Originally posted by dstaubsauger
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Richard Stallman Announces GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Posthow about just refer to 'them' by their name
or is that fluid as well?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
Don't confuse sex with gender. Gender is a term coined by one of those -ology streams, akin to astrology and other bogus 'science'.
That sometimes get's "corrected" a bit with puberty. but there is a line in the middle and it may vary how much far right or left you are from that middle line, but you are on one site or the other site and there are no 3rd sites.
I mean there are some people that are born with both genitals and some might not been operated as babies, but that are very few, but that are seldom the people that want a sepereate gender pronome or go transgender and that are very low numbers. The most of this trangender are people that get born with a brain that differs from their bodies.
In a partial sense they are Woman the part that matters, their brain. But again even most of them want not a gender pronome "alien" they want to be seen as members of the 2 genders at least to some extend. (replace sex with gender if it fits better sorry not used to differenciate there that much, I don't see a big difference, for me a brain has a sex, and a body has a sex, that's it nurture is irrelevant on that question).
Comment
-
Originally posted by dstaubsauger View PostI literally suggested that in the post you replied to.
Originally posted by dstaubsauger View Postand that is again the same kind of "joke" that, when we extract it from the sarcasm, has a punchline that goes "haha look at those mentally ill idiots they're dumb". one of the reasons that some people would argue that a Code of Conduct is a good thing. I'm not saying this because i was offended (i'm not), i'm just trying to explain why others might be.
You have just provided us with a great example of why this trash is so dangerous.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
I am supportive of Stallmans approach as well, completely reasonable and is a good balance. I was critical of the Code of Conduct adopted by Linux because of the potential that such powers it creates would be administered in a corrupt manner and the draconian type of atmosphere it can lead to. I completely agree that people should be polite and considerate to one another and avoid insensitive and hurtful remarks. The problem is potential for corruption. The The idea of guidelines is something that alleviates concerns while encouraging people to be welcoming and considerate.Last edited by jpg44; 23 October 2018, 09:24 PM.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by dstaubsauger View PostWell, that's why they are attempting to change language. English as well as other modern languages developed during a millennia-long process, and their current form reflects changes that society made along the way (e.g. "miss", "mademoiselle" etc going out of fashion somewhat recently). Current language "versions" do not reflect nonbinary people's subjective reality, and so they now try to fix that (because for the first time in probably a very long time in history, it's (somewhat) ok to publicly talk about being transgender/whatever). Practically speaking, i don't expect we'll settle on 80 different pronouns in the long term (including their correct reflective and possessive forms), because that would be kind of impractical, and therefore i don't "fear" it.
...
Just kidding.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
Probably because up until this point in human history software projects have progressed fine without such authoritarian rules designed to shut down discussion when you disagree. Did Linux (and Freebsd also) just suddenly become dysfunctional & now requires a long list of stupid rules to make it function again or did the pc brigade just add another notch to their belt in their 'struggle' for social realignment?
Perhaps people have no real world experience coming from a schooling system that treats everyone as winners, but, guess what, people aren't all winners, we don't always get our own way and you need to be able to resolve conflict other than referring to a set of rules to shut down disagreement. Nanny-state nonsense.
If you think a CoC or guidelines are authoritarian, you might need to pickup a history book or look at the news.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by audir8 View Post
Or a genuine attempt at encouraging more diversity maybe? By people who have tried to work on such matters? No, I don't expect whining without evidence to stop.
Originally posted by audir8 View Post
If you think a CoC or guidelines are authoritarian, you might need to pickup a history book or look at the news.
And you might want to check a dictionary... coc are by their contents authoritarian - do what we say or be banned.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post
What situation previously excluded 'diversity'. Proof? I'll answer that, there is none. Some agitate for this & others capitulate; it's how PC works. This is because the very act of asking about someone's gender violates half these coc!! It's farcical.
Oh dear, I'm micro-insulted by your micro-aggressive insinuation that I'm ignorant. I need to check which clause in the coc your comment falls under to start my outrage & shut down discussion.
And you might want to check a dictionary... coc are by their contents authoritarian - do what we say or be banned.
"1. I read that the fraction of women in the free software community overall is around 3%, whereas in the software field overall it is over 10%."
A CoC can be changed by the community or the governing board, I don't think this qualifies as authoritarian. I checked the dictionary. You're free to try and change the structure of a community, or leave.
Do try to reply without saying PC.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment