I feel harmed by the use of the word Stanford. I sincerely hope those behind this initiative will understand this and change the name of the school to something which does not cause me concern, anxiety and fear.
Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
741–750 of 1001 posts
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#742Toxic masculinity and patriarchy are unsurprisingly not on the list.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#743I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
> I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". If you don't feel uncomfortable for any of these words or phrases, then consider yourself fortunate; it does not apply to you. But don't dismiss it because you're not offended for any of the words, just be fortunate it's not a problem you have.
Are you personally offended by any of these words (except the ones that are obvious slurs, I mean)? I would love to hear a first person account, since they seem to be absent from this discussion.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#744If Stanford was supposed to the beacon of knowledge it sounds like they decided to turn off the lights. Utterly ridiculous.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#745Some of these suggestions are so euphemistic I wouldn't necessarily know what someone using them is trying to say... Plenty of cases where the client isn't actually the user, plenty of cases where saying something is "surprising" doesn't give the same subtext as saying something is "insane..." and that's just scratching the surface. GF is 100% Mexican descent, first gen US citizen, w/ advanced degree and she despises…
I'll never forget how a Mexican on Twitter replied to those who use "Latinx": "Fuck off, pendejx." Your girlfriend's attitude generally reflects those of Hispanics in the US, most of whom prefer to be referred to as "Hispanic". The rationale behind Latinx is that it covers both Latino and Latina, while also acknowledging the trans/nonbinary/genderqueer contingent. But I think the term "Hispanic" covers everybody as w…
> The rationale behind Latinx is that it covers both Latino and Latina
The real rationale is one of imperialism: everyone should use a non gendered language. Like English, things would be so much more simple if everyone used English.
So going for latinx to erase part of a gendered language is a sneaky first attack on this language.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#746It's pretty remarkable that this conflates: - Well-known slurs like "Jewed" - Outdated, now-offensive terms like "hermaphrodite" - Touchy metaphorical language like "slave replica" - Gendered terms that if you're being assiduous you probably want to avoid, like "manpower" - Words that have long since lost any stigmatizing meaning by virtue of the original use being so ancient ("lame", "dumb", "stupid") - Words that,…
Surely “American” is the most absurd. Literally no one is offended that people in the United States of America are referred to as American, even if there are 42 other countries in the Americas. The technical fact is it’s correct - anyone in the americas could be called an American correctly. But only one has “America” in the country name. But by including this it sparks a patriotic and nationalist response in most Am…
You are wrong. I'm from South America, and the "American" thing is an issue for many people. In Spanish, we don't even call Americans "Americanos" but "Estado Unidenses". Many people joke when Americans say they are Americans by answering, "yeah, me too." I couldn't care less especially because I know the difference between America and "The Americas" but many people don't
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#747I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
My issue with the list is that we're increasing the harm associated with the words in the list. If we perpetuate the story that people are harmed, and introduce new harmful associations that most people don't have, then we're broadening the blast radius ( oh sorry sphere of effect ). The stories we tell ourselves matter, and I don't see why everyone has to tell the most pessimistic, helpless story possible when these…
This is the biggest issue with this list in my opinion. We are teaching kids to be offended by things they wouldn't think twice about.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#748I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
Some of them are deliberate slurs but most of them are just colourful language. This list is 95% absolutely ridiculous and I’m what you’d probably consider a proponent of social justice. It’s deeply funny, but also tragic because while there should be an attempt to make language inclusive, lists like this make the movement look like a joke.
The movement is a joke. The very idea of "making language inclusive" is so full of hipocracy, contradiction, the desire to control others, there is no "good" version of it. It's possible to treat others with respect naturally without self censoring or censoring others. That's not what these movements are about, they're the opposite of inclusive and respectful, in any form.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#749I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
My issue with the list is that we're increasing the harm associated with the words in the list. If we perpetuate the story that people are harmed, and introduce new harmful associations that most people don't have, then we're broadening the blast radius ( oh sorry sphere of effect ). The stories we tell ourselves matter, and I don't see why everyone has to tell the most pessimistic, helpless story possible when these…
There's a lot of silliness in college that goes away when you get your first job and have to take on more consequential and realistic priorities.
We've had bubble over the past 20 years where big tech companies and news organizations have indulged the silliness internally to reduce friction for the graduates they hire but that is drying up with the economic downturn. We're reverting to the mean.
Re: Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative
#750I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". This is what's known in the sports world as "flopping" - feigning an injury to elicit a penalty on the other team. Except academia has taken it even further. You don't even need to pretend that you're the one injured. You can make up an imaginary person and pretend they are injur…
> I reject the notion that anyone hearing or reading a word from this list could possibly experience anything properly categorized as "harm". If you don't feel uncomfortable for any of these words or phrases, then consider yourself fortunate; it does not apply to you. But don't dismiss it because you're not offended for any of the words, just be fortunate it's not a problem you have.
I had a bottom 0.01%(probably lower) childhood (don't ask.)
This list is in itself offensive. Multiple entries try to force words into negative territory. This includes words previously used to be inclusive and presumably words from this list of "alternatives" will be in a future list.
People, all people, need to stop being offended on "my behalf." Especially people with a job that entitles them to work on something full of self-realizable hypocrisies like: "Additionally, one can never know what may or may not trigger a particular person."
For those curious: I have worked all my life to see my "off-center brain chemistry" in a positive light. I do not under any circumstances want some person telling me OCD is offensive.
Take half your paycheck and save some lives. Have a reason to actually feel good about yourself.