5 ms·

I think it all starts from a good place. Would you rather people just using words "carelessly" without regard to how you might feel? It's questioning the assu

I think it all starts from a good place. Would you rather people just using words "carelessly" without regard to how you might feel? It's questioning the assumption that the word used is fine throughout history. I don't think there is anything nefarious about it, just that "people" always co-opt the motives in the end and make it muddled for their own benefit. Overthinking it I guess. I know it when I see it, but it's hard to articulate it to something that works for everyone.

DharmaPolice 4y ago
>Would you rather people just using words "carelessly" without regard to how you might feel? I can't speak for anyone else but surely the answer to this is yes?
recuter 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with... > It's questioning the assumption that the word used is fine throughout history. Bullshit. It forbids questioning of the questioning. That is all it is really about. > "people" always co-opt the motives in the end and make it muddled for their own benefit At least you can concede that point. Which is an enormously important point and more than enough of a reason not to go down this idiotic path of linguistic power struggles.
- ookblah 4y ago
  I'm not arguing what is currently happening or the end result, just that from even my own personal perspective I usually want to ask "is this word okay to use around you?" instead of just assuming it as such or automatically making someone else responsible for their feelings around my words. You might ultimately be right, but go down that road enough and these people are usually called "assholes" lol. That phrase isn't an indictment of good intentions, just a warning to be aware.
  - recuter 4y ago
    > or automatically making someone else responsible for their feelings around my words If people are not responsible for their own feelings and the onus is on you, you are at their mercy. Some percentage of them are going to abuse you as a result. Where is the win? All you are enabling is psychos and mentally/emotionally unstable people.
    - ookblah 4y ago
      Like I said, people ARE ultimately responsible for their own feelings, but that doesn't mean we can't do with erring on the side of empathy in our day-to-day. Don't mistake this for me saying "policing language is fine to preserve someone else's feelings". My comment was mainly to the parent on why it's bad for someone to feel awkward about potentially using a "wrong" word and for me sometimes it stems out of care. All that said, I basically think all this shit gets perverted in the public space where there's a lot more gamesmanship and manipulation.
  - ramblerman 4y ago
    We have millions of years of evolution that allow us to pick up on these subtle signals though. And we are really good at it. Do you think the worry of always having to ask up front (if xyz is ok) comes from ironically a lack of natural empathy in your case?
    - ookblah 4y ago
      I mean sure, if I asked up front every single time to the point where people get annoyed? But that's what we are discussing here. Yes, we humans have millions of years ready subtle signals, but we are also really fucking bad at reading minds and knowing what others are thinking. Thus, by clarifying with things like actual words in a direct and non-confrontational way we can actually communicate and understand. I don't know why people are so keen to get me in some kind of "gotcha!" when it's pretty simple what I'm suggesting. Like since when has the intention of wanting to be sure that you're not offending someone become a replacement for inept social person who can't read subtle signs?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

DharmaPolice 4y ago

>Would you rather people just using words "carelessly" without regard to how you might feel? I can't speak for anyone else but surely the answer to this is yes?

recuter 4y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with... > It's questioning the assumption that the word used is fine throughout history. Bullshit. It forbids questioning of the questioning. That is all it is really about. > "people" always co-opt the motives in the end and make it muddled for their own benefit At least you can concede that point. Which is an enormously important point and more than enough of a reason not to go down this idiotic path of linguistic power struggles.

ookblah 4y ago
I'm not arguing what is currently happening or the end result, just that from even my own personal perspective I usually want to ask "is this word okay to use around you?" instead of just assuming it as such or automatically making someone else responsible for their feelings around my words. You might ultimately be right, but go down that road enough and these people are usually called "assholes" lol. That phrase isn't an indictment of good intentions, just a warning to be aware.
- recuter 4y ago
  > or automatically making someone else responsible for their feelings around my words If people are not responsible for their own feelings and the onus is on you, you are at their mercy. Some percentage of them are going to abuse you as a result. Where is the win? All you are enabling is psychos and mentally/emotionally unstable people.
  - ookblah 4y ago
    Like I said, people ARE ultimately responsible for their own feelings, but that doesn't mean we can't do with erring on the side of empathy in our day-to-day. Don't mistake this for me saying "policing language is fine to preserve someone else's feelings". My comment was mainly to the parent on why it's bad for someone to feel awkward about potentially using a "wrong" word and for me sometimes it stems out of care. All that said, I basically think all this shit gets perverted in the public space where there's a lot more gamesmanship and manipulation.
- ramblerman 4y ago
  We have millions of years of evolution that allow us to pick up on these subtle signals though. And we are really good at it. Do you think the worry of always having to ask up front (if xyz is ok) comes from ironically a lack of natural empathy in your case?
  - ookblah 4y ago
    I mean sure, if I asked up front every single time to the point where people get annoyed? But that's what we are discussing here. Yes, we humans have millions of years ready subtle signals, but we are also really fucking bad at reading minds and knowing what others are thinking. Thus, by clarifying with things like actual words in a direct and non-confrontational way we can actually communicate and understand. I don't know why people are so keen to get me in some kind of "gotcha!" when it's pretty simple what I'm suggesting. Like since when has the intention of wanting to be sure that you're not offending someone become a replacement for inept social person who can't read subtle signs?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]