Twitter removing "master", "slave", and "blacklist" to be more inclusi

Tony EH · 03-07-2020 3:41pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

The reasons why change is now being affected later rather than sooner has already been posted, and very recently. Please read first before quoting me and saying the same nonsensical stuff.

And here we have more name calling on people who are speaking up. What's your problem? So if they were able to speak up on issues much earlier in time, would you not also call them a "useless c@nt" trying to get attention? It was okay to do if it was done earlier somehow, but now it's too late? :pac:
Talk about silly excuses for dumb sh!t because this absolutely wins the award.

All you are doing is making silly excuses.

Edgware · 03-07-2020 3:58pm

When are the getting rid of Groundskeeper Willie from The Simpson. It's very derogatory towards the Scots

fly_agaric · 03-07-2020 4:09pm

Stateofyou wrote:

Removing or changing offensive language is progress.

Would agree with that but...the engineering/IT use of such terms (in particular black/white) cannot be considered "offensive" unless the words themselves are intrinsically insulting and should be struck from polite English completely like racist slurs, curses etc.

When you look at current state of the place (USA) zealously driving English language reform to new heights, doing CTRL+H on their codebases etc make me wonder if it is all just another symptom of some deep problems that seem to manifesting there.

I think you see it in some badly damaged, somewhat dysfunctional societies IMO, e.g. descent into obsession with raking over history, petty point scoring over each other and flags in NI.

Tell me how · 03-07-2020 4:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

What part are you asking for evidence for?

There are more slaves now that ever before, and they are mostly owned by their own race.

Asians growing weed in farms in the UK are owned by Asian gangs. Eastern European prostitutes in the US are owned by Eastern European gangs. African slaves in the Congo are owned by Africans. Asians catching shrimp off Thailand are owned by Asians.

If you think this is hysteria, I can tell you it's not. The last few years have just been token efforts picking at low-hanging fruit just to look good, be it companies, or individuals on social media. There is almost no actual effort made to combat slavery even though it's the hot topic of the year. Most people seem to think it disappeared when the US ended it. I think it's terrible that people are being convinced of this.

Why is it that people who profess to be bothered that there is no real effort to do something to help people in the world react by posting comments and starting threads which undermine any effort to do something to make peole feel more inclusive.

Start a thread about eastern europeans being trafficked, asians being exploited or what is going on with the Uyghurs in China right now if you want to see some progress on those issues. What do you think starting a thread such as this does only enforces the message that any action is either unnecessary or irrelevant.

See it plenty here, people giving out about migrants being supported in Ireland using arguments that plenty Irish people need support but the same posters then go on threads about the homeless issue or travellers and freak out at any supports being given to those groups.

Start a thread advocating for awareness or meaningful action on a topic, and I'll probably support your cause and post on the thread to that effect.

MFPM · 03-07-2020 4:34pm

Edgware wrote: »

When are the getting rid of Groundskeeper Willie from The Simpson. It's very derogatory towards the Scots

It's not but then you know that...maybe try and engage with points of substance than nonsense.

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 5:24pm

fly_agaric wrote: »

Would agree with that but...the engineering/IT use of such terms (in particular black/white) cannot be considered "offensive" unless the words themselves are intrinsically insulting and should be struck from polite English completely like racist slurs, curses etc.

When you look at current state of the place (USA) zealously driving English language reform to new heights, doing CTRL+H on their codebases etc make me wonder if it is all just another symptom of some deep problems that seem to manifesting there.

I think you see it in some badly damaged, somewhat dysfunctional societies IMO, e.g. descent into obsession with raking over history, petty point scoring over each other and flags in NI.

With all due respect, I don't think you're the gatekeeper of deciding what is offensive and what isn't? There's a video (I think it's a TT) that I've seen circulating on social media of a black guy explaining the way that language uses the words black or dark to mean something bad or negative; I hadn't realised that before and it definitely made me think. It probably never occurred to me before because as someone who's white that's my perspective and in racial connotations there's a blind spot to it. I don't think Black people's opinions on offensive language is petty point scoring.

Curious to why you say the US is "zealously driving English language reform to new heights?" What do you base this statement on?

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 5:48pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

With all due respect, I don't think you're the gatekeeper of deciding what is offensive and what isn't? There's a video (I think it's a TT) that I've seen circulating on social media of a black guy explaining the way that language uses the words black or dark to mean something bad or negative; I hadn't realised that before and it definitely made me think. It probably never occurred to me before because as someone who's white that's my perspective and in racial connotations there's a blind spot to it. I don't think Black people's opinions on offensive language is petty point scoring.

Curious to why you say the US is "zealously driving English language reform to new heights?" What do you base this statement on?

If people are going to claim expertise over word then they need to go back to the roots of the word. The original word blaec meant absolutely dark, absorbing all light or burned. It was also naturally used to refer to dark-skinned people. The evil connotations didn't emerge until about the 14th century and one can see why the word became connected, with fire, devil etc.

I really think we've lost the plot entirely if social media is laying down what we can use or say in language. Words have little force just a meaning, context and intent provides the damage.

As for US English many of the newer verbs, where we use real words like nouns, have come out of it. They also tend to rename things to nicer expressions, more than we ever would.

fly_agaric · 03-07-2020 5:51pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

With all due respect,

Oh dear I see I am about to be insulted...:pac:

Stateofyou wrote: »

I don't think you're the gatekeeper of deciding what is offensive and what isn't? There's a video (I think it's a TT) that I've seen circulating on social media of a black guy explaining the way that language uses the words black or dark to mean something bad or negative; I hadn't realised that before and it definitely made me think. It probably never occurred to me before because as someone who's white that's my perspective and in racial connotations there's a blind spot to it. I don't think Black people's opinions on offensive language is petty point scoring.

I understand the reasoning thanks.
Wonder if any lingusits can give opinion on black/white and negative/positive?
Going to go out on a limb and bet it is in practically every human language.
Would say it is to do with 24 hr cycle of the planet we live on, the fact we are pretty clearly diurnal adapted animals, fear of the night etc.
I don't wish to be a "gatekeeper" (?) of what is offensive of not but really I do wonder where the line is.

Stateofyou wrote: »

Curious to why you say the US is "zealously driving English language reform to new heights?" What do you base this statement on?

On reclasification of the English language words "white/black" as offensive and hurtful terms that should have a chunk of their meaning (as proxies for positive/negative) stripped from them to spare peoples' feelings. References to Master slave I can kind of get in context of US specific history (and I suppose "We are All Americans Now" in the English speaking world and have to accept that fact).

edit: On language reform, I suppose there's also the other stuff they tend to do like turning verbs into awkward but trendy nouns when a suitable word is there already

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 6:10pm

is_that_so wrote: »

If people are going to claim expertise over word then they need to go back to the roots of the word. The original word blaec meant absolutely dark, absorbing all light or burned. It was also naturally used to refer to dark-skinned people. The evil connotations didn't emerge until about the 14th century and one can see why the word became connected, with fire, devil etc.

I really think we've lost the plot entirely if social media is laying down what we can use or say in language. Words have little force just a meaning, context and intent provides the damage.

As for US English many of the newer verbs, where we use real words like nouns, have come out of it. They also tend to rename things to nicer expressions, more than we ever would.

Who's claiming expertise? It's not social media laying down anything? It's people giving opinions and speaking from their perspective and experience, through social media. Social media is just the platform.
It wasn't the word black on it's own, but I can't remember the examples given. I'll try to find it and post it here.
Not sure what you're saying in your last paragraph; can you elaborate?

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 6:14pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Who's claiming expertise? It's not social media laying down anything? It's people giving opinions and speaking from their perspective and experience, through social media. Social media is just the platform.
It wasn't the word black on it's own, but I can't remember the examples given. I'll try to find it and post it here.
Not sure what you're saying in your last paragraph; can you elaborate?

Well you've given some random individual on social media control over your thought processes and I don't think it's an uncommon scenario. Please do link. US English is more prone to change than other varieties, especially in renaming things.

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 6:20pm

fly_agaric wrote: »

Oh dear I see I am about to be insulted...:pac:

I understand the reasoning thanks.
Wonder if any lingusits can give opinion on black/white and negative/positive?
Going to go out on a limb and bet it is in practically every human language.
Would say it is to do with 24 hr cycle of the planet we live on, the fact we are pretty clearly diurnal adapted animals, fear of the night etc.
I don't wish to be a "gatekeeper" (?) of what is offensive of not but really I do wonder where the line is.

On reclasification of the English language words "white/black" as offensive and hurtful terms that should have a chunk of their meaning (as proxies for positive/negative) stripped from them to spare peoples' feelings. References to Master slave I can kind of get in context of US specific history (and I suppose "We are All Americans Now" in the English speaking world and have to accept that fact).

edit: On language reform, I suppose there's also the other stuff they tend to do like turning verbs into awkward but trendy nouns when a suitable word is there already

Ok... so where was the insult?
If it's in every human language, that could be fair enough. But then tell me in what society is blackness and black people not on the receiving end of racism, denigration, and lower power structure? I don't think it's to do with fear of the night but more to do with what I just pointed out.
Why does there need to be a line on offensive terms and language? Is there something wrong with open-mindedness and change? Do you really think that people are offended or triggered (being triggered is a legitimate reality due to trauma, not just an insult) by language because it's an amusing joke? Maybe there's something to it and some of us should actually listen and consider because our lived experiences are actually very different. This is something that was more obvious to me after living in the states for many years because black people are American's too (as opposed to foreign nationals).

Trendy nouns??

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 6:22pm

is_that_so wrote: »

Well you've given some random individual on social media control over your thought processes and I don't think it's an uncommon scenario. Please do link. US English is more prone to change than other varieties, especially in renaming things.

Control? Lol. No, I listen, and consider. It's called empathising and remaining open minded to a lived experience and perspective different from my own. You might try it sometime. Because god knows if the shoes of oppression were on your feet you would want the same. No?

"US English is more prone to change than other varieties, especially in renaming things."

Please explain or link.

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 6:33pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Control? Lol. No, I listen, and consider. It's called empathising and remaining open minded to a lived experience and perspective different from my own. You might try it sometime. Because god knows if the shoes of oppression were on your feet you would want the same. No?

"US English is more prone to change than other varieties, especially in renaming things."

Please explain or link.

Shoes of oppression? Open mind, eh? I'm fine with new perspectives just not so much on ones that presume to tell me I'm wrong.

Pa ElGrande · 03-07-2020 6:37pm

I think the dictators who ban words may have a point. By expunging a word they can turn around with a straight face and say said situation is not a problem in their country.

What shall we call those chess masters now? Or is the banning of words irresspective of the context they are use just more of the same neologisms of politically correct “authoritarians.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAfKiRgMSGc

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 6:37pm

is_that_so wrote: »

Shoes of oppression? Open mind, eh? I'm fine with new perspectives just not so much on ones that presume to tell me I'm wrong.

That's so typical. If you're so fine with new perspectives, then what's with the over-defensiveness? We're all wrong sometimes, you know. It's not even a case of being wrong. Just considering something else. Is that too much?

I haven't found the video yet, but I did find another close example:

..."negative associations with the color black arose, as in “black sheep” or “black day” or “Black Death.” In other words, why is “angel food cake” white and “devil’s food cake” black?

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 6:46pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

That's so typical. If you're so fine with new perspectives, then what's with the over-defensiveness? We're all wrong sometimes, you know. It's not even a case of being wrong. Just considering something else. Is that too much?

I haven't found the video yet, but I did find another close example:

..."negative associations with the color black arose, as in “black sheep” or “black day” or “Black Death.” In other words, why is “angel food cake” white and “devil’s food cake” black?

I'm not remotely defensive but you do have your own predilection for sensational language.

Hmm - your examples.

Black Death - The skin can turn dark or black

Black sheep - This idiom is in a multitude of languages and its origin is agrarian. These sheep stand out in the flock and their wool was traditionally considered less valuable.

Black day -also an idea in many cultures. In South Korea it's a holiday for singles!
Devil’s food cake - is full of chocolate and considered sinful. How is this an offence to anyone?

Stateofyou · 03-07-2020 7:00pm

is_that_so wrote: »

I'm not remotely defensive but you do have your own predilection for sensational language.

Hmm - your examples.

Black Death - The skin can turn dark or black

Black sheep - This idiom is in a multitude of languages and its origin is agrarian. These sheep stand out in the flock and their wool was traditionally considered less valuable.

Black day -also an idea in many cultures. In South Korea it's a holiday for singles!
Devil’s food cake - is full of chocolate and considered sinful. How is this an offence to anyone?

Oh really? Where is my own predilection? In fact I have only amplified black voices/opinions who I've heard speaking on it. They're not my examples, it's what I've found online and what has most closely matched the video I watched of a Black man speaking up about it.

Nice try with Black death but what what it actually refers to is known as the Pestilence and the Great Mortality, was the most fatal pandemic recorded in human history. The Black Death was an epidemic of bubonic plague, a disease caused by the a bacteria found amongst wild rodents.

Black sheep wool less valuable you say? hmm.... Anyway black sheep is an idiom used to describe an odd or disreputable member of a group, especially within a family. Standing out? From whom? White sheep or white family? So assuming white is the "norm?" :pac:

We're not talking about a S. Korean holiday here. Black day is a popular term to describe a day on which something terrible has happened:
a day of a bad incident
a day of grief
a day when something disastrous happens to someone
Source: theidioms.com

So consider why black is associated with sin and white with innocence and purity?

Some A+ deflection work there though! :pac:

How is it an offense to anybody? Well I suppose if white had the persistent negative connotations you might feel offended by it.

Quantum Erasure · 03-07-2020 7:01pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Some A+ deflection work there though! :pac:

indeed

fly_agaric · 03-07-2020 7:05pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Ok... so where was the insult?

People usually preface with that because they have no respect at all for what the other person said and think it is rubbish.

Stateofyou wrote: »

If it's in every human language, that could be fair enough. But then tell me in what society is blackness and black people not on the receiving end of racism, denigration, and lower power structure?

I don't know, you tell me? Maybe one where all the people have the same skin colour I suppose, or black people are in a majority and system is democratic.

Stateofyou wrote: »

I don't think it's to do with fear of the night but more to do with what I just pointed out.

I'd really like some evidence that black/white having a negative/postive meaning in English (e.g. black/white hats, black/white list) is bound up with people's skin colour + racism.

Stateofyou wrote: »

Why does there need to be a line on offensive terms and language? Is there something wrong with open-mindedness and change?

Probably because at some point we'd spend all day obsessing over this stuff.
There's open-mindedness and then there just stupidity.
What about darkness and lightness? That could refer to skin colour aswell.
Even a racial slur for black people involving "dark" isn't there?

Stateofyou wrote: »

Do you really think that people are offended or triggered (being triggered is a legitimate reality due to trauma, not just an insult) by language because it's an amusing joke?

It is not a joke. Never said it was. I think when people really get offended and hurt over "black/white" used as negative/postive in English with zero reference to any skin colours or races or history (vs companies trying to be proactive with their image/"wokeness" rating + head off at the pass anything that could damage them) they wish to be offended and hurt + are looking for bones to pick.
They are angry, maybe they are quite justified in that anger.
I've never lived in the US, I'm not black so on that I cannot comment.

Stateofyou wrote: »

Trendy nouns??

Ah doesn't matter and is off the point.

Tony EH · 03-07-2020 7:08pm

There are many phrases that have the word black in them.

If there really are people going around looking to be offended by them they should be ignored, not indulged, because they are too stupid to even bother looking up what the word actually means.

If a word like "blacklist" is going to be considered "offensive" to people (which is a load of bollocks in the first place), then ANY phrase with the word black in it is subject to that stupidity. In fact, you could say that the word black itself should be stricken from the English lexicon.

This is all a complete absurdity, however, as there isn't anyone going around being truly offended by innocuous terminology and it's all just a silly exercise in vacuous virtue signalling by truly disingenuous American attention seekers.

That country is blight on the world.

Quantum Erasure · 03-07-2020 7:10pm

good article here, read it a couple weeks ago and was trying to find it again

https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2009/12/light-and-dark-2.html

The metaphors in question aren’t Western notions, either. From what I’ve been able to find out, they’ve been around since the beginning of time, when people first became aware of the division of their world into day and night, light and dark.
Joseph Campbell, writing in the journal Daedalus in 1959, says it was the Persian philosopher Zoroaster (circa 600 BC) who put the seal on the concept of darkness being evil.

For what it’s worth, we don’t believe that metaphors identifying lightness as positive and darkness as negative are inherently racist. They certainly didn’t begin that way, though these negative connotations have certainly fed into and reinforced racism over the centuries.

s7ryf3925pivug · 03-07-2020 7:17pm

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

I think the dictators who ban words may have a point. By expunging a word they can turn around with a straight face and say said situation is not a problem in their country.

What shall we call those chess masters now? Or is the banning of words irresspective of the context they are use just more of the same neologisms of politically correct “authoritarians.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAfKiRgMSGc

Black versus white!

White has a minor advantage so they are more likely to win. (There is a philosophy of playing to win as white or to draw as black.)

But I don't think this is factored into the rating adjustments when a game is completed.

So you are literally being penalised for being black!

And the masters frequently beat the rest of the players.

Shocking.

SnazzyPig · 04-07-2020 12:51am

I did a short course on computer maintenance a few years ago and I found this terminology weird.

Woudn't 'master' and 'servant' be more appropriate?

It seems perverse to want the Master/slave protocol.

SnazzyPig · 04-07-2020 1:01am

Ah, I've just glanced back on the posts before mine and the "discussion" seems to be around the word 'blacklist' rather than what I thought the OP was principly about.

joseywhales · 04-07-2020 1:02am

SnazzyPig wrote: »

I did a short course on computer maintenance a few years ago and I found this terminology weird.

Woudn't 'master' and 'servant' be more appropriate?

It seems perverse to want the Master/slave protocol.

The slaves processes literally perform the role of a slave, they receive instruction , work and return result. Just because the term is loaded socially, it doesn't make it inaccurate.

Tony EH · 04-07-2020 1:23am

The term is entirely accurate. That's the reason it was used in the first place.

It has fuck all to do with human slavery, whether that in Roman times or in America in the 19th century. If someone hears that in conjunction with engineering or computing and thinks "human slaves", then the problem is with that person (who is a moron) not the terms.

There is nothing derogatory, whatsoever, in something like a master switch and absolutely no real reason for someone to get their knickers in a twist.

Honestly, this is like something you'd read on 'The Onion'...

ILoveYourVibes · 04-07-2020 2:27am

Deleted User wrote: »

Twitter engineers replacing racially loaded tech terms like 'master,' 'slave'

No.. Not from their site's content or tweets.. From its codebase.

Since when does a programming language need to be more inclusive? Last year apparently. Some worthless cúnt who works there took issue with it and decided to save the world from racism and slavery.

But more importantly, how on Earth are "master" or "slave" racially loaded terms when there are more slaves now than ever before, and they're not all black, and the majority of slaves are owned by people of their own race? Why is America trying to force this idea on us that only black people have ever been slaves and only white people have ever been slave owners?

If they cared about black slavery, they should campaign for black people to stop selling black people to black people in Africa. But I guess it's easier to spend a few mill changing a programming language.

Let me get this straight ...its reported this is happening on a website ....and you believe it?

I mean have you seen the extent to which actual newspapers lie?

04-07-2020 2:53am

Normal people can understand the obvious reasons for light / white being good and dark / black being evil.

Imagine thinking that it must be about black people. Like tricking yourself into believing something that isn't true because it matches your politics.

Tell me how · 04-07-2020 3:10am

Deleted User wrote: »

Normal people can understand the obvious reasons for light / white being good and dark / black being evil.

Imagine thinking that it must be about black people. Like tricking yourself into believing something that isn't true because it matches your politics.

What are the obvious reasons?

04-07-2020 3:27am

Tell me how wrote: »

What are the obvious reasons?

That can't be a genuine question. I refuse to believe that a grown adult with a functioning brain can't think of why all around the world, light is associated with good.

Twitter removing "master", "slave", and "blacklist" to be more inclusi

Comments