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

221–230 of 1001 posts

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

#221

Post by School-Cotton »

woooooo wrote: post #84
nfw2 wrote: post #77

The inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group w…

The kicker for me is if we want to anglicize Spanish because we know better than them... we could just say Latin! It's already a word! But it doesn't come with ingroup signaling and so here we are..

In my understanding “Latin” also includes people from Latin Europe, (France, Italy, Spain, etc.), so it’s a bit less precise.

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

#222

Post by School-Cotton »

somewhereoutth wrote: post #196
nfw2 wrote: post #77

The inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group w…

Furthermore, Hispanic != Latino (or even Latinx) Specifically, Hispanic relates to Spain and the Spanish speaking world, whereas Latino indicates Latin America which includes Brazil, but not Portugal.

In the context of US immigrant groups they’re almost the same, as there are huge amounts of Mexicans, Central Americans, Cubans, Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and their descendants, but relatively few people from Spain, Portugal, or Brazil.

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

#223

Post by School-Cotton »

oehtXRwMkIs wrote: post #129

Some are obvious and others surprising to me, but I'm very glad they mention the way "American" is used in the US. It always ticked me off but I never felt like I could mention it due to how widespread it is. Now I have somewhere to point to if I want to bring it up, kind of like how French people can point to the DGLFLF if someone uses the term nègre nowadays.

In English (not just in the US), “American” means someone or something from the USA. Yes, it originally meant something different, but the meanings of words drift over time in all languages.

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

#224

Post by [deleted] »

pannSun wrote: post #6

> Instead of "blind review", consider using "anonymous review". Context: Unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture. But.. disability is abnormal and negative? How tortured of a definition of 'normal' must one use to make blindness normal? And I suspect if the author of that sentence were offered, say, $100,000 to undergo a painless but irreversible blin…

[deleted]

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

#225

Post by hnarn »

Can someone please steelman the argument that language can be harmful, because I just don’t get it.

There’s physical and psychological harm, clearly it’s not physical so it’s saying that people are being harmed in a psychological way from a certain type of language.

Ok, so are they developing disorders, or what kind of harm are we talking about? My understanding is that we’re talking about language that causes offense, discomfort, things of that nature.

So if you’re going to pursue this line of thought, where do you draw the line? Whose discomfort do you take into account, what offense is enough?

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

#226

Post by joenot443 »

kkoncevicius wrote: post #7

I read though the suggestions. So "trigger warning" is now problematic and the proper alternative is "content note". And "Preferred pronouns" is hate speech, because you imply that pronouns are merely a preference, as if the person can choose their identity. Godspeed.

I wonder if “trigger warning” has been labeled offensive because those doing the labeling have realized it’s become a joke, almost pejorative term in the eyes of the rest of the world. I think 80% of the time when I hear someone use the phrase these days, it’s through some layer of satire.

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

#228

Post by AnnualDegree99 »

netika wrote: post #227
8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #25

Are humans no longer capable of recognizing context? How is "he mastered the material in the lecture" invoking centuries of internalized slavery and causing harm in the process?

Moreso, how the hell would they call MSc graduates?

"main of Science" is my best guess

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

#229

Post by 4AoZqrH2fsk5UB »

Looking at it from a different angle, I don’t like the more wordy suggestions.

> convict…person who is/was incarcerated

> senile…person suffering from senility

Before I hit send I try to make my writing clear, concise, and full of meaning. I do it in the hope that the folks on the other end read and understand me.

Swapping one term for a slightly longer one won’t be a breaking point, but sentences like:

> I went to visit the incarcerated person suffering from senility

build up cruft that you don’t get with something shorter.

> I went to visit the senile convict.

Maybe they should punctuate the article as Orwell did in his rules for writing:

> Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous

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

#230

Post by Pelayu »

nfw2 wrote: post #77

The inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group w…

The thing is though, in Spanish, the masculine form of a noun already also takes the duty of neuter form. E.g. “Latinos” already refers to a general group of people, regardless of gender. It doesn’t mean a group of only men.
Post reply on HN