14 ms·
Really wish skintone+gender emoji variants weren't an option in Slack. It's awkwardly personal in a way I don't want to think about at work. It's inappropriat
by inanutshellus 1y ago
Really wish skintone+gender emoji variants weren't an option in Slack.
It's awkwardly personal in a way I don't want to think about at work.
It's inappropriate to broadcast my skintone so i can confirm "taco bell sounds good" in a thumbs up, or announce gender to say I'm investigating something with the manly/girly detective emoji, which then others click on, scowl, unclick, then must manually go find the other one if they want to join in...
When in professional settings (like Slack), "everyone's just a bright yellow smiley face" is much more professional and cohesive. (As professional as emojis can be, I suppose.)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- pyrolistical 1y agoHmm. They should add indeterminate gender for all gendered emojis
- uneekname 1y agoThat's already a thing! https://emojipedia.org/neutral https://emojipedia.org/neutral
- secondcoming 1y agoWhat's the deal with 'Man in Turban'?
- cenamus 1y agoThe base yellow one?
- jenniferx 1y agoU+1F937 - person shrugging U+1F937 U+200D U+2642 U+FE0F - man shrugging U+1F937 U+200D U+2640 U+FE0F - woman shrugging
- LorenDB 1y agoHow about when a group chat has five different skin toned thumbs up reactions? So much for reaction based polls.
- ascorbic 1y agoThere are generic versions of all of them. All emojis have a base version without skin tone or gender applied. These are mostly displayed with yellow skin and a vaguely gender-neutral appearance. They're combined with modifiers to create the skin tone or gendered versions.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- jameshart 1y agoI sympathize. But this does also fall a little into the LEGO trap of claiming that ‘the yellow doesn’t specify any specific race so it can represent any of them!’ Which maybe held water right up until they wanted to make a Lando Calrissian minifigure and it became extremely obvious that he couldn’t be yellow; while all the other Star Wars characters they had already made yellow without a second thought rather gave the game away that maybe yellow minifigs are actually white people. And it’s not a fluke: The Simpsons are exactly the same. The fact that the most enthusiastic adopters of non-yellow emojis seem to be non-white people, while white people tend to be more on the ‘I was fine being yellow’ side… just suck it up and pick a color.
- aendruk 1y agoIs it specified that semantically neutral appear yellow or is the color free to vary by implementation/user preference?
- jameshart 1y agoUnicode says > When a human emoji is not immediately followed by an emoji modifier character, it should use a generic, non-realistic skin tone, such as RGB #FFCC22 (one of the colors typically used for the smiley faces). https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Diversity https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Diversity
- adamrezich 1y agoThe “LEGO (race) problem” was only a problem once LEGO began licensing IP (it was NBA first, not Star Wars, actually) and had to make minifigs to match real people. Before that, minifigs were perfectly raceless, able to abstractly represent whatever sort of characters that children could imagine—just like the yellow emojis. Yellow minifigs aren't “white”—they're “LEGO people”. Any other interpretation is post-hoc historical revisionism imagining past racial bias in domains where it was never present. Yellow LEGO minifigs (1978) predate The Simpsons (1987). There is no evidence to my knowledge that the latter was directly influenced by the former, such that the “yellow minifigs = white” line of reasoning makes any sense at all.
- adamrezich 1y agoGreat to see people finally beginning to agree with this when I've been saying it for at least (according to comment history) eight years now. It was always obvious that in a globally-connected Internet age, having universal, skintoneless glyphs that can be used to represent emotion and other shorthand (e.g. thumbs-up) was a decent idea, and that adding skin-tone modifiers was a bad idea: - Five skin tones is insufficient to cover all possible present-day human use-cases - Forcing users to make the decision between e.g. [thumbs up] and [thumbs up and also btw I'm white] is stupid (and possibly needlessly divisive) - Skin-tone modifiers opened the door to all other sorts of modifiers Now we're stuck with supporting all of this wholly unnecessary combinatorial complexity forever—awesome. What did we gain from this?
- paulryanrogers 1y ago> What did we gain from this? The steelman argument would be that we have provided a way for folks who felt excluded to now feel more represented. And just repeating that yellow is abstract and inclusive doesn't address the fact that it's objectively far closer to representing people of lighter complexion than those with significantly darker complexion. The latter group has suffered centuries of oppression and exclusion, often based solely on their appearance, so it's an issue that impacts them differently. Even "The Simpsons" has introduced characters with darker complexions alongside their yellow toned cast.
- redviperpt 1y agoGuess we should have made them purple or green
- paulryanrogers 1y agoEven if that worked, is it such a loss that we now have some personalization in our emojis? They aren't for super formal or technical needs. It's just something fun to express ourselves over text mediums. Computers are powerful. We have no shortage of computer programmers. Given all the complexity in systems just to stay current and functional, a bit of extra work for emojis is a small price to pay.
- bombcar 1y agoWrong. They should support the "color combining code" with a 3 byte sequence so you can specify ANY of the 16,777,216 color variations. And they should also support the gender combining code with any other emoji, in fact, any two emojis should be combinable (if you have the combination in your font, otherwise you just display both next to each other). I'm only like 33% joking.
- hdjrudni 1y ago> any two emojis should be combinable That's literally what emoji kitchen is. > They should support the "color combining code" with a 3 byte sequence so you can specify ANY of the 16,777,216 color variations. Why stop there... we have 10-bit color and beyond now. Give me display-p3 (https://webkit.org/blog/10042/wide-gamut-color-in-css-with-display-p3/ https://webkit.org/blog/10042/wide-gamut-color-in-css-with-d...)
- deepsun 1y agoWhy cannot we at least make that UI-configurable? Everyone would select what gender and skin tone they want to see in their UI. Same as code colors -- there's one code, but everyone is free to configure their text editors to colorize whatever they want.
- paulryanrogers 1y agoIs it so bad to just click to increment the emoji regardless of the color/tone choice made by the first reaction? I suppose if Slack were open to 3P clients you could override all the tone variants to use your choice. Maybe you can make a browser extension?
- petesergeant 1y agoiirc Slack will remember your chosen skin tone and will increment it based on that, rather than the first colour chosen
- deathanatos 1y ago> Is it so bad to just click to increment the emoji regardless of the color/tone choice made by the first reaction? This is sort of what I feel like the parent was implying without outright saying it, too. But: that's not how Slack works. If the only reaction is an emoji of skin tone A (let's say its a dark skin toned thumbs up), and I click that dark skin toned thumbs up to also react, Slack adds a thumbs up with the skin tone configured in the user's settings (which I believe defaults to no skin tone), not the skin tone of the initial reaction. Settings → Messages & media → Default Skin Tone
- zyx321 1y agoThere's a big difference between "I wish Slack didn't have optional skin colors" vs "I wish Slack didn't have mandatory segregation"
- WalterBright 1y agoI went through an emoji stage. Then realized I was wasting time looking for the perfect emoji and settling on an imperfect one. Then realized once again that a phonetic alphabet replaces all that nonsense.
- WalterBright 1y ago> i can confirm "taco bell sounds good" in a thumbs up May I suggest "sounds good"? I'm glad the D forums don't allow emojis.
- hdjrudni 1y agoNo. That creates a new message which might have been 10 messages ago. If you want to react to an older message without flooding the chatroom, emoji is the only way to do it.
- keybored 1y agoWe need a compromise: an image of "sounds good" that people can react with.
- colejohnson66 1y agoSlack allows responding to a message directly as a separate thread. You can optionally put the reply into the main log.
- upcoming-sesame 1y agoI've been using black thumbs up until now without realizing it's a racial thing... and I'm white. are you telling me I've been offending people?
- umeshunni 1y ago[flagged]
- mock-possum 1y agoHar har har
- therealfiona 1y agoDepends where you work. Personally, I will think it is odd, then move on. But your HR department may have a different view. If it is a personal slack, then have fun! I'm a big fan of the rainbow thumbs up because I like rainbows.
- denkmoon 1y agoJust use yellow then? You don’t have to broadcast your skin ton, and for those that it matters to they can.
- hdjrudni 1y agoI don't know how it is in Slack, but in other apps if someone already thumb'd something up you have the option of just clicking their thumb to +1 it or you can go into the emoji picker and pick your favorite shade of thumb. Sometimes you do just want to +1 so you just click whatever is already there and that's when this awkward dance begins.
- adastra22 1y ago[flagged]
- Symbiote 1y agoOnce I noticed all my non-white colleagues had selected the closest skin tone, I selected the white one. If I click a black or brown thumbs up in Slack to add my own, a white one is added. We're a very small team and three of the skin tone choices are unique, so I often know who has reacted from the colour.
- Freak_NL 1y agoOh yeah, that's totally not awkward. Imagine being the only one of a particular shade of human and constantly seeing your lonely thumbs up next to the the thumbs ups of the rest of the team.
- sedatk 1y ago> It's inappropriate to broadcast my skintone so i can confirm "taco bell sounds good" in a thumbs up You're also continuously broadcasting your skintone and gender in the office simply by existing. Is that inappropriate and unprofessional too?
- philwelch 1y agoYou can’t help the way you look but you can choose whether or not to go out of your way to deliberately draw attention to it.
- mikestorrent 1y agoIt's up to you to decide if someone setting the colour of a couple of pixels on the screen is "deliberately drawing attention" to it vs. just a cute customization that makes people feel included. Probably instead of picking a few tones we should just let people go full RGB on masked colours in the emoji so we can have green people too.
- nomdep 1y agoAdding a skin color, let's say a thumbs-up with a black skin tone, its saying: "this is not just a thumbs-up, its different, it's a BLACK thumbs-up". See how racist it is?
- Devorlon 1y agoPersonally, no I don't see it.
- nomdep 1y agoWithout knowing anything about the particular person, in what ways a black thumbs-up is different than a non-skinned thumbs-up? Adding a skin-tone is saying there ARE differences, but any difference you can name are actually prejudices about blacks. What was meant to be a simple "ok", "agree", etc. now is charged with an "I don't think you/others and me are the same kind of humans". That's why using skin-tones in emojis is actually racist.
- jszymborski 1y agoI don't understand this kind of thinking at all. We announce gender and race a million ways. It's inescapable and undesirable to avoid doing. Our background and gender are relevant to our life experiences and who we are as people. That context is important when interacting with people at work or elsewhere. Cohesive is a funny and frankly telling word to use here as well. Can you not be cohesive as a group while acknowledging that you are not all the same gender or race? If I'm honest, this is giving "I don't mind gay people as long as it's not too in my face" vibes and I don't like it. Very strange comment.
- philwelch 1y ago[flagged]
- account42 1y ago> Our background and gender are relevant to our life experiences and who we are as people. No, it's incredibly racist and sexist to think those things are the most important distinctions of who you are.
- jszymborski 1y agoI never said they are the "most important", but simply they are "important". Your race or gender isn't the totality of who you are, but it is surely a part of you, your identity, and how people treat you. To ignore it also perpetuates racism, even among well-intentioned folks. Here is some reading on the topic: https://www.forbes.com/sites/maiahoskin/2022/09/28/newsflash-color-blindness-perpetuates-structural-racism/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/maiahoskin/2022/09/28/newsflash... https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/color-blindness-is-counterproductive/405037/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/color-b... A great book I can recommend is "Racism without racists" by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva https://search.worldcat.org/title/Racism-without-racists-:-color-blind-racism-and-the-persistence-of-racial-inequality-in-the-United-States/oclc/435421582 https://search.worldcat.org/title/Racism-without-racists-:-c...
- John23832 1y agoOr people can be themselves and their skin tone? Are you against headshots with actual faces as icons as well?
- hdjrudni 1y agoIf someone uses my face as their avatar, yes. If I use black skin tones as my default emoji set even though I'm white... I imagine others will find that weird at least.
- John23832 1y ago> If I use black skin tones as my default emoji set even though I'm white... I imagine others will find that weird at least. Then don’t? Why create some weird hypothetical? Just let people be who they are.
- Freak_NL 1y agoI'm pretty much against avatars featuring people's actual faces too. Digital communication pretty much allows us to completely disregard another's appearance, so why reintroduce that via the backdoor? Emoji segregation feels off and backwards.
- squigz 1y ago> Emoji segregation feels off and backwards. Please explain in what way does segregation have anything to do with emojis?
- Freak_NL 1y agoSpecific coloured emoji for people with a specific skin colour. Six thumbs up under a post about apple pie in the lounge now turns into five thumbs up in colour A and one in colour B. Suddenly the colour you pick, or don't pick in case of LEGO yellow, is a political statement. I can do without all that.
- 1y ago
- stronglikedan 1y agoI just use the wrong emojis for my gender and skin tone. If anyone is truly offended by something as petty and insignificant as an emoji, it's like a scarlet letter warning me to not associate with them.
- mock-possum 1y agoYeah same I think it’s fun to just pick randomly between colour and gender every time
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- chrismorgan 1y agoAnother aspect is contrast. We put such a lot of effort into getting adequate contrast between background and foreground, and then emoji skin tones destroy it. On a light background, light skin tones are bad, lacking contrast between background and skin. Dark skin tones are bad because they lack contrast between skin tone and other details in the emoji; and if on a dark background, dark contrast. Yellow works well on near-white and near-black backgrounds.
- adastra22 1y agoHow old are you? You don't have to answer of course, but I suspect this is either an age or a generational thing. Being over 40, I just don't give a crap about those things.
- deathanatos 1y agoCertainly the younger generations are not hung up on the skin tone of an emoji. Some people customize them to more closely represent themselves. Some people use the defaults. Who … cares? … it's just an emoji. Heck, for a while some emoji were only available in specific genders. (Those are much rarer, now.) Nobody where I work ever got hung up on the gender of an emoji not matching the user.
- adastra22 1y agoMy experience is the opposite. I've seen 20-somethings getting hung up on these sorts of issues. My teen daughter is unhealthily concerned about such things. Us old farts dgaf.
- account42 1y ago> Heck, for a while some emoji were only available in specific genders. (Those are much rarer, now.) Nobody where I work ever got hung up on the gender of an emoji not matching the user. You mean those emojis were originally gender neutral but have now been reinterpreted. Another unnecessary division that we really don't need.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- account42 1y agoSkin tones for emojis shouldn't be a thing at all. There is something weirdly dystopian about a consortium and ultimately mega corporations deciding what aspects of you are important to distinguish yourself from others, what options for those should be available or what concepts you may use to express yourself. But this is also a wider problem with emojis beyond just skin tones - the selection of foods for example is best described as what a California hipster would think of and hardly representative of what someone around the world would want to communicate. And then there is now the problem that instead of defining building blocks for communicating concepts, Unicode now feels the need to enumerate all concepts individually. This is not just extremely limiting in what you can communicate but also horribly inefficient where with each new version fully compliant implementations need to add thousands of additional glyphs.
- nickdothutton 1y agoI see emojis as purely semiotic. I don't expect to find personalisation or see myself reflected in them at all. Perhaps this is because of my age and use of emoticons in the BBS days of the late 1980s. Perhaps it's also because when i press for one on a screen, I still conceptualise that action as pressing a mechanical/physical button, where no customisation would be possible.
- freehorse 1y agoThis is why I hate this kind of stuff. Another reason that text-based emoticons like in the old times were far better. Why does anybody need to render ":(" into "U+1F641"? Nobody would ever think of debating race because of ":(". Unicode is not just technically confusing but spread sociopolitical confusion as well, like a contemporary babel tower. We could survive just fine in ASCII times, and on fewer bytes too, even if we had to be creative in how to represent languages with different alphabets.
- chmod775 1y agoReally? I just pick colors at random. The skin color of an emoji is so utterly irrelevant, I don't see how one can break into a sweat over it... or why it is an option in the first place really. If it's there, you might as well have some fun with it.