Live data from Hacker News

Banning words won’t make the world more just

theatlantic.com

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been told in no uncertain terms that the word “minority” is offensive, as it has come to have pejorative use. No alternative term was suggested, rather that one should refer to specific groups of people with their specific terms, and never generalise. Additionally, “white knight” I have also been told off for, for the reasons you might expect. In both of these cases (actually, almost every case I can think of)…

I feel like, Materially Unencumbered Birth Gives of Reduced Melanin, is approaching an actual usable acronym for the typical pejorative, Karen. I bet chatgpt could bridge the gap

I don't see white women standing out in their behaviour, but they sure will always remain an acceptable group to beat up on without losing your progressive or otherwise credentials.

Karen at this point is always pejorative and pretty much just not well hidden sexism at best.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Hispanic American, I very regularly tell people I am Latino and that Latinx is incredibly offensive to my heritage. I'm in my 30s and the younger people I know also find it offensive.

Out of curiosity, more or less offensive than referring to you as Latina?

If it's blissful ignorance where someone doesn't know the how gendered pronouns work, that's not a problem. If it's someone who is intentionally adding an X to the end because of some perceived gender nonsense, then that's offensive.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#774
post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Particularly because I'm not sure I've ever come across a case in my life when a speaker or writer wanted to include people from both continents as a single group. That's the thing: for many people, it's a single continent, called just "America", which can be further subdivided into "North America", "Central America", and "South America" (but these three are not continents, they're subdivisions within a single cont…

Do these people also believe in a single continent called “Eurasia”? Hell those are mostly on the same plate, which can’t be said for the Americas.

> Do these people also believe in a single continent called “Eurasia”?

It's the traditional six-continent model (America, Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia, Antarctica), which according to https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continente is the model taught in school in many places, including Italy, Spain, Portugal, and all over Latin America. So no, "these people" (which includes nearly all of America outside the USA and Canada) have learned about Europe and Asia as two separate continents.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#775
post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For my partner's entire pregnancy, our providers only referred to "birthing people" Calling my wife a "birthing person" just made her feel like some gross vessel for having a baby. We purposefully chose providers that didn't use that language. "Chestfeeding" is another one that's cropping up and makes zero sense. Men have breasts, so breastfeeding is already gender-neutral. But it's seen as female-centric so out th…

I was kind of with you, birthing person does sound pretty obstruse. But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle. There are some uses radfems get super upset about that I find useful, though. Like "people with cervixes" if you are asking for cervical cancer screenings. Because increasingly, that affects people who do not feel spoken to if you use the word woman and this adds clarity to wh…

If it only takes a simple sentence to set you off. You should be careful how much you’re reading into peoples language. The worlds not filled with facists in disguise. Look at people that way and you’ll see it everywhere. It will drive you mad.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#776

The Sierra Club guide is hilarious: https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/default/files/sce-authors/u... . > People of color” has in the past served as a collective term for people who are not white. A preferred term today is “BIPOC” referring to Black, Indigenous and people of color, which provides a unifying term for ease of use while still acknowledging the reality that Black and Indigenous people in the United States…

My opinion is the motivation behind “BIPOC” is to exclude Asians, who are rarely considered as minorities due to their economic and academic success.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#777
post #363

What was it, 10 to 20 years ago, people started to be noticeably nervous when they were coming near a description of my disability. It used to be so simple. I am 100% blind, and guess what, I prefer the term blind because it is pretty descriptive and relatively short. But all of a sudden, people external to the community started to fumble around with "visually challenged", and all the nonsense variations of that in m…

[deleted]

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. the embryo/fetus inside the mother's body is not the mother's body. 2. it is not the mother's body, but it's completely dependent on it to live. 3. parents have and have to have natural responsibility over their offspring. 4. the society establishment (both secular and religious) are there to protect society's norm. 5. not killing innocent humans is a social norm. 6. the embryo/fetus is a human. 7. saying that som…

I'm unsure if you're joking, so I'll bite: if 6 is true (a fetus is a human), then is a zygote a human? Can a human be a single cell? Of course not.

most of the times they don't argue about killing single cells, but an undisputedly multicellular fetus with human DNA. the conceived egg cell is already a new member of the given species. why? has it to be of a species? if yes, which one other than human? if no, when this "growing clump of cells" become an organization separate from its host? i don't know other event of a pregnancy which more clearly shows that here is something new which was not there before. "Can a human be a single cell?" can it be 2? or 3? …

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#779
post #363

What was it, 10 to 20 years ago, people started to be noticeably nervous when they were coming near a description of my disability. It used to be so simple. I am 100% blind, and guess what, I prefer the term blind because it is pretty descriptive and relatively short. But all of a sudden, people external to the community started to fumble around with "visually challenged", and all the nonsense variations of that in m…

i used to live on the coast and moved to a midwest state. i did it because property is cheaper in the midwest and also i thought it would be refreshing to get a break from coastal culture. i moved to the midwest but a metro area in the midwest, not a rural community. the state is red, we have constitutional carry and we have stand your ground rather than duty to retreat.

i have gotten into developing real estate in this place and i have had a lot of theft. naturally, i thought that because the state is red, constitutional carry and stand your ground i would be able to confront someone committing a crime. i thought that if that person attacked me, i would be well within my rights to defend myself. one day i did catch someone trespassing, looking for something to steal. i did confront him and he did try to attack me. luckily, drawing my gun was enough to make him change his mind. it was a whole incident. and what happened next shocked me to my core and changed my understanding of what is going on in this country. the police treated me like the criminal. they didnt charge me but they were really mean and aggressive with me, as if i were not the victim of a crime, and they lied to me. they said i should have just called and not followed the man. i said if they hadnt taken 20 fucking minutes then i wouldnt have needed to keep him in sight. i said if it takes you 20 minutes to show up to me following the guy, it would have taken you an hour to get here otherwise. and i said that the guy would have gotten away. if people follow your advice the criminals will get away every fucking time. how the fuck does that work? his response, from a midwestern cop, was that i should just let insurance cover the losses. the insanity of that statement is shocking. but not as shocking as this: people in the community didnt support me. nobody was in favor of me confronting criminals. these people, who are often victimized and stolen from, are not just apathetic about crime but look down on me because i was involved in a violent interaction. these people wont confront criminals or be associated with people who do because they dont want to reduce their social status. thats what it is, its snobbery. these people "support the police" and there are blue porch lights everywhere, and they claim to be tough on crime, but they are no different than los angeles liberals when it comes to actually confronting crime. and people wonder why we have crime in this country. its because people are fucking retarded. they have no fucking principles.

this mind virus has taken over the entire country. and its all connected. these are the same people who allow themselves to fumble over language, who bend over backwards to not call a spade a spade. people who stumble over not offending a blind person, as if it would make them less blind, are the same people who shy away from confronting crime. in both cases, there is a total lack of critical thought, a total blindness to the bigger picture.

the simple and plain fact is that society cannot be good or even exist unless everyone makes a little sacrifice every once in a while. people have to stand up to crime every once in a while or else crime will become rampant. and it has. people have to say what they think every once in a while even if it makes you look bad or else the truth, our only guiding light, will become extinguished. but all these idiots avoid any and all risk to their own wellbeing no matter whats at stake. these people wont even accept the tiny, tiny little loss of face involved in unintentionally offending someone. literally any loss of face or status, any tiny little deviation from the script, is simply too much for these people. its fucking disgraceful. everyone knows that the country has become much more crime ridden, much more seedy, much more crappy in recent times. especially when you control for technology. its cultural for sure, not economic.

and since we are on the topic, let me just say it: fumbling around when calling a black person black or a blind person blind is more insulting than not! when you dance around and fumble and so on, you are making a huge and embarrassing insinuation that the condition of the person you are referring to is problematic or undesirable. you are screaming in that persons face that you see them as less than and you are trying really hard to not portray them as such. thats what really cements these people in the category of "idiot." they are selfishly helping themselves by toeing the line and not helping anyone else despite the fact that the entire justification for that dogma is being selfless and helping others.

Re: Banning words won’t make the world more just

#780
post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once had an injury in both of my legs after a long hike. It caused my legs to be so swollen that I had very limited mobility, but I could still walk - though it probably looked very awkward. In school, children get taught that when someone looks disabled, you shouldn't look at them, because staring at them is some kind of discrimination or so. I couldn't disagree more. When I had that injury, and was kind of crip-w…

I kind of feel the euphemism treadmill is the language version of “looking away”. Blind is stark; powerful; forces me to contemplate the lack of vision - I can’t escape it. But if I start using “visually challenged” then it’s softer, sounds like a game, challenges can be overcome, this isn’t something I need to worry about.

George Carlin has a great bit on euphemisms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isMm2vF4uFs
Post reply on HN