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

Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative

itcommunity.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

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

#491

Post by kelnos »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #366
cipheredStones wrote: post #332

It's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want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,…

Quoted post unavailable.

I'm downvoting you not because you're entirely wrong, but because you've chosen to be somewhat right in an irritating, unproductive, flamebaity manner.

No, this is not "the absolute state of the left". This is the state of some loud people who think they have the final word on ethics and morals. Unfortunately, many others have allowed them to flourish, rather than shutting them down.

I agree with some of the items on Stanford's list, though most of the words I think are pretty harmless, or at least should be. That doesn't mean that some people wouldn't feel harmed by them, but it's just my personal opinion that the harm is minimal, or that yes, some people do need to learn that not everything is about them, and that language has moved on, and no one actually associates the word they're using with the thing they feel offended about. (Like, if I were to say something was "lame", I would not expect a person who couldn't walk to be offended by that, as that's just not what "lame" means anymore. Ditto for words like "dumb".)

But "master"/"slave"? Sure, those words suck. "Tranny"? Sure, 90% of the people using it are using it as a slur, and I don't want to be associated with shitty people like that. "Black-" prefixes meaning things that are bad, and "white-" prefixes meaning things that are good? Yeah, screw that, that's bullshit.

But then we get to... "Tarball"? Associated with "tarbaby"? What, are you kidding me? "Brown bag"? I'd never heard of the association with "brown paper bag test"; I always thought of it as "brown bag lunch", as in the kind of paper bag I'd always use to bring my lunch with me to school when I was a kid. Is the negative association actually a thing, or is this just Stanford's hand-wringing over nothing?

I'm also really annoyed by the "person-first" stuff. Not only is "person who has immigrated" a mouthful, but I don't know any actual immigrants who would consider being called an "immigrant" offensive. Worse, I think trying to put a stigma on words like "immigrant" ends up putting a stigma on the entire idea of being "a person who has immigrated", which is a shitty thing to do.

I've gone to the effort to write all this out to attempt to demonstrate to you that not everyone on the left -- or even a "majority of mainstream" or whatever you think -- would come up with or agree with the entirety (or even a majority) of a boneheaded list like this. My perspective is absolutely not unique in this, either.

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

#493

Post by josephg »

hbrn wrote: post #396
cipheredStones wrote: post #332

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,…

Basically anything that can make anybody[1] offended. If a term doesn't seem offensive right away, see if you can make it offensive through mental gymnastics. [1] This, of course, excludes people like me, who are offended by the very existence of such lists.

Uh oh! “mental gymnastics” sounds like it implies able bodied people who can do gymnastics are better than people with disabilities! Burn the heretic!

I find a lot of the cultural appropriation items on this list deeply ironic because they imply English is allowed to take words from French (“beef”, “rendezvous”) and German (“welcome”, “hound”, …). But terms from non-white cultures aren’t allowed to become part of english? (“Guru”, “bury the hatchet”, and so on in this list.)

Is it just me or is that policy remarkably racist?

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

#494

Post by tsimionescu »

yunwal wrote: 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…

You say this, and yet much of the tech industry has taken to removing words like blacklist and whitelist already, even though they have no racial undertones whatsoever. Similarly, the master branch of many projects has been renamed to main, even though it had nothing to do with slavery, and master remains an extremely common term.

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

#495

Post by handoflixue »

ancapsfascists wrote: post #467
cipheredStones wrote: post #332

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 don't read it as conflating, they just say these are all harmful, not that they are equally harmful. A hangnail is harmful and a car crash is harmful, I try to avoid both. I'm less put out by a hangnail and I go to great lengths to avoid a car crash. Any list like this should be read as: "you are causing harm somewhere between a paper cut and a gunshot wound, you may not realize it. Be advised you might be causing…

Surely it matters the extent of the harm, though? If I'm doing home wiring, it is not at all helpful to know "this could result in a slight tingle or kill you and burn your house down."

Ambiguity means I can wave off your complaints because clearly what you're complaining about is a hangnail. Ambiguity means I can punish you brutally, because how dare you not take my car crash seriously.

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

#496

Post by choeger »

Ain't it cultural appropriation to insist on the slavery-connotated meaning of "master"? In central Europe, "master" has the connotation of having successfully learned ("mastered") a craft, cue. German "Meister".

Also, what degree does one get in Stanford after a BSc?

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

#497

Post by rendall »

zumu wrote: post #293
rendall wrote: post #47

I heard a theory that woke is actually a class marker of manners, indicating that someone has the time and privilege to track the constantly shifting, baroque signals of what is and is not acceptable to say during any given season. If someone were to make that case, this could be evidence in favor.

I always considered it ageist. Gen-X and above who have been using terms like "guys" since they were subversive are now targeted and made unwelcome. Younger "folks" meanwhile are fresh from the birth place of PC terminology--American universities--and therefore on the level by default.

That's an interesting perspective. This ageism makes me think of elderly people (both Black and white) in the 80s who could not seem to stop using the term "colored" to refer to Black people. It was the polite term when they were young and it was hard for them to adjust to Black, which had been up to then an outrageously rude term. I just dismissed them as racist, but thinking back, the people who used it otherwise expressed no animosity in their hearts. Ironic that things have come full circle today and the polite term is "people of color".

To be fair to the woke, sincerely, their hearts really are in the right place generally speaking.They are trying out the ancient idea that language changes thought, and if people speak only correctly they will think only correctly. Of course, it never has worked, will never work, and introduces bad unintended consequences, but the motivation is kind at core.

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

#498

Post by kodah »

3np wrote: post #457
cipheredStones wrote: post #332

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,…

Some further examples that stood out to me as being too far-fetched, fashion, and/or excessive to be part of any reasonable "Elimination of harmful language initiative" (explanations verbatim qouted from TFA): > abusive relationship (The relationship doesn't commit abuse. A person does, so it is important to make that fact clear.) > rule of thumb (Although no written record exists today, this phrase is attributed to…

> rule of thumb (Although no written record exists today, this phrase is attributed to an old British law that allowed men to beat their wives with sticks no wider than their thumb.)

This is a myth: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb

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

#499

Post by coffeeblack »

testfoobar wrote: post #258

They apparently spider and scan their own websites for "harmful" language: I just find this wild. How and when did language itself become so dangerous to this degree? Along with most adults in my social circle, I care and think about my health, my family, my friends, my work, my dog, my environment, my community, etc. I could not give a flying fuck about language policing. Language isn't going to protect me on my bik…

Language policing is a great tool to control society. There is always some “flaw” in your language. So you have always something for people to “struggle session” about, in order to become better communi… I mean woke. Ideologies based of group identity have been using this since the early days.

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

#500

Post by Ste_Evans »

thomasahle wrote: post #408
cipheredStones wrote: post #332

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,…

> Indian summer | late summer | This term infers that Indigenous people are chronically late. While it may be innocently used to describe a beautiful time of year, it could have an unintended negative impact on those who hear it. This one was surprising to me. I always assumed Indian summer was about summer in India lasting longer. Apparently it really is about an American phenomenon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN