Ardent wrote: » Anyone else experiencing this madness where they work?
Ardent wrote: » I work for an IT multinational. Today, after having spoken about IP whitelists and blacklists, I was politely informed by a colleague that I shouldn't use that terminology as it has racial connotations. Sure enough, looking at our handbook, we have a list of terms we are discouraged from using, e.g., "rule of thumb" (violent implications). I know one fella here even got pulled aside for saying that customer support folks are the "shepherds" of the customer experience. Anyone else experiencing this madness where they work?
Arghus wrote: » I don't believe you OP.
callmehal wrote: Are you just making this up? I don't believe a word. Your tall tales don't fool me. You don't work in IT.
Ardent wrote: » I work for an IT multinational. Today, after having spoken about IP whitelists and blacklists,
There is no evidence that I have seen that deems the term 'Blacklist' to be offensive; in fact it is valid computer terminology. Being blacklisted is a negative term, but that is the point of the word: Black and White are contrasting. If you need other terms then it's easy to go with 'Blocked List' but then you're left with the opposing side being an 'allowed-list' which isn't as cognitively associated with 'Blocked' as 'Black' is with 'White'. There are no racist connotations here unless you are wanting to find one; just as there is no racist connotations to being 'Blackballed', or having a 'Black book'. For some extra reference: Black and White are also used in a software testing capacity - black-box testing and white-box testing and these are perfectly acceptable and non-offensive terms.
Collie D wrote: » I’d have taken great pleasure in firing that ****.
Deleted User wrote: » It's a thing
Ardent wrote: » I work for an IT multinational. Today, after having spoken about IP whitelists and blacklists, I was politely informed by a colleague that I shouldn't use that terminology as it has racial connotations.
Ardent wrote: » Wow, when did we get so thin-skinned about a turn of phrase that's been used for hundreds of years?
Randle P. McMurphy wrote: » I can't figure out what's wrong or offensive about 'rule of thumb' or 'shepherds' Maybe somebody could enlighten me.
Ardent wrote: » Shepherd is gender specific. We prefer gender neutral language. The 'rule of thumb' has been said to derive from the belief that English law allowed a man to beat his wife with a stick so long as it is was no thicker than his thumb.
Ardent wrote: » Shepherd is gender specific. We prefer gender neutral language.
Kaybaykwah wrote: » The expression "Customer experience" is vomit inducing. A female employee would be called "shepherdess", and that in itself is something to trip over in a Little-Bo-Peep kind of way. Just disregard my use of Peep. Jeez.
corner of hells wrote: » Ya , you can no longer have "manholes" marked on drawings , you can only have "person holes " , dont even mention "women holes".
Yester wrote: » You can't say "little" anymore. It's just "Bo" now.
angel eyes 2012 wrote: » One of the senior directors in my workplace, an absolute gentleman, was introducing two female managers who are responsible for training, to new staff as part of induction training. He introduced them as "these two girls beside me are Mary and Jane..." One of the new staff members interrupts him and told him he can't call them that, they are women, not girls. He was absolutely taken aback and mortified and so were the two women beside him.