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

Privilege is bad grammar

tadaima.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 292 posts

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#221

Post by spiritplumber »

StevenWaterman wrote: post #4

This is almost textbook countersignalling. The same as: - Signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else to make up for the fact I'm less professional in other ways - No signalling: I dress like everyone else because I am like everyone else - Countersignalling: I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here

I'm just glad ties are gone. I used to have it in my consulting contract that I would wear a tie for a maximum of x hours for the duration of the project, so choose them well. It used to be a point of negotiation, now nobody cares anymore.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#222

Post by coldtea »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #170
coldtea wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and I don’t need to use dress anymore to get the access I want and need. The privilege in that, contrasted with the lack of privilege for those in the inverse situation, is what's sinister.

> privilege in that, contrasted with the lack of privilege for those in the inverse situation, is what's sinister To folks who code any advantage as sinister, sure. I for one like living in a town that saves seats for locals over tourists.

Being a tourist is different to being poor or underpriveleged, in precisely that it's a privileged thing.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#223

Post by coldtea »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #193
simon666 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah similarly we can make a few distinctions here: 1) Intended signal, true 2) Unintended signal, but true 3) Unintended signal, but false (Sure, 1' intended but false; though not really important here) When (1) obtains we can describe this situation as one where sender and received coordinate on a message. When (2) obtains we can say the sender acted in a way that indicative of some fact or other and the received i…

Also remember that each recipient of the signal will have their own reaction to it. What signals professional competence to one person can signal lickspittle corporate toadying to another.

Yes, but in aggregate, most people (or most groups of people) will arrive at the same conclusion for the same signal.

Else signals and signalling wouldn't be a thing and people wouldn't care for them, their reception would be a random scatter plot.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#224

Post by saghm »

WalterBright wrote: post #187
saghm wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I kinda wish the airlines would have a dress code What? Why? Are you really that bothered by other people wearing stuff that you wouldn't personally want to wear? I can't even imagine going through life with strong feelings about how other people should dress; it legitimately sounds exhausting.

Would you go to a wedding dressed like a slob? Would you go to an elegant restaurant in sweats? If you go to pick up your date, and she opens the door wearing track shorts and a worn t-shirt, how would you feel? When I'd pick up my date, and she had obviously spent a lot of time on her appearance, it'd make me feel like a million bucks.

When I got married, my spouse and I told people to wear whatever they wanted because we didn't really care. I also never cared at all about what we were wearing on our dates because what I enjoy about spending time with people is not seeing them present themselves in a way that I tell them to. I would go to a restaurant in sweats if I were allowed to.

I fundamentally do not understand what reason everyone else should have to dress to please you compared to themselves. Seeing everyone else as props to fit your preferred aesthetic rather than people who's desires about their own appearances are more important than what you want them to look like just seems selfish to me.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#225

Post by blahaj »

mempko wrote: post #205
snickerer wrote: post #95

Bad grammar is disrespect. Underlings have to swallow that disrespect. It is just a power game. The next level is simply to insult everyone, and everyone will still remain submissive.

Except they don't just talk this way with underlings but everyone including their peers.

I think the key is whether they expect their underlings to be more formal or if it actually goes both ways.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#226

Post by kingofmen »

This is not my experience at all. I have never received an informal email like this from a manager; even chat threads at my job are generally correctly spelled, grammatical, and fully professional. Maybe I'm not talking to sufficiently exalted leadership?

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#228

Post by wakawaka28 »

StevenWaterman wrote: post #4

This is almost textbook countersignalling. The same as: - Signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else to make up for the fact I'm less professional in other ways - No signalling: I dress like everyone else because I am like everyone else - Countersignalling: I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here

Everybody is signalling, especially the people who think they aren't. We could sit here all day and game out all the possible interpretations that could be made from anyone's appearance, with respect to who they actually are, and it won't change much.

My take on it all: Programmers and other hot shot types often eschew formalities and conventions for dress and such, as a way of asserting status. "I'm professional and important enough to assert that my preferences supersede the ordinary" is what they want to signal. Of course, some are just childish enough to insist that dress codes don't matter in the slightest, and everyone must put up with their goofy graphic t-shirts. Others are willing to tolerate that stuff because most programmers are not customer-facing. But they still look like adult children when they insist on that crap.

Re: Privilege is bad grammar

#229

Post by thrance »

renewiltord wrote: post #152
thrance wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What else should you call something that is only socially acceptable for a certain group of people to do? I understand word fatigue, but it feels very adequately used here.

[flagged]

Why are you getting so irrationally angry at a word use? You are making a fool of yourself, again.
Post reply on HN