5 ms·

> supported on every platform known to man. How about some non-sexist boilerplate?

by RyanMcGreal 14y ago

nanijoe 14y ago
Not sure how the quote is sexist..man in this context = mankind, and No, I don't regard that as sexist.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  Maybe you could ask a woman what she thinks about a mass noun for humanity that excludes half of the humans.
  - sandfox 14y ago
    <troll-feed> I asked, In the small sample I questioned, not a single f* was given. Now troll off somewhere else, or alternatively actually make a useful contribution to increasing opportunities and interest for women in tech. </troll-feed>
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - nanijoe 14y ago
    You know..I just did, and she does not give a shit. She cares a heck of a lot more that her male colleagues earn more than she does.And that being of child bearing age somehow counts as a strike against her at her job. Maybe YOU should try talking to an actual woman and asking her what she cares about.
    - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
      How can we fix the big stuff - discrimination and pay disparities - if we can't even fix the small stuff like choosing to use non-sexist language?
      - joshka 14y ago
        Focussing on the stuff which is broken, rather than the stuff which is not is a good start.
  - fallenhitokiri 14y ago
    To quote my significant other: "who the f* actually cares about this!?" Of course you will find women who support your point - as you will find people who support $something, no matter what it is. The fine line between caring and taking care of a problem and moving every topic off topic, justifying it with something small, unimportant, knowingly wrong interpreted and ripped out of context is the key to change something without creating a mass of people who are just sick of a topic because of the mentioned behavior.
    - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
      If it's small and unimportant, why not do the right thing and use a non-sexist term instead of a sexist term? Why are we defending the use of a masculine mass noun to refer to all humans when it confers no advantage over an equivalent non-sexist term while adding, however incrementally, to the totality of messages that women are not welcome in tech?
      - quesera 14y ago
        > If it's small and unimportant, why not do the right thing and use a non-sexist term instead of a sexist term? Because we don't agree that it is a sexist term at all, and altering common usage to suit the sensibilities of a tiny group of people[1] is a) pandering, which is discriminatory, and b) impossible. > Why are we defending the use of a masculine noun to refer.. Well that's just it. It isn't a masculine noun. It's gender neutral. It takes no stance on the debate whatsoever. Its resemblance to a masculine noun is interesting but not relevant. If the author had meant it in a gender specific way, he would have committed a grammatical error. Right bark, wrong tree, I think. You're just making easy noise. If you are passionate about the underlying issue which you've conflated here, I hope you also spend energy in more fruitful efforts. [1] by which I mean the tiny group of people offended on behalf of the larger 51% of the population, the vast majority of which doesn't even recognize this conversation as linguistically, much less socially, interesting.
quesera 14y ago
"known to men" would imply sexual differentiation, which is not necessarily sexism. "known to man" does not, and is not.
RyanMcGreal 14y ago
Dear Hacker News: this persistent blind spot about the many casual, unconscious and dismissive ways the tech community excludes women - and get nerd-rage defensive about it when confronted - is a big part of why there are not more women in tech.
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  I'm generally in favour of calling out sexist bullshit in tech, but in this case you're talking about a very specific phrase that's been in semi-popular usage since the 1800s.
  - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
    An appeal to 19th century cultural norms is less than helpful when considering whether a turn of phrase is sexist.
    - nicholassmith 14y ago
      I don't believe it is cultural, I believe it was based off shortening 'mankind' to 'man'. However, I'm not a linguistics specialist and have no idea the roots of the phrase, but I've come across it in many contexts.
    - joshka 14y ago
      ... and yet by 21st century cultural norms the word 'man' is still not considered sexist by many. Besides, strictly from an etymological perspective you should not be calling for the eradication of the 'man' when used to speak of the species, rather you should call for a prefix to be used when talking of the gender (e.g. werman).
- quesera 14y ago
  The habit of grepping all content for keywords without understanding context or definition inhibits rational discourse. Getting third-party apologist about it when confronted is a dead stop appeal to authority.
jtiernan 14y ago
That quote isn't sexist. However asking "Your name please Sir..." for the beta list sign up is.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  They're both sexist, and apparently unconsciously so.

> supported on every platform known to man. How about some non-sexist boilerplate?

nanijoe 14y ago

Not sure how the quote is sexist..man in this context = mankind, and No, I don't regard that as sexist.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago
Maybe you could ask a woman what she thinks about a mass noun for humanity that excludes half of the humans.
- sandfox 14y ago
  <troll-feed> I asked, In the small sample I questioned, not a single f* was given. Now troll off somewhere else, or alternatively actually make a useful contribution to increasing opportunities and interest for women in tech. </troll-feed>
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- nanijoe 14y ago
  You know..I just did, and she does not give a shit. She cares a heck of a lot more that her male colleagues earn more than she does.And that being of child bearing age somehow counts as a strike against her at her job. Maybe YOU should try talking to an actual woman and asking her what she cares about.
  - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
    How can we fix the big stuff - discrimination and pay disparities - if we can't even fix the small stuff like choosing to use non-sexist language?
    - joshka 14y ago
      Focussing on the stuff which is broken, rather than the stuff which is not is a good start.
- fallenhitokiri 14y ago
  To quote my significant other: "who the f* actually cares about this!?" Of course you will find women who support your point - as you will find people who support $something, no matter what it is. The fine line between caring and taking care of a problem and moving every topic off topic, justifying it with something small, unimportant, knowingly wrong interpreted and ripped out of context is the key to change something without creating a mass of people who are just sick of a topic because of the mentioned behavior.
  - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
    If it's small and unimportant, why not do the right thing and use a non-sexist term instead of a sexist term? Why are we defending the use of a masculine mass noun to refer to all humans when it confers no advantage over an equivalent non-sexist term while adding, however incrementally, to the totality of messages that women are not welcome in tech?
    - quesera 14y ago
      > If it's small and unimportant, why not do the right thing and use a non-sexist term instead of a sexist term? Because we don't agree that it is a sexist term at all, and altering common usage to suit the sensibilities of a tiny group of people[1] is a) pandering, which is discriminatory, and b) impossible. > Why are we defending the use of a masculine noun to refer.. Well that's just it. It isn't a masculine noun. It's gender neutral. It takes no stance on the debate whatsoever. Its resemblance to a masculine noun is interesting but not relevant. If the author had meant it in a gender specific way, he would have committed a grammatical error. Right bark, wrong tree, I think. You're just making easy noise. If you are passionate about the underlying issue which you've conflated here, I hope you also spend energy in more fruitful efforts. [1] by which I mean the tiny group of people offended on behalf of the larger 51% of the population, the vast majority of which doesn't even recognize this conversation as linguistically, much less socially, interesting.

quesera 14y ago

"known to men" would imply sexual differentiation, which is not necessarily sexism. "known to man" does not, and is not.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago

Dear Hacker News: this persistent blind spot about the many casual, unconscious and dismissive ways the tech community excludes women - and get nerd-rage defensive about it when confronted - is a big part of why there are not more women in tech.

nicholassmith 14y ago
I'm generally in favour of calling out sexist bullshit in tech, but in this case you're talking about a very specific phrase that's been in semi-popular usage since the 1800s.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  An appeal to 19th century cultural norms is less than helpful when considering whether a turn of phrase is sexist.
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    I don't believe it is cultural, I believe it was based off shortening 'mankind' to 'man'. However, I'm not a linguistics specialist and have no idea the roots of the phrase, but I've come across it in many contexts.
  - joshka 14y ago
    ... and yet by 21st century cultural norms the word 'man' is still not considered sexist by many. Besides, strictly from an etymological perspective you should not be calling for the eradication of the 'man' when used to speak of the species, rather you should call for a prefix to be used when talking of the gender (e.g. werman).
quesera 14y ago
The habit of grepping all content for keywords without understanding context or definition inhibits rational discourse. Getting third-party apologist about it when confronted is a dead stop appeal to authority.

jtiernan 14y ago

That quote isn't sexist. However asking "Your name please Sir..." for the beta list sign up is.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago
They're both sexist, and apparently unconsciously so.