shellshocked comes to mind.
- phist_mcgee 4y agoFor those curious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSp8IyaKCs0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSp8IyaKCs0
- luuuzeta 4y agoComic Doug Stanhope did a bit about the euphemism treadmill. For example, before "retarded" was a medical term doctors used the terms "moron" and "imbecile" which people co-opted to call someone that does something incredibly stupid. In turn, "retarded" ended up co-opted as well because it stuck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_a2C7VSWg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_a2C7VSWg
- joe463369 4y agoWhat's he saying though? That connotations of words change over time? Everyone should know that. 'Retarded' used to be a medical term, now it's a 4chan term, so it needs canning.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- divan 4y agoI'm actually glad someone puts it into one list. I grew up in a society that used words like "disabled" left and right, as an insult. As a child I never saw ramps for the wheelchairs, and seldom saw people on a wheelchair (only in hospitals). That was part of the culture of ostracising "different people" and making sure "normal" people don't see them. It's still the case for mental issues though, and I have friends with kids at different levels of ASD who are literally prohibited to enter cafes so they "don't scare normal people". Using "autist" as an insult is still widespread in my country. And I'm glad to see how this is changing. Accessibility becomes a topic of discussion and a new norm. I was glad to learn to use "people with disabilities" instead of "disabled". Somehow I felt like I'm a part of this change, undoing wrongs that were common in our society towards that group of people. I have the same feeling towards gender pronounces. When I use "person-hours" instead of "man-hours", even if it sounds the same to me, I feel like my communication becomes a little bit better and respectful to everyone. I have no troubles learning doing something in a new way. I also embraced "master" to "main" default branch naming switch at Github, and I like it. Main is shorter and makes more sense. Branch renaming is not painful, so why not, if it makes someone's experience a bit more pleasant. In figure skating, for example, almost century old names of "Choctaw" and "Mohawk" steps where renamed recently to S-step and C-step, because the history of those names where rooted in the history of oppression of Indian tribes in North America. I then read a reddit comment from one of the indigenous people from skating community in Canada sharing her experience and feelings about this change - in short, she was extremely happy. There are 1.6 million people like her in Canada alone. And guess what, many coaches reported that kids where super happy too, because making sense and remembering words like "choctaw" and "mohawk" was difficult for them. "S-step" and "C-step", instead, make a lot of sense, because those steps looks exactly like S and C on the ice (hence the naming). Those names were never good. So to me changing language is a reflection of changes in society. I understand that sometimes it can go too far, but I disagree with majority of comments here that this list is something "absolutely disgusting". I think it's fine, and serves a good purpose as a recommendation.
- friend_and_foe 4y agoThese changes don't reflect changes in society. The vast majority of us do not have any involvement in instituting these changes. These are thought up by the deranged and unintelligent and socially enforced by instilling fear of ostracism. The rest of us are simply expected to go along with it and I, for one, refuse to participate. You ninnies can have fun.
- friend_and_foe 4y agoImagine wanting to live in an environment where the foundations are always shifting, never knowing if something you say now will lead to your downfall in a decade, constantly having to devote mental capacity to policing the thoughts in your head, social structures entirely built around the policing of acceptable words. Fuck that.
- cm2187 4y agotone deaf > unenlightened > Ableist language that trivializes the experiences of people living with disabilities. What about blind people, you can't talk about light! This page is terribly insensitive, borderline offensive!
- crackercrews 4y agoIt is hard to choose which of these is silliest, but my vote goes to the replacement of "he" with [name] or "they", until you know the person's preferred pronouns. [1] The vast, vast majority of people who present as male wish to be referred to as "he". Many of them would be offended or confused if you used "they" as a term of reference. Many listeners would also be confused if you referred to a person who appears to be a typical male as a "they". If 99% of men go by "he", why should we use "they" as a term of reference by default? This is the tail wagging the dog, to say the least. 1: the list also says we are not to refer to "preferred pronouns" anymore. They are just "pronouns" now.
- Macha 4y agoThis one seems fair to be honest, it's not just about those with non standard pronouns, but also women.
- lbwtaylor 4y ago20 years ago, using they in this way would have really tweaked my ears, but I find myself using it in this way and hearing it in this way more and more, and I think it won't be long before we've forgotten how odd it used to feel.
- shever73 4y agoIt still sounds odd to my ears, but that's because I usually hear "they" as a plural pronoun. For example, I was watching a TV show with two siblings, one used "they/them" pronouns. When the mother said "I'm really proud of them and everything they have accomplished", I didn't know if that was referring to one sibling or both. I know it will probably feel less odd as time goes on.
- pjio 4y agothere is the same recommendation for "she".
- 4y ago
- hayst4ck 4y agoI consider myself deeply liberal. I try to "police my language." I agree with the underlying premise of the article, that language encodes implicit power structures and it is a worthy endeavor to not implicitly "dominate" or denigrate those around you. When I was younger I used the word retard disparagingly, and someone who was the father of someone who was suffered from a disability was visibly hurt. The world doesn't need that. I agree with the reasoning behind capitalizing the b in Black but not the w in White when referring to people. But holy cow, this article is nuts. There is some serious group think going on in these academic groups, and despite a desire to do the right thing, this article is going to have the opposite effect. The fact this was published shows a serious lack of critical review, a lack of academic rigor, and an extreme rejection of pragmatism in the face of idealism which is exactly how liberalism fails.
- soundnote 4y ago> I agree with the reasoning behind capitalizing the b in Black but not the w in White when referring to people. The actual reason is activist pettiness, though.
- JetAlone 4y agoHe did say he was a liberal. I don't think it's possible to be a left wing westerner without embracing the prevailing cultural attitude of activist pettiness, at least a little bit.
- soundnote 4y agoA bit, maybe. But I do know people who are actual left-leaning liberals and folks who are orthodox, economic Marxists and both pretty much loathe the activist class. A lot of the reason to be afraid of the modern times, though, is that many more or less left-lib people have lost sight of why anything the activist class wants might be bad. People increasingly just have no understanding for why these kinds of word redefinitions or any activist program like trying to erase the contributions of assholes from projects and products might be damaging. It's not necessarily that they're actively onboard. It's not that they're actively pushing for more silliness, but there's just a new blindness as to what they're doing. It's similar to how in during the pandemic a lot of people were really into the idea of forcibly relocating unvaccinated people, and it just didn't occur to them that their policy might be monstrous.
- ankit219 4y agoThey included many words but notably excluded the ones who are kind of hateful for curious and academically bent folks. Eg: nerd is one, then neckbeard, mouthbreather, and many other things i have been called.
- kylecazar 4y agoIf somebody told me I was not thinking properly rather than going off the reservation, I'd definitely be more offended. I'm not Native American, I'd be interested in their opinion.
- alex_young 4y agoAmusingly “git” isn’t on here. Perhaps British insults get a pass at Stanford.
- idontwantthis 4y agoI'd heard of "brown bag lunch" being a thing, and I'd assumed that was right wing trolling. What on Earth? If I bring lunch in a brown bag, am I allowed to refer to it? Am I not allowed to bring lunch in a brown bag? Can I bring other things in a brown bag? If I racially discriminate my mid day meeting using a white bag, is that ok?
- s1artibartfast 4y agoI much prefer the approach of the 60s to 90s of taking back words and breaking their negative power.
- sourcecodeplz 4y agoAs a non-native English speaker this page is gold.
- soheil 4y agoWhat a wonderful list of words to start using more frequently.
- uwuemu 4y ago
- dang 4y agoYou can't post like this here. Since you've been breaking the site guidelines in other places too, with unsubstantive and flamebait comments, I've banned this account. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. No this has nothing to do with how right or left you are. You can s/left/right/ the text and it would be just as bad. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
- kashunstva 4y ago> OCD Maybe they should ask actual OCD sufferers whether the term offends them when used to mean “detail oriented” because if they had asked me, a bona fide obsessive-compulsive patient, I would have responded with “meh.” My OCD has caused me untold misery, wrecked relationships, and made work difficult, but we all have a subtle sense about when people mean us harm or are just using a term as a shortcut. Almost never is “OCD” meant to cause personal distress, nor should it.
- ancapsfascists 4y agoAnd your experience is reflective of all folks who have OCD? I can absolutely imagine someone being pretty upset by seeing how casually "oh I'm just OCD" gets tossed around. I'm queer, I would never presume to say that another queer person's challenges or trauma were the same as mine.
- iinnPP 4y ago[dead]
- CapmCrackaWaka 4y ago> I can absolutely imagine There's the problem, right there. A lot of these affronts are imagined, without actually getting input from people. A perfect example is the use of Latinx, which many Hispanic people have spoken out against, yet keeps getting tossed around because people _imagine_ that the word "hispanic" is offensive.
- OctopusLupid 4y agoMy partner has OCD and he heavily dislikes people misusing the term.
- p0pcult 4y agoShould we really redefine everything to meet the sensibilities of the most easily offended? Go read some Vonnegut.
- 4y ago
- jacquesm 4y agoIf they keep this up long enough they'll have a very thin dictionary. And their department of English will go out of business. It would be sad if it weren't so funny.
- stdbrouw 4y agoObviously there's much to laugh at in this initiative and a legitimate worry about thought being policed. That said, if you are open to changing your mind, there's an excellent 9-minute bit of stand-up comedy from Stewart Lee about political correctness you might want to watch [1] where he discusses why for example it's not "political correctness gone mad" to refer to a prostitute as a sex worker [2]. I do think the general impulse to try and create a kinder language is worthwhile, even if in practice it can spiral out of control due to virtue signaling and people with too much time on their hands. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc&t=309s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc&t=309s
- PeterStuer 4y agoThe whole of English as the language of global imperialism could be considered 'offensive' by the same measure.
- choeger 4y agoAin't it cultural appropriation to insist on the slavery-connotated meaning of "master"? In central Europe, "master" has the connotation of having successfully learned ("mastered") a craft, cue. German "Meister". Also, what degree does one get in Stanford after a BSc?
- NeverFade 4y agoSo many of the grounds for elimination are just plain wrong. "Balls to the wall" is banned for "attributing personality traits to anatomy", because some woke activist never bothered to learn that it refers to ball-shaped grips on an aircraft's joystick and throttle, being pushed to their limit. It's astounding how little effort was taken to put a word or an idiom that millions use on this huge list to be eliminated. This elimination project was as lazy and sloppy as much as its intended impact is vast and invasive. The future of tyranny is a shadow committee of ignorant, sloppy woke moralists controlling our free expression with a few lazy keystrokes.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- DocTomoe 4y agoI keep reading, but all I understand is "never hire anyone who associates their education/work experience with this organisation".
- quickthrower2 4y agoTldr: 1984
- rockzom 4y agoNonsense
- Guthur 4y agoDoes anyone real believe this will fix the chronic problems facing the US? The people who are actually responsible for the greatest inequities in our societies are neither talking of listening to you or I in the first place.
- bawolff 4y ago>stand up meeting [replace with] quick meeting Lol, if only stand-ups were actually quick
- torginus 4y agoI kind of find it ironic the these 'inclusivity initiatives' are driven by some of the most exclusive instructions in the world, with a long history of murky and nepotistic admissions practices.
- foofoo4u 4y agoFrom one of the most selective universities in the country. A prestige from the fact that they are one of the most exclusive institutions that exist.
- anshumankmr 4y agoSo I am devoed to Hackernews. (Makes sense)
- chakintosh 4y agoWho defines "harmful language" ?
- midasz 4y agoSerious question, and maybe this is ignorant because I do not have an academic background but: Are these people not just a vocal minority? And if so, who cares? It seems like the internet is always up in arms about woke-ism but I honestly don't notice much of it in my daily life. At work, sure there are rules and regulations, but they make sense. Treat people with respect is always my default stance. If I make an assumption about someone and call them 'he' while they want to be called 'she' - that's fine. Tell me and I'll do that from now on. Don't see the big issue, and I don't think 99% of people who desire such things (e.g. trans people) will try to cancel you for making a mistake. It's always the extremists that put others in a bad daylight and that's a shame.
- spikeagally 4y ago>> And if so, who cares? It seems like the internet is always up in arms about woke-ism but I honestly don't notice much of it in my daily life. The only place I have noticed this is in the workplace. They allowed a small group ( < 10 people) to force everyone intro various DEI groups and meetings and events on a regular basis. As soon as the ringleaders left the company (just regular job switching, nothing dramatic) all of the DEI groups died. I'm onboard with most of this stuff because people deserve respect - but it is 100% a small vocal minority that makes all of this get way more airtime than it actually needs and than the majority want to give it.
- mach1ne 4y agoIt's about the fact that institutions (incl. corporations) hold all the power in the world, and the people within them are recruited from academia. If academia becomes (is) an indoctrination school, it will produce mainly activists and those who don't mind submitting to activists. These people will then eventually rebuild this system in their workplaces (since 'wokeism' is an inherently corruptive and hard-to-resist system). After this, you will start to see the fruits of their labor pop up all around - OpenAI censoring their model to oblivion, movies selecting for overtly activist plot points, social media companies beginning to censor more and more stuff... You wouldn't see activism in normal everyday discussions, though, due to people being rather agreeable in real-life face-to-face conversations. Political undertones, no matter how strong, are always in the background, not forefront, of conversations anyway. You wouldn't expect people to proactively discuss Putin with you if you went to Russia, for instance. And yet, if the general public either agrees with or is neutral towards ideals which DON'T conform to real reason, those ideals can be weaponized in the fringes. And they indeed are. (Note: Below, I'm using the term 'fascism' to describe the societal phenomenon. I'm NOT referencing nazism nor saying that the current political atmosphere is anywhere close to it.) Westerners are conditioned to think about fascism as originating from one well-defined party, mainly due to the fact that autocracies of the world do indeed operate that way, but fascism is just the blind power-hunger and violence of the human condition enabled by any group of people and accepted by the majority. The hallmark of fascism is that it is never hostile to the majority, but continuously extremely violent to whoever happens to be the edge case at the time. It guides the general discourse through these edge cases, not the center. Thus, if you are in the center, you don't really see anything bad happen to you - as long as you course-correct every once or twice from the edge cases.
- zxcvbn4038 4y agoThis is a very helpful site - just like I include a goto in every script or application I write to mess with the “goto considered harmful” people, now I have a list of trigger words I can use in variables and comments to mess with the college kiddies. BTW “Balls to the wall” has nothing to do with anatomy, it’s a reference to a WWII fighter plane which had ball shaped handles on the throttle levers, when preparing to take off you would push the levers all the way forward until they almost touched the instrument panel - a mnemonic device, not something you ask for on the third date - looking at you Stanford, very disappointed your mind went there. tisk tisk.
- laserdancepony 4y ago"Pedal to the metal" comes to mind immediately.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ki_ 4y ago
- shivekkhurana 4y ago2+2=5
- flakeoil 4y agoCan we please change the name "Stanford" to something else? It offends me. "Stan" looks like "Satan" and "ford" is an automobile brand which makes me think of combustion engines and global warming. I cannot stand it anymore...
- Phelinofist 4y agoTroll level: god-like
- hcks 4y agoThis is a good initiative. Language needs to reflect the aspirations of an institution, this is akin to cleaning the floor.
- okokwhatever 4y agoBusiness as usual. I'm waiting to receive the list of words I can use. Probably contains "yes", "my" and "lord".
- okokwhatever 4y agoAnd, obviously, this decisions kill the universities forever. If free speech is organised around a rule, a norm or a law, then it's not free anymore and I don't want to participate as a free individual. And many people is gonna decide the same way looking for parallel ways of demonstrating their knowledge out of the formal.
- TacticalCoder 4y agoThat's plain retarded!
- whitepaint 4y ago"retard (n) person with a cognitive disability, person with autism," Autism is not the same as mental retardation. That's really offensive Stanford. Shouldn't we really pinpoint exact people & groups who push for these kind of things? We need to put faces on this ideology. Who exactly is responsible for this?
- nemo44x 4y agoThe managerial class.
- imgabe 4y agoI reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injured, i.e. "maybe somone will hear the word tarball and think of tarbaby and then they'll feel bad" despite the fact that this has never once happened in recorded history. This way you can search for infractions and more expeditiously accuse and eject your rivals (people whose work is better than yours).
- makeitdouble 4y agoYou're basically positing that words have no possible effect and anyone actually hurt by words is just pretending. Sure, we're not expecting every single word on these lists to have any random person go cry in the corner, but those are pretty long lists and I could totally see specific people getting hit at the right angle and be affected enough to warrant consideration.
- imgabe 4y agoWords have an effect, but you can choose how to react to them. You cannot be harmed by them unless you choose to allow yourself to feel that way. Your internal mental state is under your control. If someone hits me with a bat with sufficient force, I have no control over whether my bones break or not. If someone says a mean thing, or something that could theoretically be interpreted as mean if you completely ignore their intent and context, I 100% have control over how I feel about that.
- dekken_ 4y ago> I 100% have control over how I feel about that. You do, that's great, sincerely, I mostly agree with you, but I feel it lacks a bit of nuance. Adults should have control over how they interpret reality, but not everyone does, and some people want to use perceived offense (Oppression Olympics) as a means for some sort of change, even if it's just padding their wallet. Some folks are immature, some folks have PTSD or some other condition and/or problem which makes it harder for them to have the discipline you have. Can we acknowledge both that words are interpreted by the listener, and that the listener might not be able to handle them? I try to not be affected by things, why should I respect someone who's trying to insult me, and if I don't respect them why should I care at all about what they are saying? It boils down to self preservation ultimately I think. Ostracism might not be the death sentence it used to be, but it still can be seriously deleterious.
- brainphreeze 4y agoDo not hire people that attend schools that push insane agendas such as these, period. There are hundreds of other good schools around the world that don't institute crazy policies such as these - it's time for parents and their children to start pushing back and letting schools with agendas know that this is not okay and there will unfortunately have to be negative consequences for their students who "just go along" with it for the prestige of going to Stanford. These power-crazed schools are becoming indoctrination camps.
- taylorius 4y agoWhen a hypothetical "injury" occurs entirely within the confines of your own thoughts, it's a recipe for disaster to treat it like you would a crime in the external world. There is no evidence other than the word of the complainant. The whole thing is way, way too easy to game.
- fiftycents 4y agoMy two cents. IDK what's going on in US and I barely speak English, so often people here can't understand me. Sorry about that that sentence, it implies I am the chief and you white people have to make and effort to vaguely making out an idea of what I'm saying. Despite my bad English. <<Circle the wagons>>, that's the King's Indian Defense opening. I often using it when I'm black and my opponent are failing to install his London System. Sorry about that wording. It implies I am the King, or at least, someone is the King and someone is the Indian, the indigenous people who obey and defend the Empire. Well it's just a bishop, you know, that I left in a diagonal. Bishop, obispo, implies I am not an Anglican I guess, I don't mean it. And really really I am not black enough, but you know the rules: one time you are white, then you are black. <<Indian summer>>. That's interesting. Did not Kant said time is a synthetic a priori knowledge? I'm disagree Mr. Time is a thing we teach each other. My parents struggle hard with my perceiving of time when I was a child, I guess. I wonder how time is like to people like Messi. In my corner of the world we often refers to <<paraguayan hour>> meaning it's expecting you late. <<User>>. You all know how 'boring' they are. And no, they are no clients, clients are often smart and, I'm thinking of Betterbird, crisps. <<Too many chiefs, not enough indians>> thanks for the phrase. I like that. Even is a kind of metaphor that for and instant suggests white people, or some people, are indians or indigenous and other are chiefs, you know leaders of people who are born in a certain place. But, I'm a <<survivor>> and gonna make it.
- denton-scratch 4y agoThey got "committed suicide" wrong. Of course, "committed" implies it's a crime (or sin); but the word "suicide" also carries the implication of crime or sin. It should be "killing yourself" or "taking your own life".
- disruptalot 4y ago"Karen" Context: "This term is used to ridicule or demean a certain group of people based on their behaviors." Consider using: "demanding or entitled White woman" This example is truly a tell all for this movement. To redefine language from a position of moral superiority where they can make no mis judgment.
- fennecfoxy 4y agoUgh, taking this stuff too far is stupid. Even just something like "blacklist", "whitelist"; it has nothing to do with the modern black skin white skin world of racism - literally every culture on this planet has similar associations with the colours white/black... It's almost like primitive cultures could only observe the Sun and our planet's day/night cycle and based it all of daytime = safe, nighttime = unsafe. Also: was the page always behind a login? Or was it moved behind one once it created controversy? Man = "This term reinforces male-dominated language." ahaha, for a university they should study a little more: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mann#Old_English https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mann#Old_English. Also checking this list, and as a gay man myself, they've missed a whole class of people in their silly list.
- OctopusLupid 4y agoNo, a few days ago this page was public.
- unicornmama 4y agoThe creation of more shibboleths will tragically cause harm to those unprivileged people they claim to help. An ivory tower council of privileged white men and women should never claim the authority to represent unprivileged minorities.
- trilbyglens 4y agoMany of these are just simply wrong. "Balls to the wall" is an aviation reference, and "manmade" is not equivalent to "made by hand" even a little bit. This list is embarrassing, and not worthy of bearing the name of Stanford.
- allendoerfer 4y ago> hip-hip hurray, hip hip hooray > This term was used by German citizens during the Holocaust as a rallying cry when they would hunt down Jewish citizens living in segregated neighborhoods. I don’t know, might have been used that way. Wikipedia says it originated from different militaries using it as a rallying cry, while hip actually comes from the English word. As a German, I would not use it today, because it‘s rather old fashioned, but I have no negative connotation with it. Did not even know, that it originated in the military. If this expression reminds you of the Holocaust, you might as well be reminded by every German word and therefore avoid it, which might be difficult speaking a Germanic language like English.
- tgv 4y agoThe Dutch historical dictionary (we say "hiep hiep hoera") says it might stem from Prussian soldiers, but that an older reference exists about use by English sailors, and there was a considerable linguistic exchange between seamen. Another option it cites is that it came via the French houra from the Russian "urá", a transcription of a Kozak war cry. There's no way whatsoever that it is tied to the Holocaust. If we take that path, I guess books will be banned next, so they can no longer be burned.
- Hitton 4y agoThey are not very consistent. It uses harmful term "users of wheelchairs" when according to them it should be "clients of wheelchairs".
- tatrajim 4y agoWake me when even elite Chinese call out and stop using the term "老外“ ("clueless foreigner whom [go the nuances] I can hold in humorous contempt and take advantage of at will").
- trilbyglens 4y agoLiterally "trigger warning" is on this list with the note "The phrase can cause stress about what's to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person." This is not a serious publication.
- nemo44x 4y agoSticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
- yamrzou 4y ago"You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth. Even if it's an unpleasant truth ... I don't like words that hide the truth, I don't like words that conceal reality, I don't like euphemisms, and American English is loaded with euphemisms, because Americans have a lot of trouble with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth, so they invent the kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation." — George Carlin on Soft Language (https://youtu.be/o25I2fzFGoY https://youtu.be/o25I2fzFGoY)
- spritefs 4y agoThe point here isn't actually to not offend, it's to have some byzantine set of rules to force on others I remember at a job orientation a year or so ago, the HR people and management spent a long time talking at us about DEI shit. They asked for questions and one of the people in the audience brought up unconscious bias (which wasn't in their presentation for some convenient reason). They got kind of shitty with the guy. Not in any sort of non-plausibly-deniable way, they just changed the subject really fast This is DEI in practice: it's some upper management head game where anyone who doesn't answer "I MOST CERTAINLY AGREE!!!1!1!" is doing it wrong The real solution imo is DEI accelerationism: just crank the wokeness to the absolute maximum, to the point where management starts to reconsider opening their mouths about it. You can be a ridiculous asshole, just make sure you're on the woke side and there's very little they can do to retaliate
- SnowHill9902 4y agoKeep digging.
- account-5 4y agoHow long before this percolates into normal life? Ridiculous nonsense! Guess my mum was lying when she told me as a kid that sticks and stones could break my bones but words could never hurt me. Looks like words are worse than torture, the way things are going. No need to pull out fingernails in secret black sites, just say some naughty words and see how long they last! Haha.
- iinnPP 4y agoHow much collective value has been used on politically correct speech? How much just from this thread of replies? How many starving children have died who would instead be saved by that same collective value? I want to say millions because I truly believe it would be close to billions(assuming that many could be saved). Instead we encourage replacement words which over time become just as offensive. Of course, insults don't need to be limited to just English words either. Thus proving the entire endeavor is impossible since aggressors control more word choices than moderators. Save a child. The UN says that is going to cost you about $160USD on average. (Based on 6.6B for 42M and please don't turn this into a dingbat/secondcoming thread)
- seydor 4y agoWho do i contact to add a few thousand terms to the list? It's kind of urgent please, starting with the word byzantine BTW isn't "Elimination" kind of vionent as a term? I wish they used a less upsetting name. In any case, by upvoting this you are providing visibility to nonsense.
- readerbaza 4y agoThey see elimination in a positive light, because they won't apply it to themselves.
- seydor 4y agoyeah, you see "positive light" is othering other colors, hues and numbers.
- acjohnson55 4y agoIt is overwhelming to see so many language guidelines in one place. But the point is to catalog a comprehensive set of best practices. The vast majority of cases presented here are changes I've learned over the past 20+ years. When I was a kid growing up in the 80s and 90s,almost all of the negative cases on here were normal ways to talk. Some individual cases are debatable--and it would probably be better to refer to more nuance, since there is not unanimous agreement on all of them--but on the whole, I think it's a useful catalog, with mostly good rationale. I think there are wrong ways to use such a catalog. Using it to be punitive or demanding 100% compliance would be counterproductive, I think. Nothing is absolute. However, using it as a guide for small, teachable moments is really useful. Honestly, it's simply about being respectful and making an effort. Considering my language use is a small, but useful step to improving my practice of empathy, on the whole.
- geraldwhen 4y agoMy work published a very similar document. The newspeak is honestly hard to keep up with.
- huevosabio 4y agoLooked at the list and.. Instead of "committed suicide" Use "died by suicide" Reason: "Ableist language that trivializes the experiences of people living with mental health conditions." ... How does "committed" trivialize the experience? If anything saying "by suicide" obfuscates and weakens the message. This _reeks_ of a bureaucracy doing busywork and then burdening the rest of the institution with further valueless processes. Sadly, the US is being strangled by bureaucracies in all sides. University admins, government officials, and even the big tech companies are all showing signs of middle-managers sucking the air out of the institution.
- mettamage 4y agoIMO "died by suicide" trivializes it more than "committed suicide" because when you commit to something it shows intention. It shows the committer decided to kill themselves. I don't understand how that can be interpreted as trivial. By saying "died by suicide" it comes across as if they didn't have agency, it's as if their were a victim of certain circumstances, had no choice in the matter and that it was a foregone conclusion that they'd kill themselves. With that said, I think it's all hair splitting in the first place. Whether someone says died by suicide or committed suicide. It's a tragic act and a tragic event and it makes me sad that it happens.
- IceHegel 4y agoThis is the most insidious on the list in my opinion because it totally removes agency. Makes it seem like free will has been thoroughly debunked and language should be adjusted appropriately.
- marcus0x62 4y agoMany of the suggested entries are no different than the allegedly problematic word and phrases. What is the difference, practical or otherwise, between “committed suicide” and “died by suicide”? Also, if anyone from Stanford is reading, “balls to the wall” refers to the operation of a centrifugal governor. It is not a reference to male anatomy.
- bfgoodrich 4y ago[dead]
- itsthecourier 4y agoSo are we using 1984's newspeak now? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak
- amelius 4y agoOne small step for person, one giant leap for person-kind.
- josh_fyi 4y ago"Balls to the wall" has nothing to do with anatomy (nor does balls-out). https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls-to-the-wall#English https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls-to-the-wall#English https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls-out#English https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls-out#English
- TexanFeller 4y ago> Unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture. I have a physical disability and several mental conditions that are considered disabling and I'm here to tell you they're all both abnormal and negative!
- jdthedisciple 4y agoThank you. Sad how increasingly the obvious must be stated for being disputed. Also, all the best from my heart in dealing with your conditions.
- baud147258 4y agoI think the 'user' one takes the cake (I did check and taking the cake wasn't in the list, so I can safely use it).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- davidgrenier 4y ago"balls to the wall - Attributes personality traits to anatomy" Is it me or someone over there thinks this may have something to do with testicles?
- puma_ambit 4y agoSome people will never miss an opportunity to make themselves into a victim.
- palebluedot 4y agoFrom the document: > balls to the wall | accelerate efforts | Attributes personality traits to anatomy. I've always thought this term had nothing to do with anatomy; am I incorrect here? From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls_to_the_wall https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls_to_the_wall > First attested in the 1960s in the context of aviation, in reference to ball-shaped grips on an aircraft's joystick and throttle. Pushing the "balls to the wall" would put the plane into a maximum-speed dive > Not related to the vulgar sense of balls (“testicles”).
- McP 4y agoI've helped compile guidance on inclusive language for my company. Whoever came up with this list has scored an own-goal against people who genuinely seek to make their communities more inclusive. There are words like "slave" that actually cause offense to real people when used in a trivialising way. Accordingly, terminology around databases and the like has changed, and that's a good thing. A laundry list of terms to be "eliminated", some of which are completely harmless makes a joke of real problems and is the opposite of helpful.
- laserdancepony 4y agoI do not agree about the master/slave idiocy. These terms have been used for ages in the IT universe, and never once have I come across someone who insinuated racism. What about "server", does that not insinuate that there once were serfdom? Or "protocol", we are all on a spectrum now, that old fashioned way of thinking triggers me! Not one step back, or they will rip us apart.
- markdestouches 4y agoIt's like banning shovels because someone can get hit with a shovel. It's not a language problem, and it cannot be solved by chopping the language up on the Procrustean bed. All it's going to do is annoy people and rally them against what used to be perceived as a good cause. And guess what, sometimes one needs to get hurt by being called a fucking idiot especially, if they act like a fucking idiot. Real life is not kindergarten. You have responsibility, not just rights.
- samhuk 4y agoWhat was the driving force for this? What was the percentage of staff and students asking for this level of policing of language? I'm not American and even I am scared of how un-American such flagrant policing of language is. Some of the examples are shockingly benign, with invisible lines drawn and imaginary people invented to manufacture offense. With the Twitter Files showing how the US government has colluded with a web of companies to violate the 1st Amendment, I wonder if any lines will end up being drawn between anomalous actions like Stanford's and the US government. Even as a non-American, I'm confused how this doesn't violate the very thing that being American is -> freedom. This all reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
- foofoo4u 4y agoAs an American, I am coming to appreciate the First Amendment, the freedom of speech, more than ever before. I can better see why, now, out of all amendments, this is the first. And why it is so absolute. I am also glad that we do not have "hate speech" laws. The Stanford word-banning list is a perfect example as to why. The university is the pinnacle of our institutions. The staff who composed this list are upper echelon members of society. They serve as gatekeepers to our future success and now wish to dictate what is good and bad. If hate speech laws were to be enacted, who do you think would have significant influence on what gets added to the list? I'd bet it would be individuals like these. People and institutions closest to Washington D.C. I am already under threat for losing my job for saying "master branch". But a "hate speech" law could very well charge me with a crime as well. Circling back to why the First Amendment is absolute. I appreciate it is this way because it compensates for the fact that composing a list of what shouldn't or cannot be said is impossible to compose. And any attempts to do so will only lead to tyranny and undermine the point of the amendment itself.
- krapp 4y agoThe First Amendment isn't absolute. The US has always had numerous laws that regulate and limit speech in various ways[0]. And the First Amendment explicitly doesn't prevent private citizens or organizations like Stanford from regulating speech themselves. It only prevents the government from doing so, with exceptions as mentioned. And the premise that this could somehow lead to a dystopian future in which you are thrown in jail simply for uttering the phrase "master branch" is absurd. Even granting the slippery slope, that isn't a realistic fear. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
- shireboy 4y ago“It’s a beautiful thing, the Destruction of words. Of course the great wastage is in the verbs and adjectives, but there are hundreds of nouns that can be got rid of as well… in the final version of Newspeak there’ll be nothing else. In the end the whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only six words – in reality, only one word. Don’t you see the beauty of that, Winston?”
- luuuzeta 4y agoIn addition to George Orwell's 1984, are there other books that describe what's happening to American English and the control of speech to dictate people's thoughts?
- kfrzcode 4y ago"OCD" is not "detail-oriented," what a farce. Don't use "brave," you might be invoking the spirit of the msuline
- dahfizz 4y ago> Instead of 'handicap parking', use 'accessible parking' This is just insane. What is wrong with 'handicap parking'? 'Accessible parking' is objectively less descriptive. Its only accessible for the handicapped! This is the perfect example of the euphemism treadmill. We started with terms like 'invalid' and 'cripple'. But over time, these labels are perceived negatively. So we move to 'handicap'. And now 'handicap' is offensive, so we come up with a new label. As if agonizing over what to label handicapped people makes their condition any better.
- pfortuny 4y agoAs opposed to inaccessible parking it is very clear: you can reach it. The fact that a handicapped person cannot reach it seems irrelevant. Totally bonkers.
- justin66 4y agoThe issue here is that a lot of people who need a spot close to the door are not "handicapped." The obvious example would be someone gimping around in an ankle cast. You wouldn't, they wouldn't, and their doctors would not say they are "handicapped." They don't have "handicap" concerns, but they certainly have "accessibility" concerns.
- dahfizz 4y agoSure, I can see how in certain circumstances, the word "handicapped" is not the optimal descriptor. I still think "accessibility" is bad, but maybe "disability parking" covers your scenario better. This is the nature of language. Any one word or image you use to represent something necessarily loses some nuance. Not everyone who needs a handicapped spot is in a wheelchair, but the wheelchair symbol is a clear, obvious way to communicate that a spot is for handicapped people. You're not supposed to bring all your brothers and sisters into the "family" restroom with you. Most people can look beyond the literal words on a sign and comprehend the meaning that is being conveyed. The article is not about tweaking language to be more precise, its about banning _harmful_ language. The assertion that using the phrase "handicapped parking" is _harmful_ is absurd.
- kfrzcode 4y agoWhat the actual -- > The word "preferred" suggests that non-binary gender identity is a choice or a preference." Is it not? I identify as a very confused motherfucker on this particular shambolyee
- antegamisou 4y agoSomeone feed the list to ChatGPT so they generate a comment on this absurdity only using the 'forbidden' words. (Hope this very comment abides by EHLI)
- TexanFeller 4y agoI grew up in an extreme right wing religious fundamentalist household. My mother wouldn't say the word "fart" because it was deemed offensive. I remember the religious right trying to ban offensive words from broadcast media and my mother going to extreme lengths to otherwise ensure I didn't hear such words. There were lots of PG movies I was not even allowed to watch as a teenager. These efforts were rightly and widely mocked. It's both amusing and terrifying to watch the progressive left go down the same ridiculous paths that the extreme right did not that long ago.
- swayvil 4y agoThe victim is always considered to be morally superior. Therefore step 1 in any "public battle of words" is to spin the narrative to cast yourself as the victim. And if you can't manage that then find or invent a victim and rush to his defense. Because whoever defends the victim is also morally superior. (I wonder who's the more morally superior, the victim or the defender-of-victim. I'm thinking the defender. There is an implied authority.)
- rayiner 4y agoEveryone should read Musa al-Gharbi’s analysis of the purpose of these kinds of lists. It’s written in the context of racism and “micro aggressions” but is more broadly applicable: https://contexts.org/blog/who-gets-to-define-whats-racist/ https://contexts.org/blog/who-gets-to-define-whats-racist/ To use one of the examples, Filipinos didn’t get together and campaign to eliminate “the Philippine Islands” from the lexicon. A bunch of white Americans—the people who run Stanford—did that, in order to increase their own power. Maybe some Filipinos assimilated into the white power structure of Stanford contributed, but in no way does that imply any organic demand by Filipino Americans in general.
- ElfinTrousers 4y agoIf Java, Python, and JS aren't on the list, they haven't finished their work yet.
- schappim 4y agoI'm just glad they haven't taken away "numpty" to describe a stupid or ineffectual person.
- weberer 4y ago>Instead of "African-American", consider using "black" Well that went full circle
- ldh0011 4y ago> whitespace > Assigns value connotations based on color (white = good), an act which is subconsciously racialized. lmao what? I am 100% sure I've never met anyone who has a positive or negative opinion of whitespace. Maybe of whether or not it should be syntactically important but most people seem to think it shouldn't be anyways.
- jdthedisciple 4y agoSeriously, how deranged must one be to think that?
- AHappyCamper 4y agoThis belongs next to Standfords research into sterilising white males. "Harmful language"? Sounds like a dystopian dictatorial nightmare. "We're enslaving you to protect you from yourselves..." should be their new motto.
- oldgradstudent 4y agoPeak harmful language: > user > While often associated with one who uses (software, systems, services), it can also negatively be associated with those who suffer from substance abuse issues or those who exploit others for their own gain.
- hnburnsy 4y agoGoogle has a similar list for developers although more its list is for clarity than for harm reduction... https://developers.google.com/style/word-list https://developers.google.com/style/word-list
- prepend 4y agoThis doesn’t seem real. Maybe it’s a distraction to engage people who spend a lot of time on things like this so they don’t get involved in real activities and gum up the works. I’ve seen this used where there is an anti-productive person who makes other people waste time. When there’s one of these on a project, it can be a real drain. But if there’s two, you can plug them into each other and they’ll sort of create a perpetual motion machine of stupidity of important sounding make work. It’s important to set a task so it doesn’t suck in others. But forming a committee on conference room naming or something might work. Cynically, I suspect I’ve been out on these types of tasks. So any time I’m stuck on a Sisyphean task, I try to step back and see if I’ve been stuck on ark ship B [0]. [0] https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Golgafrinchan_Ark_Fleet_Ship_B https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Golgafrinchan_Ark_Fleet_...
- IceHegel 4y agoDoes it seem like we’re living in a world where these guys have no influence?
- neonsunset 4y agoMaybe we should celebrate this? If the system is unfit for real world, the faster it selects itself out the better.
- corpMaverick 4y agoAs a Mexican, I can tell you that actual people from latino-america dislike the Latinx thing. Use Hispanic, Latina, Latino, Latino-american, or actual country of origin.
- greenthrow 4y agoThis is an extremely low quality thread. There is almost no intellectual curiosity in here. Just a lot of "No, it isn't offensive." assertions and personal opinion. Agree with the list or not it at least tries to explain the reasoning for everything on it.
- ilrwbwrkhv 4y agoPeter thiel must be foaming at the mouth.
- cauliflower99 4y ago“It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” ― George Orwell, 1984
- javajosh 4y agoAn excellent illustration of the beginnings of an SJW dystopia. Not just the list itself, but the general feeling of fear they want you to feel while speaking. One can draw a link between any word and a possible harm - something that a few comments have hilariously shown with some examples. So if the goal was protecting anyone from every possible harmful word, the list fails. But this demonstrates real evil that hides behind compassion and empathy, because preventing harm is not the real goal. The real goal is the assertion of power to police speech. Once you have that, you can do whatever you want with it to build a utopia where people aren't allowed to say things you don't think should be said. Even SJWs have to decide: what's worse, letting people say "lets bury the hatchet" without realizing they are "appropriating native culture", or putting an arbitrary group of unaccountable people in charge of what everyone says, in full knowledge of how that power can and will be abused? Good heavens this whole thing is astonishingly stupid.
- IceHegel 4y agoThe general feeling of fear is the point.
- skrbjc 4y agoI think you mean dystopia because what this leads to is no utopia in my mind
- javajosh 4y agoI meant utopia from their perspective, ironically. Although I think we all have a subjective utopia in mind - if no-one ever spoke again about certain subjects, I personally would consider the world a better place! But I recognize that my opinion isn't the only one that matters, people are messy and still somewhat barbaric at heart, and its an exercise in futility if you think you can legislate your way out of that state. The "greatest ethical minds of our generation" have agreed amongst themselves to embark on this SJW adventure, for realsies. It's an experiment in techno-utopia based on the dogmatic presentism and a confused, crude model of historical value production, and a grossly oversimplified cure. This "cure" depends entirely on synthetic moral reasoning motivate, and power-by-fiat to enforce. It is almost a parody of left-wing extremism, as described by the right:ivory tower reasoning foisted on the rest of us without our consent. Essentially the right wants the freedom to be a bad person if they want to, a racist if they want to, and the left really doesn't want to allow that, but has to tiptoe around issues of freedom of expression. Personally, I miss the days when the Jewish-led ACLU would come to bat for neo Nazis when local police would violate their free speech rights. This is correct. We must give people the right to be bad people, and say bad things, because no-one can unambiguously define good or bad. This disciplined, principled approach to a notion of freedom seems to have disappeared completely, and within my lifetime! That makes me feel incredibly guilty because, right now, my kids have a much harder road ahead than I did, my son in particular.
- wingspar 4y agoWhat if the suggested replacement is problematic? The suggested replacement for 'manmade' is 'made by hand'. Surely 'made by hand' is ableist.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- time0ut 4y agoI can't believe the Ryzen CPU in the PC I am typing this on was made by hand. Those able bodied humans must have very small hands indeed.
- smrtinsert 4y agoI'm not riled up at all. I already avoided the great majority of these instinctively because I like treating people with respect
- obscurette 4y agoI lived many years of my life in the country (Soviet Union) where there were a lot of rules what words were insulting and what words were appropriate. The only real use of these rules were to bully people by authorities and assholes. These rules just gave them a seemingly morally superior standpoint and an excuse.
- Zigurd 4y agoHere is the cheapest prediction possible: The outrage against this is going to be a festival of mansplaining, 'splained by people who have never been talked over in a meeting by a woman, nor pulled over for driving while black. OK, that's not your lived experience, but that's why empathy is so valuable to arriving at the right answer. Without it, it's right only for you.
- holdenc 4y agoQuite ironic they suggest we use "demanding or entitled White woman" instead of "Karen". Isn't a Karen actually a "a female of European descent struggling with mental conditions of entitlement?"
- CWuestefeld 4y agoTIL that the word "grandfather" originates from them phrase "grandfather clause", and not the other way around.
- 6510 4y agohttps://studentsfororwell.org https://studentsfororwell.org
- phantomathkg 4y agoThe list can go on and on and we will one day witness the Standford IT Community doing "The Chief Apologies" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBGOryiqZZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBGOryiqZZI
- cannonpr 4y agoSo I am curious how this comment will go, but I suspect this might be an unpopular take. A while ago there was a concentrated effort by the right in the US to “regain” the mind space of universities, towards ideas of the alt-right and traditional right like protecting foetuses etc. Since then I have been noticing an uptick of articles attempting to polarise and raise outrage against the “radical left” with one major avenue of attack being these “language initiatives”. I’ve also noticed an uptick of false flag operations with certain academics of questionable intellect and pedigree.. being pushed past the edge into rather harmful attempts to purge otherwise harmless language, or to express other “extreme views” while trying to identify them selves as left. To someone who has mostly viewed them self as a rational and somewhat left leaning intellectual this is exhausting. Frankly these days I do my best to hide from both the new right, and the polarised and misguided people that think they are left wing.
- jdmtheNth 4y agoNo worries, Stanford, we'll come up with new slurs to hurt your feelings soon enough.
- fedeb95 4y agoIt's absurd how this people don't know absolutely anything about linguistics. "Men" in menpower doesn't mean "the power of men". It means the power of people. Words can have different meanings when written in different contexts, even more when combined. Go on, downvote, be like the many preachers, iconoclasts and witch burners of the past, see you in ten or maybe a little more years when we can focus again on stuff that matters for mankind.
- IceHegel 4y agoMy sense is this is actually still the majority opinion in men’s hearts. It just doesn’t get said as much because of the mind virus going around.
- bacchusracine 4y agoI feel harmed by the use of the word Stanford. I sincerely hope those behind this initiative will understand this and change the name of the school to something which does not cause me concern, anxiety and fear.
- dandare 4y agoToxic masculinity and patriarchy are unsurprisingly not on the list.
- ekianjo 4y agoIf Stanford was supposed to the beacon of knowledge it sounds like they decided to turn off the lights. Utterly ridiculous.
- soheil 4y ago- Brave: none/do not use Even Orwell couldn't picture the animals as the timid cowards that they truly were. First they came for freedom of speech, and I did not speak out. Then they came for freedom of thought, and I did not speak out. Then they came for all, and there was nothing left to speak for.
- 1970-01-01 4y agoStanford has no authority, power, nor license to modify and shape written language. Stanford is free to do whatever it wants to words and so are we. Let's not become slaves to their forced word choices.
- ericmay 4y agoIf language can harm you, I don't see how one can't make the case that advertisements (especially billboards and non-consenual/contractual advertisements) aren't also harm and should be eliminated.
- forgetfulness 4y agoOh wow there was "latinx" there. People from Latin America take a lot of umbrage at having this little exonym pushed on us, believe me. It feels like colonialism. The term "Hispanic" is already very broad to refer to people from a large collection of polities with several cultural spheres in it, but at least the concept of "hispanoamérica" exists in it, and the word isn't a novel take on the Spanish language coming from the US.
- stelonix 4y agoThe best example of how all of this is just a huge virtue signaling effort. I don't want to be called latinx and it's not a bunch of yankees feeling guilty of their government who's going to choose what to call us. It's the most colonial term I've seen from these types and it's unpronounceable in either Spanish or Portuguese. A juice of wokism.
- sometimeshuman 4y agoHumor may apply here since the best way to kill this is to pronounce it la-tinks instead of Latin X. My parents are from Central America so feel free to say a latinks person told you it's pronounced that way.
- forgetfulness 4y agoI prefer lantinucks. There was also a short-lived trend of using 'x' in some parts of South America, it kind of died down in Chile as people decided to roll back to more boring centrist positions after a period of radicalization, and priorities shifted lower in the pyramid of needs during an economic crisis and a crime wave.
- smrtinsert 4y agoYou speak for all latin americans?
- forgetfulness 4y agoDo the American "lantinx" and their "allies" at fancy Universities do?
- 2devnull 4y agoWord lists, ai, free speech, Orwell, NLP, newspeak, the great firewall, FBI in every social media, feds riddled throughout our newsrooms, shadowbanning, content moderation, needing karma to post, brigading by special interest groups, Epstein, social credit rating systemS, no fly lists, warrantless search… I don’t like the future.
- gundamdoubleO 4y agoSome of the most non-verbal stuff I've read in a long while.
- pc86 4y agoOthers have called out some the silliness on this list, but honestly my biggest problem with it is that it's just so lazy, and often times flat out incorrect in its assumptions. - "Consider using 'devoted' instead of 'addicted.'" I'm sorry but you don't develop a physical devotion to heroin. It's an addiction. - They say the phrase "committed suicide" is problematic because it "trivializes the experiences of people living with mental health conditions" and I'm not sure how in the world you can come to that conclusion unless you're using a completely different (and wrong) definition of "committed" as in being committed to a mental hospital. - Every word that contains "man" or "woman" as part of it just lazily replaces it with "person." I'm sorry, but "congressperson" is never going to be a word and nobody is ever going to use it in any serious context. "Member of Congress" has been around for a couple hundred years but mention of that completely acceptable alternative. - Nobody has ever said "landlady" - "Latinx" is used almost exclusively by the type of person who comes up with this list in the first place. This list reads like ChatGPT trained exclusively on social justice parody.
- VyseofArcadia 4y ago> Nobody has ever said "landlady" I have heard it in exactly one place, and that place is the movie Kung-fu Hustle. Who is throwing handles?
- themanmaran 4y agoCertainly the most prominent landlady in my mind. But I also had a landlady for several years in SF. And that's how I referred to her. I didn't think it too strange.
- bee_rider 4y agoShe’s like a badass or something in that movie, right? I feel vaguely like that was a sendup of a trope that is like: a landlady who kind of harries the main character but isn’t taken very seriously because she’s a woman. But that idea doesn’t resonate as much anymore (which is good!), so the sendup loses some grounding.
- unethical_ban 4y ago
- brightball 4y ago"American" is considered harmful language by Stanford?
- crackercrews 4y agoWhat does that bode for Mexican Americans or Asian Americans?
- brightball 4y agoHow do you mean?
- crackercrews 4y agoWe're supposed to say "United States" instead of "America" since the latter refers to more than just the U.S. But what are we supposed to say instead of Mexican American or Asian American? AFAIK there is not an adjective in English that means "from the United States", aside from "American".
- brightball 4y agoNo other country in the America’s has “of America” in its name. American is naturally easier to say than “from the US” and flows directly from the name. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with referring to yourself as American. There’s something very wrong with trying to create a problem from it. Probably something uniquely…American.
- jdthedisciple 4y agoThis is absolutely insan- excuse my language, I mean wild!!
- passwordoops 4y agoAlready I disagree with their re-interpretation of the first word (addict). Have they ever actually interacted with, or been addicted to something? Your life revolves around the substance. If "addict" is dehumanizing then so is "carpenter". Had to get to #6 (committed suicide - I worked delivering technology for the blind and visually impaired, no one is offended by "I see" or "I'm going in blind") before thinking "ok, this makes sense" since that framing implies a crime. But that's not their re-interpretation, which again doesn't make sense. I had an old British colleague who used to say "what you Yanks need is a good old land war to set you straight again". I think he might be right
- Pigalowda 4y agoOr severe enough economic down turn. We don’t need land to fight over we just need a realignment of incentives. That will separate the wheat from the chaff. There’s no real value to the people who write such rubbish lists however they are still paid to do so. They still make what I imagine is a decent living to create hot air that the public gets to argue over. Money is still too easy to come by. When it isn’t these people will have to actually work and gain real value and we won’t be arguing or criticizing their nonsense anymore.
- kymki 4y agoThe words themselves are never harmful. Its in their context of use where the potential "harm" lies. What has led academia in particular to drive decontextualization of language like this? How have we, in just a few years, completely started to disregard contextual meaning of languange? Surely this has to be an active research field as well.
- stableandrom 4y agoI consider myself a very leftist liberal, and some of this list sounds fair. Some of it reads like bad satire. "Died by suicide" is somehow LESS trivial than "committed suicide"? "Blind studies" are somehow bad things now, rather than admirable things? And some of it reeks of linguistic arrogance. People aren't going to say "relationship with an abusive person" when "abusive relationship" is both much shorter and IDENTICAL. And the IRONY in not only wanting to police content with trigger warnings, but to police the usage of the phrase "trigger warning" itself. How is this NOT satire?
- piyh 4y agoI work at a company with what is basically a woke bot that will suggest corrections. Some like cakewalk I was glad to learn about the history, others like whitelist/blacklist are just because colors are used with no racist past. There's a nugget of good intention, and a load of newspeak happening.
- jdthedisciple 4y agoDoes it fulfill you working for such a project?
- piyh 4y agoI don't work on woke bot, I work on other backend projects that are many layers from any customer impact, but the hours are light and the pay is good.
- jdthedisciple 4y ago"Submit" "Depending on the context, the term can imply allowing others to have power over you." Correct. And I hereby reject to allow Stanford power over my speech.
- xkcd1963 4y agoLaws that require people to policy themselves do not work. It is frustrating and wasteful that people often have to follow systems or norms that lack logic or reason. Stanford hiding their page indicates that they understand their approach is not universally accepted.
- unethical_ban 4y agoI feel the need to write an "economic leftist's manifesto" and get it in front of as many people, particularly conservatives, as we can. This identify and grievance based social leftism does very little to materially improve the conditions of people, very little to change actual power structures which harm the everyday family, and does very much to divide people by making individual identity/attributes the most important thing about a person. Community goes out the window, free expression is ridiculed. Economic leftism and social democracy is the key to pushing politics leftward in the United States. It prioritizes economic security for people and families. It wants to take away free markets and profit motive from those industries where it is harmful or objectively immoral, such as health insurance and prisons. It wants to lift all people of all races and identities, to get everyone a decent education, housing, healthcare, and work in order to secure a person's ability to live day to day without fear bankruptcy or homelessness. This kind of divisive, satirical, Newspeak bullshit will do more to keep the far right in power in the United States.
- yakshaving_jgt 4y agoI never would have imagined that of all people, it would be the political correctness police who do away with the stand up meeting.
- KunafaPizza 4y agoYep, we are losing the next world war...
- zugi 4y ago> people of color ... BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) Wow, so "people of color" should be avoided and "BIPOC" used instead? Even though the "POC" in "BIPOC" is literally "people of color"? That didn't last long. The Euphemism Treadmill ( http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2020/08/ableist-language-and-the-euphemism-treadmill/ http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2020/08/ableist-language-and-th... ) seems to be moving faster and faster.
- bentley 4y agoThe express purpose of the term BIPOC is to de‐emphasize Asians and other “less‐oppressed” people of color. I won’t bother criticizing the term—such criticisms practically write themselves.
- randomsearch 4y agoHow do we know if this is a joke or not. Some of them definitely read tongue in cheek.
- mmmpetrichor 4y agoThis is double plus ungood.
- yakshaving_jgt 4y ago> Instead of people of color (used generically), consider using BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) This list is the result of work done by People of Color in Technology (POC-IT). So they shouldn't be using their own name. Utter madness.
- jobs_throwaway 4y ago>spaz, brave, user, white paper this is what these people want to take from you
- fleddr 4y agoThese kind of institutes have lost all touch with reality. Call it woke, postmodernist, critical (race) theory, I don't know what the correct term is. Their mechanisms are escalating out of control because nobody dares to stop them out of fear of being called an ableist, sexist, colonist, whichever-ist. It's like a virus. Rather than progressive, it is regressive. It politically alienates a growing group of people in the center, center-left, independents. It's like a perfect recruitment movement for the right-wing, which is on the rise everywhere. Progressives should stop this nonsense and return to the basics, which is to improve access to livable wages, good education, healthcare. For ALL, regardless of identity. Further, the explosive growth of the administrative function in these institutes needs to be dialed back. Always follow the money. It looks to me like right now, we're paying through the nose for anti-progress.
- diebeforei485 4y agoIs Stanford going to stop issuing Masters' degrees?
- Foobar8568 4y agoSo according to Stanford, Karen shouldn't be used, and somehow, "demanding or entitled White woman" is preferable. Yeah sure.
- randomsearch 4y agoIs there a list of universities that don't do this kind of thing? I wouldn't want to send my kids to a university that published this, I want them to think for themselves. I certainly will strongly discourage them from applying to Stanford. Are there others I should be wary of? (incidentally, not _all_ of the list is ridiculous, but most of it clearly is)
- crackercrews 4y agoCheck out ratings by FIRE [1] and the Heterodox Academy [2]. 1: https://www.thefire.org/news/just-released-2022-2023-college-free-speech-rankings https://www.thefire.org/news/just-released-2022-2023-college... 2: https://heterodoxacademy.org/library/10-colleges-where-you-wont-have-to-walk-on-eggshells/ https://heterodoxacademy.org/library/10-colleges-where-you-w...
- yuck39 4y agoI had never heard of FIRE before, and assumed they were going to rank free speech by prominence of conservative idea representation on campus as most of these types of rankings tend to do. I was pleasantly surprised to find that was not the case. Schools with high acceptance of conservative speakers trend lower on the list. The highest ranking schools are typically the ones close to the middle. Thanks for sharing.
- IceHegel 4y ago“If the truth shall kill them, let them die.” -Immanuel Kant
- Genghis_Khan 4y agoSatire. The way to fight this is with satire. Perhaps we should post this list to Github, make whatever ridiculous additions we can think of, and take pull requests from all quarters. Then we just need to find a way to broadcast it.
- globular-toast 4y agoAre we sure this isn't satire?
- shockeychap 4y ago> "Yellow" is often used disparagingly against people of Asian descent. Has anyone ever (let alone "often") heard the word "yellow" used in this manner?
- maw 4y agoYes, in a line in "Born in the USA." Of course there's an implicit eyeroll there; it's not used to denigrate Asian people.
- ThrowawayR2 4y agoNot in recent decades. Historically, it was a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Peril https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Peril
- samhyde69 4y ago
- circlefavshape 4y agoThe "chief" and "tribe" things particularly irritate me. Native Americans were not the only humans ever to have tribes or chiefs
- ur-whale 4y agoIs this for real? I have a hard time believing someone in their right mind could come up with a list like this unless tongue-in-cheek. I was considering trying to send my offspring there, I am now entirely reconsidering, don't want them to be subjected to that kind of political brainwashing.
- cafed00d 4y agoI clicked on the link thinking: "sigh, another woke propaganda campaign". "Brave", oh wow, and no alternatives either. "Geronimo", ok, I can kinda get behind that one: I mean, we don't want someone using "Gandalf" or "Gandhi" in similar vein, I suppose. "For god & country, gandhi, gandhi, gandhi" would be kinda weird (chuckled softly). "Guru" -- :O -- I have always felt we diminished the weight of this word in the western, English speaking world. "Pundit"/"Pandit" & "Guru" have the same connotations as "sir" in my home country but when I came to the US I was mildly disappointed they had very different connotations than "sir" did -- even outside formal contexts. Then it hit me: Oh snap! Now I get it! I get why someone else may feel the same way about "Geronimo" or "Brave" or "Bury the hatchet". Those are words that _I_ obviously discovered through Western/English-speaking cultures. Perhaps, if the medium was not-English then those words wouldn't carry with them the same connotations that didn't originate from the rightful heirs of that culture. [The point]: I literally went from thinking "oh, great, more policing of words", when I read the headline, to "Hm, I get it" / "I support this effort". I'm seeing a lot of HN comments tend to lean on the side of taking issue with the post & the effort. I hope sharing my (contrasting) perspective helps.
- cuteboy19 4y agoPundit can mean the same thing as in English, it's just that it's not the primary meaning
- unethical_ban 4y agoEven if we take some of this list in good faith, this kind of manual is so over-the-top compared to anything in current American society. The cognitive load of constantly having to think about what you are saying in order to avoid microaggressions does more damage to free thought and discourse than any damage it prevents by policing it. And then there are more examples of absolute stupidity than there are legitimate grievances. The policing of color references due to "perceived superiority" is ridiculous. It is a net harm to make people think this way, especially when the penalties for getting it wrong are immediate apologies, lest you be run out of your profession. There was an article yesterday in the New York Times where some people took issue with the naming of the James Webb Space Telescope because he headed NASA when there was a government-wide policy against homosexuals. A well-credentialed and respected black man wrote an article saying "No, JW did not actively participate in purges of gay employees and in fact may have dragged the feet of NASA in any implementations of such policies" (I am paraphrasing). He also expressed frustration toward an unnamed scientist who “propagated unsubstantiated false information" regarding James Webb. The rebuttal from said scientist, a self-proclaimed left wing activist and cosmologist? “The leader of a professional society and a senior scientist,” she wrote, is “going out of his way to justify historic homophobia” and “attack a junior queer Black woman professor.” --- For some people, they only have their perception of their own persecution to lean on. She didn't argue the merits. She makes anyone who disagrees with her out to be someone who abuses power dynamics, hates LGBT people, black people, women, and women in high professions. --- The point: Even if some of this makes sense in a lab setting, it is a net harm on the discourse, and those who would champion it wholeheartedly are the kinds of people who live their lives as perpetually persecuted, and are willing to ruin careers and lives if you do not consent to their total authority over language.
- jkingsbery 4y agoI try not to question the intelligence of others that I don't know, but this might be a case where that's merited. Leaving aside whether words can cause harm (which - I don't know, maybe they can), there are a fair number of logical inconsistencies and standards for what makes the list, as well as just factual errors. For example "balls to the wall" comes from aviation (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls_to_the_wall https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/balls_to_the_wall) and not from human anatomy. Even when the source of that expression is well attributed, later on the list goes on to call out "rule of thumb" even though it says it is unable to attribute the source of that expression (and, yes, maybe there is a violent past to it, but also: a person's thumb is about an inch, a useful way of measuring things of that size scale). And of course, they suggest instead of rule of thumb "standard rule," even though the etymology of "standard" involved "stand" - which elsewhere seems something the list would consider ableist. Man in some context means an adult human male, but sometimes it just means any human (see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man). When Neal Armstrong said "... one giant leap for mankind," he was not speaking on behalf of the species. Some groups of Christians have a prayer that reads in part "for us men..." which is prayed equally by the female members of the congregation. There are plenty of cases where the word "men" is equally clear that we're referring to all members of the human species. And the word "guys" is routinely used to refer to a group that is not just men. People use it all the time, everyone knows what we mean, it does not cause offense, and in using it to refer to a group you are no more implying that the group is all male as you are implying that the group is composed of clones of Guy Fawkes (from whom the term originated). Besides ones where just facts are getting in the way, there are also many that just seem ineffectual. For example, "the use of person-first language" - In English, adjectives come first. Sometimes English makes use of substantives, either directly or as lone words from other languages. When you put the word "person" first, you aren't magically changing how people construe that sentence - if someone wants to be uncharitable and define someone entirely by a characteristic, they probably will, and the rest of us will go on understanding that each of us can be described in multiple ways depending on the context. The "Latinx" also needs to go. Every poll I've seen indicates that the people whom it was meant to describe don't care for it, and find it disrespectful of their linguistic heritage.
- circlefavshape 4y agoOh man. "whitespace" and "empty space" are not synonyms
- jdthedisciple 4y agoExactly, C# literally has two distinct extension methods on the string class named `isNullOrWhitespace()` and `isNullOrEmpty()`. This garbage was obviously not written by a person with any significant technical background. How else would they come up with equating `user` and `client`?
- shockeychap 4y ago> child prostitute, child who has been trafficked, Using person-first language helps to not define people by just one of their characteristics. I'm sorry, but I'm aghast (is that term okay, or is it too close to "ghost", which suggests "death", which might be triggering for somebody who knows somebody who died?) that somebody was able to type this out - a suggestion of a "more sensitive" term for a child involved in prostitution, ostensibly to "not define people by just one of their characteristics" - and wasn't immediately shocked into deleting it right away.
- zapataband1 4y agoPuritanism, a tale as old as time. What's fcking weird is the religious-tinge to this. It's like a less-worse version of pro-life people, they probably 'feel' good that they are 'helping', but as soon as the baby comes out they can ignore it. Similar to this, Stanford has a huge endowment. They could actually help poor & marginalized black n brown communities. But instead they will continue to destroy neighborhoods(e.g. University of Chicago, University of Illinois at Chicago). Harvard will continue to put out machine economists and lawyers that incarcerate people. People want to come together to 'help', which is cool, but I think they are fking retard#d about what real help looks like. Probably not like authoritarianism.
- mbg721 4y agoLots of pro-life organizations actually do meaningfully help children after they are born. I regularly give money to a pregnancy center that buys car-seats for low-income moms. But that would get in the way of the story.
- ur-whale 4y agoPerfect time to quote Hitchens: https://quotefancy.com/quote/1909496/Christopher-Hitchens-When-Dr-Samuel-Johnson-had-completed-the-first-real-dictionary-of https://quotefancy.com/quote/1909496/Christopher-Hitchens-Wh... [EDIT]: Better source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7340903 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7340903
- gorwell 4y agoThe next time someone asks, "What do you mean by woke? Isn't that just about being aware and kind?" I thought so at first too, but no. It's use the words we tell you to use. Have the opinions we tell you to have. Otherwise it's harmful and you're a bad person. This initiative is what is meant by “woke” and ones similar to it. It's a dangerous totalitarianism that presents itself with exactly this kind of empathetic language and emotional blackmail. It's intolerance disguised as tolerance.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> This initiative is what is meant by “woke” No, this is institutional PR by an institution that is very much the antithesis of woke; it may be trying to avoid criticism from people who are woke, but it’s interests are served just as well by discrediting the entire idea (which reduces pressure on it the same way as accommodation does, and more durably), and its actions reflect that.
- montenegrohugo 4y agoInstead of using "manmade", which further promotes male-dominated language, they propose using "hand made". Isn't hand made ableist? What about the people with no hands? Can't they create things without the usage of hands? This is a never ending rabbithole of idiocy.
- BrandoElFollito 4y agoAs a non-American I must say that this is as funny as our ridiculous attempts to translate words that everyday uses anyway ("because they are <some complicated linguistics word> of English") The difference is that someone using "mail" instead of "courriel" in France goes unnoticed because everyone understands that some orgs in the administration sometimes have to pretend to work.
- Plough_Jogger 4y agoIf you'd like to determine if other words are harmful, feel free to use this GPT playground: https://beta.openai.com/playground/p/E8MTssK5Xk4dphyWFDtGwDbf https://beta.openai.com/playground/p/E8MTssK5Xk4dphyWFDtGwDb...
- maximus-decimus 4y agoWhat I'm not seeing anybody mentioning is how hard that kind of stuff make it to speak English for non-native speakers. Coming from French, it's already weird enough that you're allowed to say "n word" or "s word" but not the actual words, as if it was some loophole. That's just not done in French, at least in Quebec. In Quebec, you say the word, you don't or for swear words people use a slightly transformed version of the swear word (like saying shout instead of shit or Oh my gosh instead of Oh my god), but mentioning the word indirectly just isn't a thing. You're considered evil if you refer to a non-binary person by he or she... but in French there is literally no polite non-gendered pronoun. Our "they" is also gendered. The result is you're seen as mean for thinking in French and just translating as you go. You basically have to think in English to be politically correct, which is pretty hard to do. Or even the fact that in English black people can say the n word but not white people. Or the fact you can call Australians Aussies and New-Zealanders kiwis, but calling Japanese people Japs is super racist. I haven't ever seen seen something like that in French so it gets really confusing. I feel like keeping track of all these intricate rules is basically harder than learning English itself and by adding even more, they're accentuating a class divide between native and non-native speakers.
- Rayhem 4y ago> ...they're accentuating a class divide between native and non-native speakers. Possibly even a class divide amongst native speakers: those with the time to ponder and research acceptable terminology and those without. I suspect the typical rejoinder there is something along the lines of "Well, society should be made more equal to prevent those without", conveniently ignoring the near geologic time it will take to get there.
- davidmurdoch 4y agoOne of the driving forces of these language initiatives is to create division within native English speakers, too.
- modshatereality 4y agothe neo puritans throwing around dehumanizing slurs like "troll" dozens of times a day think they have the moral high ground? fucking hilarious.
- dr_faustus 4y agoReading that really makes you wonder what the hell (sorry if that offends some atheists or buddhists!) they are talking about in official meetings at the Stanford IT department. Gray beards? Pocahontas??? In my 20 years in IT, not once have I heard that anyone ever felt the need to discuss "hermaphrodites" in a meeting or document.
- pfoof 4y agoMeanwhile in China: "How do we copy this nuclear fusion and improve on it? We should build a quantum computer for this."
- annexrichmond 4y ago> Pocahontas > This is a slur and should not be used to address an Indigenous woman unless that is her actual name. How dare they assume this name is exclusive to people who choose she/her/hers pronouns. They already conflict with their own rules below! > she > Unless you know the person you're addressing uses "she" as their pronoun, it is better to use "they" or to ask the person which pronouns they use.
- notadev 4y agoI read the list and confirmed that Niggardly, which means “grudging and petty in giving or spending” or being stingy with money, is not on the list. It has absolutely not relation to the N word which is obviously why at Stanford it’s still perfectly acceptable to refer to your students and colleagues as niggards, so long as they are tight with money.
- c22 4y agoI read the whole list and found it to be largely unenlightened, bordering on boring and uncool.
- jiveturkey 4y agohuh. i’m fairly well flabbergasted at the HN crowds’ reaction. this is satire of the highest order.
- martin82 4y agoElon Musk is absolutely right when he proclaimed that the woke min virus needs to be eradicated and that nothing else matters.
- dumpsterdiver 4y agoReading this list feels like grading the homework of a fifth grader (I've never done that, but I can imagine) who studied really hard on the internet all week in order to get an A on the assignment. Like sure kid, you got an A on your 5th grade assignment. Here's a star sticker.
- MrYellowP 4y agoWhat a dystopian nightmare. edit: ... we already live in.
- HelloNurse 4y agoAs always, these lists teach something bad. Expressions that were new to me include Jewed, peanut gallery, Indian giver, and circle the wagons.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- smoovb 4y agoA title change from "Elimination of Harmful Language" to "Considered Language Alternatives" would make this list more palatable.