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

I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

blogsession.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 104 posts

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#81

Post by 67726e »

jaachan wrote: post #78
67726e wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, I don't really see using "he" as sexist. It's just the English language. From Merriam-Webster: 1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women 2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex I can understand an argument that the author of the comment said "he" because of some assumption that anyone doing stats must be a man. Howe…

If you see "he" everywhere, you assume being a man is the standard, and being a woman is somehow not applicable. This is a subtle affect that, if applied to everything, will change your perspective on the world. And it's not that hard to just use "they" instead.

> If you see "he" everywhere, you assume being a man is the standard, and being a woman is somehow not applicable.

I don't quite follow. Are you saying that, by using "he" everywhere, I'm going to subconsciously exclude women?

> And it's not that hard to just use "they" instead

I cannot speak for anyone but myself but, being a native English speaker, using "they" to refer to a single person sounds wrong. I understand the tendency to use it given the lack of a gender-neutral singular pronoun but it doesn't change how grammatically incorrect it sounds to me.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#82

Post by moocowduckquack »

67726e wrote: post #79
moocowduckquack wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an astoundingly crap argument. You are saying that using he as a default isn't sexist because it is a default. However saying that a default position is a default position tells us very little indeed and nothing whatsoever about if that default position is sexist.

Perhaps we're coming at the situation from different viewpoints. You appear to be judging the situation based off of how "he" came to be a default while I'm coming at the situation from the viewpoint of intentions. Honestly, I caught myself using "he" several times writing this response but went back and "refactored" my response. Does the fact that I use "he" automatically make me a sexist? No. That's just how everyo…

Honestly, I caught myself using "he" several times writing this response but went back and "refactored" my response.

But you didn't use the word she in any of your response, so how could have you have needed to refactor anything from he? You might make at least some effort to keep your story straight from one sentence to the next. Honestly.

Also, you have a sexist learned behaviour as part of your language, you know about this and can decide yourself if it is worth giving a shit about. Learning the behaviour doesn't make you sexist, but not giving a shit about it might.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#83

Post by moocowduckquack »

67726e wrote: post #81
jaachan wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you see "he" everywhere, you assume being a man is the standard, and being a woman is somehow not applicable. This is a subtle affect that, if applied to everything, will change your perspective on the world. And it's not that hard to just use "they" instead.

> If you see "he" everywhere, you assume being a man is the standard, and being a woman is somehow not applicable. I don't quite follow. Are you saying that, by using "he" everywhere, I'm going to subconsciously exclude women? > And it's not that hard to just use "they" instead I cannot speak for anyone but myself but, being a native English speaker, using "they" to refer to a single person sounds wrong. I understand…

using "they" to refer to a single person sounds wrong

Yeah, well the person you are replying to, they may disagree.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#84

Post by sardonicbryan »

minimax wrote: post #65

It's interesting to see Birmingham in 8th place given that it's the 2nd largest city in the United Kingdom. It would be weird if you saw a similar list of American cities and Los Angeles came that far down.

A city like Phoenix (6), Jacksonville (12) or Columbus (15) would be a good analogue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by...

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#85

Post by 67726e »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #83
67726e wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you see "he" everywhere, you assume being a man is the standard, and being a woman is somehow not applicable. I don't quite follow. Are you saying that, by using "he" everywhere, I'm going to subconsciously exclude women? > And it's not that hard to just use "they" instead I cannot speak for anyone but myself but, being a native English speaker, using "they" to refer to a single person sounds wrong. I understand…

using "they" to refer to a single person sounds wrong Yeah, well the person you are replying to, they may disagree.

The use of "they" to refer to one person is incorrect. Maybe things have changed since I was in school, though I'm 20 so I doubt it, but it was never correct to use "they" instead of "he" or "she". The reason it sounds wrong is because it is wrong.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#86

Post by mkr-hn »

It's reasonable that most people are assuming this is yet another boring jab at the ignorance that's somehow unique to us.

I could do the same and ask people to name a city in Georgia other than Atlanta, Athens, or Savannah. A lot of people won't be able to do that. I don't think anyone in Bogart or Carl is going to lose sleep over it, and I don't think it would tell you anything about the people surveyed.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#87

Post by 67726e »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #82
67726e wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps we're coming at the situation from different viewpoints. You appear to be judging the situation based off of how "he" came to be a default while I'm coming at the situation from the viewpoint of intentions. Honestly, I caught myself using "he" several times writing this response but went back and "refactored" my response. Does the fact that I use "he" automatically make me a sexist? No. That's just how everyo…

Honestly, I caught myself using "he" several times writing this response but went back and "refactored" my response. But you didn't use the word she in any of your response, so how could have you have needed to refactor anything from he? You might make at least some effort to keep your story straight from one sentence to the next. Honestly. Also, you have a sexist learned behaviour as part of your language, you know…

> But you didn't use the word she in any of your response, so how could have you have needed to refactor anything from he? You might make at least some effort to keep your story straight from one sentence to the next. Honestly.

I refactored all usages of "he" to be completely neutral. There is no "he" or "she" being used, except when referencing the word itself. Perhaps you should think critically before insinuating someone else is a liar. Honestly.

> Also, you have a sexist learned behaviour as part of your language, you know about this and can decide yourself if it is worth giving a shit about. Learning the behaviour doesn't make you sexist, but not giving a shit about it might.

I guess I must be a sexist since I use the word "he" by default since my native tongue doesn't have a gender neutral singular pronoun. Sorry for being a lazy bastard and taking the "he" shortcut instead of the other linguistically cumbersome routes English offers to be gender neutral and thus not an irredeemable sexist.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#88

Post by coldtea »

jacques_chester wrote: post #73
coldtea wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, compared to what Australians? They are similarly insular. A better comparison would be with Europeans. The things he mentions as extremely insightful stuff people wouldn't know, e.g Zaire, Congo, Republic of the Congo, the civil war there, etc are all quite common knowledge.

If there was a way to lay a wager on this, I would bet you a thousand Euros that less than 10% of a randomly-selected sample of Europeans would be able to correctly identify that 1. Zaire changed its name to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2. where the DRC is, 3. that it is distinct from the RoC, 4. that there has been a civil war and 5. how many people have died in it.

Oh, I agree with that: less than 10% (with variatons from country to country). Still plenty though, and (I'd say) more than would know the same thing in the states.

As for knowing just simple facts about DRC, like where it is located and having a vague idea of it's past with Belgium etc, the percentage would be quite higher.

Re: I Asked 1000 Americans to Name a British City Other Than London

#90

Post by mkr-hn »

coldtea wrote: post #64
kghose wrote: post #24

I don't know what the author's real motives were (Was it really to beat on the theme that 'Americans are ignorant?), but I personally think this is a good exercise to humble yourself - 'My country/city is not as important as I think it is'. Frankly, Britain is not as important as it once was and hasn't been for half a century. And it's not particularly notable. You would have better luck with Germany, France, Greece,…

> I don't know what the author's real motives were (Was it really to beat on the theme that 'Americans are ignorant?), but I personally think this is a good exercise to humble yourself - 'My country/city is not as important as I think it is'. Defensive much? For one it proves they are quite ignorant on geography. Britain might not be as important, but it's as well known a country as they come. They would fair even wo…

Most Americans care a great deal about what happens in other countries, but Europe, the middle east, and the rest of Asia are a long way from the drug war on the border or economic tensions with countries in south and central America. It's easy to forget that the planet is very big, and we're very far away from your local concerns.

Brazil and Alberta are more urgent interests for me than the debt crisis in Greece. That doesn't mean I don't care about what's happening over there, but I have to prioritize. There are over 100 countries and at least as many things worth knowing in each.

Post reply on HN