2 ms·
poster here :) please keep in mind that this was a support ticket, not a thesis. i think my assumptions are obvious, fair, and valid. how "groups" are depicte
by reuwsaat 12y ago
poster here :)
please keep in mind that this was a support ticket, not a thesis. i think my assumptions are obvious, fair, and valid.
how "groups" are depicted in public is internalized, privately. "hmmm, everyone in that commercial looks like me / doesn't look like me. i think i'll buy that product / won't buy that product."
it's like the problem with public bathroom signs. and false choices. why not instead use the letters "M" "F" "U". Male, Female, Unisex. There. We can embrace kilts and convenience. (and if that doesn't work, there are other options. i'm sure we can come to some agreement that doesn't require equating gender with "my favorite color is..." or "most people of gender x/y (pun totally intended) wear...")
so, is it just me? or is this icon sexist? (even a littel?) you decide.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> it's like the problem with public bathroom signs. and false choices. why not instead use the letters "M" "F" "U". Male, Female, Unisex. The symbols, while not independent of knowledge of gender stereotypes, are language independent and widely and immediately recognizable. Words aren't, but at least are unambiguous if you know the language. Letters are the worst option, as they are the least likely to be understood.