4 ms·
I agree, actually, but "wife-acceptance-factor"[0] (or; "wife approved") is useful terminology; I would love if there was some colloquially acceptable gender ne
by dijit 3y ago
I agree, actually, but "wife-acceptance-factor"[0] (or; "wife approved") is useful terminology; I would love if there was some colloquially acceptable gender neutral term for that.
Some have suggested some truly cumbersome terminology to replace it which is unfortunate because you very quickly run into the same problem the vegans have: If your choices are too unpalatable then reasonable people (who don't care or share your values 100%) will avoid them.
You need to make the choice easier. (hence why a lot of Vegan focus right now is on having enjoyable alternative meals).
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_acceptance_factor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_acceptance_factor
EDIT: I'm not going to argue this because if you're reading my comment you've already decided whether you agree or not and you will not be productive to talk to.
I will answer some common suggestions and why they're not reasonably sufficient and you can argue amongst yourselves about it. I'm not a sociologist or psychologist but I am human so take it with that lens.
* Partner as a replacement for "wife" is unfortunately more syllables making it just a smidge more annoying to speak, so people won't; but it's the closest to what is intended and mentally equivalent for most people. As a bonus it even encompasses the unmarried! Partner is also (commonly) said lovingly so it doesn't create distance in the mind of the speaker.
* Spouse is an uncommon enough word that it doesn't come to mind quickly enough; it also unfortunately comes across as unfamiliar (IE: not from a place of warm affection) and clinical.
A good replacement term should be something endearing because it's important to point out that this isn't a term of derision, the true meaning behind the phrase is that they love their partner and want them to be happy. It's just a boomer-humour type joke to hide behind "because I dont want a divorce" or "I fear my wife", which is part of the supposed humour -- so it needs to feel familial and affectionate.
- remram 3y agoReplace with "partner" or "spouse"? Why is that not good enough?
- sophacles 3y agoWhy not make the replacement term: "even reasonable people wouldn't object"?
- dijit 3y agoYou'd be implying that your partner is unreasonable if they did object, which is a bit cold. "Wife-Acceptance Factor" is also a spectrum, not a boolean. What is acceptable to one partner may be unacceptable to another, understanding what is more generally acceptable than another solution is useful, because it's likely that you understand where your own partner is at mentally and how much of the home needs to be tidy and nice.
- crtasm 3y agoPartner. Spouse. This seems easy. edit: "it's just a joke" - please re-read OP. 5 to 6 syllables is too many? Why aren't you saying WAF (PAF) if that's a concern :)
- dijit 3y agoI'd probably say "would it be wife-approved?" or some other thing given the context of looking at a device that is hideous and not in-line with my girlfriends intended aesthetic of the home. But an additional syllable is indeed enough friction here, and if you think it's not then that's fine: but it is. Please understand me here, I'm not arguing or fighting with you: it's not something you can argue rationally, it's something subliminal that all humans will do and I'm trying to point it out. It's a form of lossy optimisation in our brains, we will always choose phrases that roll off the tongue better. This is the science of soundbites, and how they are weaponised in marketing for populist political agendas.
- crtasm 3y agoI hear you and that makes sense for speech, but let's come back to the fact that this thread begins with a guide put online for anyone interested in the subject to read. Ease of saying a phrase out loud has less importance for written communication and there's a difference between speaking about one's own specific situation and generalising that to tips for your entire audience.
- jvanderbot 3y agoThe article suggests "Significant Other Acceptance Parameters" (SOAP), which I like better anyway since it involves parameters which seem targeted to the individual, rather than a broad factor targetted at the device. The device hits all my SOAPs, vs the WAF is high.
- nonameiguess 3y agoIt should really be something like family acceptance factor. Your spouse is usually not the only person living with you for long periods of time you'd ideally like to accomodate as a permanent co-user of shared spaces. That said, this writer never says anything about the general idea being wife-approvable as far as I can tell, just that putting a homelab in the living room will lead to a divorce. That is already gender-neutral but at least so far also not true. My homelab is in my living room and I haven't divorced. I had to wallmount a very large media cabinet in the television nook and cut holes for USB fans into it, and use fanless mini-PCs rather than 500 decibel used servers, but you can't even tell it's there if I don't tell you. The article you linked even says right up top this is widely thought to be a sexist term but also different than what the guy here means. The article here is about being considerate of how you use limited shared space but the Wiki is about design elements being attractive to people who care what something looks like instead of just what it does. Stereotypically, it would have been the woman in the heteronormative relationships that cared but certainly that isn't the case in my house. My wife loves gadgets and buys random crap all the time and leaves them laying around wherever is most convenient. I'm the one that cares deeply about neatness and my living space actually looking like a living space and not like I live in a data center.
- dijit 3y agoI started my comment with an agreement to the sentiment you're expressing and the sentiment expressed by the parent. The only thing I added was a caveat that there is a useful term I'd like to see a replacement for.