Wake me when even elite Chinese call out and stop using the term "老外“ ("clueless foreigner whom [go the nuances] I can hold in humorous contempt and take advantage of at will").
Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
591–600 of 1001 posts
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#592It's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want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,…
> Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite"
Is there anything outdated if you talk about e.g. a hermaphroditic tree? I thought this was still the standard term in biology for species which practice sexual reproduction and normally or frequently have individuals with both kinds of reproductive organs, either simultaneously or alternately.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#593I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
Although a lot of this list seems silly, it also has slurs like "retard" and "jewed" on it, which i think are very reasonably considered offensive. I think the tarball thing is rediculous, but the opposite extreme of no words can be hurtful is also rediculous.
"It is high time someone wrote this list to finally put an end to the commonly accepted and pervasive use of the words 'retard' and 'jewed' in academia."
Does this make sense to you?
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#594Literally "trigger warning" is on this list with the note "The phrase can cause stress about what's to follow. Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person."
This is not a serious publication.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#595Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#596I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
An old tactic to discredit an opponent and suppress norms of free speech. It goes like this:
"Thing that is not violence is violence."
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#597I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
Although a lot of this list seems silly, it also has slurs like "retard" and "jewed" on it, which i think are very reasonably considered offensive. I think the tarball thing is rediculous, but the opposite extreme of no words can be hurtful is also rediculous.
At the risk of sounding pedantic or critical (it is but only in the helpful well, I assure you) -- the word 'ridiculous' comes from the Latin 'rideo' which means to laugh, which is in contemporary French 'rire', Italian 'ridere' and English 'ridicule'. It has nothing to do with the color 'red', if that helps you remember that it does not have the word 'red' in it. As well, you can associate 'rideo' with 'video'.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#598"retard (n) person with a cognitive disability, person with autism," Autism is not the same as mental retardation. That's really offensive Stanford. Shouldn't we really pinpoint exact people & groups who push for these kind of things? We need to put faces on this ideology. Who exactly is responsible for this?
The managerial class.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#599I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
An old tactic to discredit an opponent and suppress norms of free speech. It goes like this: "Thing that is not violence is violence." Voilà. You wouldn't want to endorse violence, would you?
Except many people would contend that words can be used violently. For instance the crime of 'assault' requires no physical contact -- you can assault someone by making them fear that you will batter them by using words. I would think of a better argument.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#600"You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth. Even if it's an unpleasant truth ... I don't like words that hide the truth, I don't like words that conceal reality, I don't like euphemisms, and American English is loaded with euphemisms, because Americans have a lot of trouble with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth, so they invent the kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation."
— George Carlin on Soft Language (https://youtu.be/o25I2fzFGoY)