61–70 of 72 posts
None of this is new despite everyone's insistence that it is. We learned in letter-writing that if you don't know who might read it, then you start with "To whom it may concern:"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment breaks the site guidelines badly. Ideological flamebait, name-calling, and (especially) personal attacks will get you banned here. We've had to warn you before. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting, which means editing out any swipes that make it into your comments? On the other hand, I just looked at your recent comment history and…
You are slightly improving as a person. I did not expect that. To respect your personal growth, I'll retire this account. In the case example that you linked, I find it disappointing that you still do not read entire threads. The original article is a Wikipedia article with many authors. The original comment, which critiques either Wikipedia or Baumol & Bowen's original study, includes the summary: > So - this is sim…
I did miss that parent comment, but I don't see how this makes much difference. What you wrote was still a swipe.
Hey everyone, OP here. I know this can be a somewhat controversial topic, so I'm keen to hear your perspectives on inclusive language and inclusion in general. Thanks for stumbling upon my post :)
The webster dictionary literally says: Guys - PERSON —used in plural to refer to the members of a group regardless of sex.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Saying "guys" in no way affects someone's safety. It's potentially rude maybe if someone showed displeasure with the phrase yet you persist, but no threat of harm comes from it.
Well that's easy for you to say. The whole point of political correctness is not to assume that no one can get offended, but to avoid certain types of speech which have either been proven to be offensive or where society has agreed upon that they might be offensive in some circumstances.
And PC can backfire. Making a point of not using a PC-speak word, when the PC word is clumsy or silly, makes the not-PC-speak word a very effective cultural code word to those who want to reinforce the very things the PC police are trying to change.
And arguing over words has almost zero possibility of any positive impact. There have been a few exceptions (say, for example, the N-word [no, no, don’t say the N-word]).
/u/tomquirk - thanks so kindly for posting this. As a trans woman in IT I couldn’t appreciate this post more at this time, nor do I think it’s ever been more relevant. Might I suggest you consider adding - and I put here for HN’s convenience as well — a list of potential great alternatives? :) ‘Hey folks’ ‘Hey everyone’ ‘Hey y’all’ ‘Hey team:’ Even just ‘Hey -‘ I also like ‘Good morning’, ‘Good afternoon’, ‘Good even…
I'm so glad you feel this way! And thanks for your suggestion. I'll definitely do a follow-up post on good alternatives to commonly used non-inclusive phrases. This tweet by the Women in Tech SEO community covers some great alternatives to "guys" - https://twitter.com/techseowomen/status/1317545475021701126 reply
Also no one over the age of 50 should be seen topless in public or ever refer to a group of people as “peeps”, “fam”, “party people” or “superstars”.
Did this community mean to be so Ageist and Nativist. (See how hard this is.)
I coached girls recreation basketball and found it weird (after a lifetime of playing basketball) to say "guard your man" or "find your man" etc. "guard your woman" and "guard your girl" also didn't "sound right" although that could be as a result of my bias.
Thanks all y’all for y’all. I’m taking y’all. I love y’all. Because “y’all” is the best, most inclusive second-person, plural pronoun in the English-speaking world. Thank you, the South. What an ally. — Hannah Gadsby, Douglas
Except y'all can be dismissive or insulting depending upon context. Let's go y'all (idiots)!
I have never thought/heard of it that way? Could you provide some context?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well that's easy for you to say. The whole point of political correctness is not to assume that no one can get offended, but to avoid certain types of speech which have either been proven to be offensive or where society has agreed upon that they might be offensive in some circumstances.
Define “society”. And define “offensive”, in particular to whom is it offensive and how offended are they. And who makes these definitions and why should we trust them to do it properly, e.g. scientifically? Without these definitions and clarifications, your statement lacks persuasive power. And PC can backfire. Making a point of not using a PC-speak word, when the PC word is clumsy or silly, makes the not-PC-speak w…
I will refer you to the wikipedia articles about political correctness and gender-neutral language as they probably do a much better job of defining the matter than I would.
I understand that you feel like "someone" making these definitions should have some kind of authority to be trustworthy. However, what happens is that someone makes a claim and then a large portion of society agrees. This is what gives them authority. And that is just how change is done usually in the democratic process. For example, at some point someone decided that women should vote and large portion of society agreed. And now, a few years later, we live in a society were women voters are the most normal thing you can think of.
> And arguing over words has almost zero possibility of any positive impact.
You just say that but you don't cite any scientific sources?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except y'all can be dismissive or insulting depending upon context. Let's go y'all (idiots)!
> Let's go y'all (idiots)! I have never thought/heard of it that way? Could you provide some context?
When a member of a group says y'all to the group it is warm.
When an outsider says y'all to a group it can be pejorative.
Compare the following in both senses: "Let's get it together y'all!"
In the first sense, it is a rallying cry. In the second sense, the speaker may think you aren't trying hard enough. There, "y'all" was added only to put some stank on the sentence.
The pejorative may be limited to the end of the sentence.
As in: Think! vs Think Y'all!
He bury's the lede until the penultimate paragraph: > I built a Slack app to help. AllyBot will suggest inclusive alternatives to over 400 non-inclusive phrases to team members. https://allybot.io/#pricing