Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 191 posts

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#31

Post by jsilence »

cthalupa wrote: post #25
jsilence wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never argued that we have used the term whiteliste or blacklist for a long time. What I am arguing against is that the author of the comment suggests in a passive aggressive way that the above commenter using the term whitelist is somewhat backwoodish while the majority of society ('we') has progressed to a preferable wording. This is simply not true and it is offensive. Completely independant from the discour…

I'm not a huge fan of the way it was stated - my response shows how I tend to frame the discussion - but at a certain point you do have to be an activist about other people's usage of language. While I would not say someone using blacklist or whitelist today is the same as someone using a racial slur, it took people actively admonishing others for using racial slurs to push them further and further out of common use.…

Quickly looking up the origin of the term blacklist on wikipedia reveals that there is no historic connotation to race or color of skin in this word (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacklisting#Origins_of_the_te...). Black and white are just colors. These words in themselves have no implicit judgemental meaning.

So by publicly arguing that the term blacklist carries a racial negative connotation one would impose this view onto the one who is using the word blcklist. This is similar to using the term 'the n-word': By saying this one is making me thinking the word 'nigger' in my head. So while the other one is not saying it, it is projected into my head, making me the bad guy. This is nefarious.

I am totally with you with the intention of becoming a better person. Same here. I am ok with people stating that they are personally offended by something I have said. I'll think about it and probably apologize and reconsider my language. I am not ok for someone from an outside group correcting my language and taking the offense for someone else. This person has no say in this.

On top of this I think that there is no right not to be offended. That we as societies should not strive for a language that is totally non-offensive to anyone. a) It i not possible because there is no end to it. It is easy to construct yet another sub division of a group that can take offense in lmost anything. b) because beeing offended is the starting point for societal discourse and negotiations. The discourse itself should be performed respectfully, and this is essential: While my opinion might be offensive to you, we should both have enough mutual respect and interest in each other to sort it out and come to terms.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#32

Post by Dma54rhs »

cthalupa wrote: post #16
jsilence wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we have not. And we don't want to, so please stop this. You are free to call it anything you want, but don't tell us how to call it.

What do you have to lose by switching to a term that is more descriptive and less likely to be offensive to someone? "We've called it that for a long time" isn't really an argument to keep doing it. For non-native speakers, they have to be familiar with the idiom or it is a meaningless statement, and whether or not the original intent was for it to be related at all to skin color, it can feed in to people's unconscio…

For the same reason I don't want Google to tell me if I can use the polymory dating app. Not a native speaker and tech community is global, as is HN. Everyone doesn't have to dance in order to satisfy white activists from Silicon Valley and their current social dogmas.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#33

Post by 8bitsrule »

>Google's developer guidelines prohibit apps "that contain or promote ... any content or services intended to be sexually gratifying."

Very reminiscent of the language of the US Comstock Laws which started 148 years ago. One hundred and two years ago, a judge called those laws "haphazard and capricious".

Those words seem to fit in this case. And this is not the Victorian Era. I imagine Google would rather not be called to D.C. again to explain its behavior to a Congress that is unwilling to explicitly define it's expectations.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#35

Post by exolymph »

cthalupa wrote: post #25
jsilence wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never argued that we have used the term whiteliste or blacklist for a long time. What I am arguing against is that the author of the comment suggests in a passive aggressive way that the above commenter using the term whitelist is somewhat backwoodish while the majority of society ('we') has progressed to a preferable wording. This is simply not true and it is offensive. Completely independant from the discour…

I'm not a huge fan of the way it was stated - my response shows how I tend to frame the discussion - but at a certain point you do have to be an activist about other people's usage of language. While I would not say someone using blacklist or whitelist today is the same as someone using a racial slur, it took people actively admonishing others for using racial slurs to push them further and further out of common use.…

> at a certain point you do have to be an activist about other people's usage of language.

Well, part of that game is people getting pissed off that you want to police their word choices. Don't be surprised that some of us will become more offensive in response to attempts at sanitizing control. You'd have to be a retard to disregard that factor ;P

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#36

Post by sprite »

Just a quick search in Google Play Store shows several apps that are similarly named including "Threesome Dating App for Couples & Swingers: 3rder". While I don't agree that they should be policing this content at all I think the inconsistency at which they do it is even worse. They won't hesitate to remove an app or your entire account and once they do it's impossible to talk to anyone. Meanwhile other similar apps or developers of similar apps that got you banned remain in the store.

I've been banned from Google Play Developer portal since 2015 because I had an app that accessed an undocumented API of a 3rd party service: "we have determined that your app interferes with or accesses another service or product in an unauthorized manner." I had two different apps using the same API so I got 2 strikes at once and was immediately banned.

I've tried multiple times to contact Google to get my account restored, several times in the past few years since it's been so long, but they don't even respond and it's impossible to get a hold of a human.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#37

Post by myotheraccount9 »

cthalupa wrote: post #16
jsilence wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we have not. And we don't want to, so please stop this. You are free to call it anything you want, but don't tell us how to call it.

What do you have to lose by switching to a term that is more descriptive and less likely to be offensive to someone? "We've called it that for a long time" isn't really an argument to keep doing it. For non-native speakers, they have to be familiar with the idiom or it is a meaningless statement, and whether or not the original intent was for it to be related at all to skin color, it can feed in to people's unconscio…

I live in a country which has none of the racial tensions present in the US. There may be some social tensions, but they're not along the black-white divide and there is no history of black slavery here.

So why should I have external forces impose on my use of the English language, when those forces are concerned exclusively with what is happening in the US. Especially when what I am saying has 0 racial connotations.

Meaning might be mostly relative, but you can't push all responsibility onto the speaker. As a speaker, I can't be held responsible for what you're hearing from your bubble and you're obviously doing 0 effort to meet me halfway.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#38

Post by dTal »

cthalupa wrote: post #26
path411 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we can no longer use words that are colors inside of an idiom incase people think you are talking about race? You have to find some kind of line of reasonability. Sure, are there lots of remnants of racism/sexism rooted around our culture. But does that mean just nuke anything that has a color in it? Heck, you aren't even thinking of the consequences of your actions suddenly turning non racist words into having ra…

We should likely avoid putting negative connotations to words that correspond with the colors of peoples' skin, yes. Does every person with black skin care about the use of blacklist or whitelist? Of course not. Do some? Of course. If some percentage of the country moves to be actively racist in their usage of the word, well, it becomes quite clear who they are, and we've got plenty of other remedies for dealing with…

Nobody has "black" or "white" skin. I'm no word historian but I'm willing to bet that the association of white/black with positive/negative is far older than the slang usage to refer to skin colors; certainly more deeply baked in the language. I wouldn't even be surprised if the metaphorical meanings informed the skin color usage, due to racism. And you'll never eliminate that metaphor from the language, not without doing excessive cultural violence[0]. If you have a problem with the overlap, better to deprecate "black" and "white" as skin color terms at all.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-and-white_dualism

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#39

Post by yew »

The polyamory "community" is generally a hotbed of misogyny and transphobia. Of course it's perfectly possible that this particular app has nothing to do with that. But always do your own research before you choose to amplify a message - you never know who else might be working alongside you.

Re: Google Play store bans polyamory dating app

#40

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

cthalupa wrote: post #25
jsilence wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never argued that we have used the term whiteliste or blacklist for a long time. What I am arguing against is that the author of the comment suggests in a passive aggressive way that the above commenter using the term whitelist is somewhat backwoodish while the majority of society ('we') has progressed to a preferable wording. This is simply not true and it is offensive. Completely independant from the discour…

I'm not a huge fan of the way it was stated - my response shows how I tend to frame the discussion - but at a certain point you do have to be an activist about other people's usage of language. While I would not say someone using blacklist or whitelist today is the same as someone using a racial slur, it took people actively admonishing others for using racial slurs to push them further and further out of common use.…

> at a certain point you do have to be an activist about other people's usage of language

You don't! That's the key insight of multiculturalism - it's totally okay that others don't think or act or speak the same way you do, and there's no need for you to impose your own cultural norms on them. The only alternative to multiculturalism is monoculturalism, where everyone struggles to make their culture dominant and we have to meekly follow whoever wins the struggle.

Post reply on HN