Live data from Hacker News

Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

itcommunity.stanford.edu

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#381

It's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want to avoid, like "manpower" - Words that have long since lost any stigmatizing meaning by virtue of the original use being so ancient ("lame", "dumb", "stupid") - Words that,…

I really don't understand how anybody proposing these types of rules is ever met with anything but open contempt. No one has ever been able to explain it to me.

Oh come on. The page itself recognizes that it’s only advice.

There were a few things on the list I didn’t know the history of (e.g. ‘grandfathered’) that I’ll try to avoid now. I can understand why someone who comes from a different history than I do could be frustrated by them - indeed, I probably will be (mildly) now I’ve learned of the connotations. It costs me almost nothing to avoid them.

There are also a few things I find questionable - but on the whole this list is basically just ‘try to be kind to others’. It’s disappointing to see it so badly received.

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#382

> master (v) > become adept in > Historically, masters enslaved people, didn't consider them human and didn't allow them to express free will, so this term should generally be avoided. I assume Stanford now hands out an Adept Degree at the end of grad school.

I personally would prefer a Journeyman exit degree option :)

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#383
post #371

Probably what you should take away from this is not “wokism gone crazy” (err, sorry “wild”). The more important lesson here is that the bloat in academic institutions has gotten so outrageous that people start bullshit time-consuming initiatives to justify their positions and the positions of their reports. Absolutely no one will take this seriously including the person who wrote it but they will be able to put it on…

It will be used as a convenient tool against anyone who goes against the groupthink of the day.

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#384

> Grandfather: This term has its roots in the "grandfather clause" adopted by Southern states to deny voting rights to Blacks. > Red team: "Red" is often used disparagingly to refer to Indigenous peoples, so its use in this context could be offensive to some groups. > Blackbox: Assigns negative connotations to the color black, racializing the term. > Brave (do not use): This term perpetuates the stereotype of the "no…

[deleted]

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#385
OCD is not the same as detail oriented. OCD is the disorder of having to have certain things in a certain way.

Detail oriented is just that, you care about details. Like someone who paints your house can go fast on the large surfaces, but you get the detail-oriented person to do your window trims in a different color without it splattering over the white facade.

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#387

“You guys” is the plural form of “you” for most speakers of colloquial American English, and is completely ungendered, in an empirical sense: if you observe native speakers speaking naturally and colloquially, you will find that everyone who uses it (regardless of gender) uses it consistently to address groups of multiple people (regardless of gender). It’s derived from the noun “guy”, which is indeed often gendered.…

I was thinking about this the other day. You can approach a group of women and say " hey guys", that is fine. To a group of men," hey gals", and that is not fine. "Hey guys" to a mixed group, why... You've now 'elevated' the women to men so everyone is ok with it. It all implies that being a woman is somehow lesser. And so that is why I'm going to stick to everyone or folks. Although I don't begrudge or ask anyone to…

Traditional English has three genders: Male, Female, ???:

He/she/it They/they/they Guys/gals/guys

(Unfortunately, incorrectly using "it" to refer to a human is considered derogatory. All the other cells I listed were considered fine 20-30 years ago, and generally still are.)

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#388
post #371

Probably what you should take away from this is not “wokism gone crazy” (err, sorry “wild”). The more important lesson here is that the bloat in academic institutions has gotten so outrageous that people start bullshit time-consuming initiatives to justify their positions and the positions of their reports. Absolutely no one will take this seriously including the person who wrote it but they will be able to put it on…

It will be used as a convenient tool against anyone who goes against the groupthink of the day.

I doubt even this much is true. I truly believe this document will never be referenced outside of a promo doc or people making fun of it.

Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

#389

It's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want to avoid, like "manpower" - Words that have long since lost any stigmatizing meaning by virtue of the original use being so ancient ("lame", "dumb", "stupid") - Words that,…

> - Words that have long since lost any stigmatizing meaning by virtue of the original use being so ancient ("lame", "dumb", "stupid")

If you've known someone with mobility issues (e.g., a limp from birth) long enough for them to be honest with you, then the term "lame" (as a slang term meaning "something shitty") that might still be a sore spot.

EDIT: you don't have to do anything. But it does mean something to some ppl, and some of these ppl do notice it being said or avoided. And after hearing that from someone you care about, if might make you want to notice more (once the surprise of realizing it's an actual concern fades away)

Post reply on HN