pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xPresumably when referring to parts you'd like to do away with the nomenclature male/female because of the reinforcement of the power imbalance between genders. Furthermore it probably highlights our endemic rape culture because the female part likely didn't give consent. We use male/female very regularly also, for more of a variety of applications, and I personally haven't found my moral compass challenging that.
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xPresumably when referring to parts you'd like to do away with the nomenclature male/female because of the reinforcement of the power imbalance between genders. Furthermore it probably highlights our endemic rape culture because the female part likely didn't give consent. We use male/female very regularly also, for more of a variety of applications, and I personally haven't found my moral compass challenging that. Food for thought then?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xPresumably when referring to parts you'd like to do away with the nomenclature male/female because of the reinforcement of the power imbalance between genders. Furthermore it probably highlights our endemic rape culture because the female part likely didn't give consent. We use male/female very regularly also, for more of a variety of applications, and I personally haven't found my moral compass challenging that. Food for thought then? The Hydraulics Industry would need an entire shake-up for this to happen. I've still got my hands full trying to fight the good fight against Imperial ffs. I'll leave the M/F debate to a stronger person than me.
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xPresumably when referring to parts you'd like to do away with the nomenclature male/female because of the reinforcement of the power imbalance between genders. Furthermore it probably highlights our endemic rape culture because the female part likely didn't give consent. We use male/female very regularly also, for more of a variety of applications, and I personally haven't found my moral compass challenging that. Food for thought then? The Hydraulics Industry would need an entire shake-up for this to happen. I've still got my hands full trying to fight the good fight against Imperial ffs. I'll leave the M/F debate to a stronger person than me. It's an interesting debate that 3 straight cis white males (I believe both of you are, apologies if I'm wrong) definitely shouldn't decide on. I would be willing to hear from other more diverse voices as to why using those terms may be an issue. I'm not sure how male/female in the context you're referring to reinforces any sort of power imbalance but I'm not an engineer. In terms of connectors, is it generally considered that female connectors are the weaker component in comparison to males? Certainly when it comes to power sockets, the male connector is more likely to wear out. If there are other places male/female nomenclature is being used I'd love to learn.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xPresumably when referring to parts you'd like to do away with the nomenclature male/female because of the reinforcement of the power imbalance between genders. Furthermore it probably highlights our endemic rape culture because the female part likely didn't give consent. We use male/female very regularly also, for more of a variety of applications, and I personally haven't found my moral compass challenging that. Food for thought then? The Hydraulics Industry would need an entire shake-up for this to happen. I've still got my hands full trying to fight the good fight against Imperial ffs. I'll leave the M/F debate to a stronger person than me. It's an interesting debate that 3 straight cis white males (I believe both of you are, apologies if I'm wrong) definitely shouldn't decide on. I would be willing to hear from other more diverse voices as to why using those terms may be an issue. I'm not sure how male/female in the context you're referring to reinforces any sort of power imbalance but I'm not an engineer. In terms of connectors, is it generally considered that female connectors are the weaker component in comparison to males? Certainly when it comes to power sockets, the male connector is more likely to wear out. If there are other places male/female nomenclature is being used I'd love to learn. Honestly a really quick opinion is if something is inserted into something else, the receiver is called Female. Outside of Hydraulics, in half of our M/F applications we use, the weak point is neither the Male or Female component, but the un-gendered piece joining them which is normally a pin or what we'd just call a joiner. In reference to your assumption of me.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWbElkaeqVA
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xLooks and smells a lot like bait McJules. Shouldn't you be using your powers for good not evil. Is it hard to believe I'm genuinely happy this is happening? I assure you it's genuine. Yes. You seem like a reasonable person. I don't buy it.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
It's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIt's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore. Is that not the goal, to work towards a world where slavery no longer exists?
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIt's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore. Is that not the goal, to work towards a world where slavery no longer exists? Isn't removing the word from our lexicon counterintuitive in regards to achieving that? That article is so tone deaf. You can just tell they think slavery is a by gone relic.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIt's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore. Is that not the goal, to work towards a world where slavery no longer exists? Isn't removing the word from our lexicon counterintuitive in regards to achieving that? That article is so tone deaf. You can just tell they think slavery is a by gone relic. If this is a word, denormalizing it sounds like a very good place to start in my eyes.
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIt's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore. Is that not the goal, to work towards a world where slavery no longer exists? Isn't removing the word from our lexicon counterintuitive in regards to achieving that? That article is so tone deaf. You can just tell they think slavery is a by gone relic. If this is a word, denormalizing it sounds like a very good place to start in my eyes. Agreed. An in my opinion, replacing the term "master/slave" with "primary/replica" or "leader/followers" depending on the context actually better describes the technical process.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIt's almost as if people have forgotten slavery exists today. Removing the word suggests it isn't something that exists anymore. Is that not the goal, to work towards a world where slavery no longer exists? Isn't removing the word from our lexicon counterintuitive in regards to achieving that? That article is so tone deaf. You can just tell they think slavery is a by gone relic. If this is a word, denormalizing it sounds like a very good place to start in my eyes. Why would you want to denormalise a word that describes vividly shocking reality of human society? Wouldn't that just sweep modern slavery under the carpet?
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
ErogenousZone
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Don't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy?
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? I think we can all agree it deflects attention away from more difficult conversations we need to have as a society.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point.
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point. And I keep asking: does the complete removal of a word that describes an insidious modern day practice not make it less likley that we will discuss it? Pot calling kettle black.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point. And I keep asking: does the complete removal of a word that describes an insidious modern day practice not make it less likley that we will discuss it? Pot calling kettle black. Which I keep answering with we should be removing it, and discussing it less. I keep saying - we should only be referring to it as a past reference and not something we normalize, continue to harbour and even encourage. I am not saying we should find words otherwise to describe what has happened in the past, but I am saying when it isn't necessary we should NOT be using it. It is not a term that need have various applications, and I am fully supporting the idea that we isolate its use. At which point my question remains - should we not be moving to completely remove it, functionally as well as just the word itself, from modern day practices.
|
|
|
Captain Haddock
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
They're going to have to overdub all the South Park episodes that feature Mr Sl- sorry- Mr Subordinate. Jethuth. Jethuth Crith
There are only two intellectually honest debate tactics: (a) pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts, or (b) pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic. All other debate tactics are intellectually dishonest - John T. Reed
The Most Popular Presidential Candidate Of All Time (TM) cant go to a sports stadium in the country he presides over. Figure that one out...
|
|
|
Captain Haddock
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xLooks and smells a lot like bait McJules. Shouldn't you be using your powers for good not evil. Is it hard to believe I'm genuinely happy this is happening? I assure you it's genuine. Yes. You seem like a reasonable person. I don't buy it. Does Jules coach a Sarcastaball team?
There are only two intellectually honest debate tactics: (a) pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts, or (b) pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic. All other debate tactics are intellectually dishonest - John T. Reed
The Most Popular Presidential Candidate Of All Time (TM) cant go to a sports stadium in the country he presides over. Figure that one out...
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
This is fucked. Archaic words are in use every day. Every race has been enslaved at some point including vast swathes of Europe by the Romans, Gauls, Visigoths, Celts etc. As a bloke who is from white European stock am I offended by the term? Absolutely not. You blokes are trying to find offence where non is present. And if you think a diverse range of opinions is warranted then you're assuming that some opinions are worthier than others based on nothing more than race. And that makes you a bigot. I can't believe I got sucked into this. And FFS. 'denormalise' is not a word. Just say 'not normal' next time.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xYou blokes are trying to find offence where non is present. And if you think a diverse range of opinions is warranted then you're assuming that some opinions are worthier than others based on nothing more than race. And that makes you a bigot. I can't believe I got sucked into this. And FFS. 'denormalise' is not a word. Just say 'not normal' next time. I mean there is an entire society literally asking us to change these things as it does offend them, whereas the people opposed to the change don't really seem to have a basis not to change other than they'd just rather not. Some opinions meaning more than others based on nothing more than race, and people being bigots, and us accepting that as the normal, is what got us here in the first place. Thankyou for the clarification on the word, I knew it didn't feel right hence the pre-empt that it may not have been right. It did indeed feel not normal.
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThey're going to have to overdub all the South Park episodes that feature Mr Sl- sorry- Mr Subordinate. Jethuth. Jethuth Crith I will be extremely surprised if they don't have an attempt at all of this when S24 gets made.
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x I mean there is an entire society literally asking us to change these things as it does offend them, whereas the people opposed to the change don't really seem to have a basis not to change other than they'd just rather not.
Yeah that's what frustrates me often, a lot of times I think "what's difference does it make to you?"
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xYou blokes are trying to find offence where non is present. And if you think a diverse range of opinions is warranted then you're assuming that some opinions are worthier than others based on nothing more than race. And that makes you a bigot. I can't believe I got sucked into this. And FFS. 'denormalise' is not a word. Just say 'not normal' next time. I mean there is an entire society literally asking us to change these things as it does offend them, whereas the people opposed to the change don't really seem to have a basis not to change other than they'd just rather not. Some opinions meaning more than others based on nothing more than race, and people being bigots, and us accepting that as the normal, is what got us here in the first place. Thankyou for the clarification on the word, I knew it didn't feel right hence the pre-empt that it may not have been right. It did indeed feel not normal. But is there really 'a whole society asking us to change these things' or are they a tiny subset of society determined to find offence. Squeaky wheel gets the oil and all that. Worse than that are they people being offended on other people's behalf. These people are the absolute pits. The other day you were told to 'check your privilege' and I thought you need new friends. Now I can see you're well suited to that group. (No judgement. Good for you.) Edit: maybe that was Pala getting told to check his privilege.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xYou blokes are trying to find offence where non is present. And if you think a diverse range of opinions is warranted then you're assuming that some opinions are worthier than others based on nothing more than race. And that makes you a bigot. I can't believe I got sucked into this. And FFS. 'denormalise' is not a word. Just say 'not normal' next time. I mean there is an entire society literally asking us to change these things as it does offend them, whereas the people opposed to the change don't really seem to have a basis not to change other than they'd just rather not. Some opinions meaning more than others based on nothing more than race, and people being bigots, and us accepting that as the normal, is what got us here in the first place. Thankyou for the clarification on the word, I knew it didn't feel right hence the pre-empt that it may not have been right. It did indeed feel not normal. But is there really 'a whole society asking us to change these things' or are they a tiny subset of society determined to find offence. Squeaky wheel gets the oil and all that. Worse than that are they people being offended on other people's behalf. These people are the absolute pits.The other day you were told to 'check your privilege' and I thought you need new friends. Now I can see you're well suited to that group. (No judgement. Good for you.) These are the people that I hate. Don't tell me what you think people are offended by unless they've directly told you.
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xYou blokes are trying to find offence where non is present. And if you think a diverse range of opinions is warranted then you're assuming that some opinions are worthier than others based on nothing more than race. And that makes you a bigot. I can't believe I got sucked into this. And FFS. 'denormalise' is not a word. Just say 'not normal' next time. I mean there is an entire society literally asking us to change these things as it does offend them, whereas the people opposed to the change don't really seem to have a basis not to change other than they'd just rather not. Some opinions meaning more than others based on nothing more than race, and people being bigots, and us accepting that as the normal, is what got us here in the first place. Thankyou for the clarification on the word, I knew it didn't feel right hence the pre-empt that it may not have been right. It did indeed feel not normal. But is there really 'a whole society asking us to change these things' or are they a tiny subset of society determined to find offence. Squeaky wheel gets the oil and all that. Worse than that are they people being offended on other people's behalf. These people are the absolute pits. The other day you were told to 'check your privilege' and I thought you need new friends. Now I can see you're well suited to that group. (No judgement. Good for you.) Edit: maybe that was Pala getting told to check his privilege. I feel like you've just tried to summarise a MINORITY group by calling them a minority. Please think about this in depth. Just like there would be some white people who can't see the existence of systemic racism in Australia and globally, how they don't represent all white people.. there will also be some black people that won't take offence to certain things that do not represent all black people. But movements like Black Lives Matter and others like that are clearly telling us all what they want, and I'm unsure how anyone can read the room so shockingly wrong to be truthful. This move to remove master/slave from a tech society isn't exclusively white people driven, there is undoubtedly black people involved in making this movement happen as well as actually executing it. They are telling us this is offensive, and we need this to change. I am personally not trying to be offended on someone elses behalf, I am trying to listen, reason and make informed decisions based on what I am being told. And as I've tried several times in this thread, I am currently fighting for the world to, as mcjules' article stated, "avoid any unnecessary references to slavery". I would also like to add to my original story of when I asked a good year ago at my workplace if we should change the terminology, it was sparked on by a black person saying to me "wait you guys really actually call them that?". I did post that I was told to check my privilege, I don't recall Pala doing similar. I was asking what I considered legitimate concerns about the protests in relation to public health and instead of being greeted in discussion with reasoned arguments, I was simply told to check my privilege. These people that you are now trying to link me with are all to happy to play the man, not the ball. They aren't listening to reasoning and are all too happy to deflect. I have definitely realised you try to group many people, inc me, into this Munrub.. you even attempted to trigger some form of reaction from me about the male/female debate and even directly prompted it. But I openly stated this was not for me. Here I am, an individual fighting individual battles and I like to think I am trying to engage in listening and using reasoning and engaging in argument about this. As you'll see I'm not simply latching onto one ideal, being the entire BLM movement, and agreeing with everything - instead I am using my own judgement of valid points, engaging in them, questioning ones I don't agree with, or just openly stating I'm not smart enough for others. In this current argument I have offered several reasons for something, and have had what I find to be fair to state as baseless resistance against it. Give me reasons to consider that could change my mind, I have received nothing in rebuttal. If you believe you have offered genuine reasons for me to change my mind, please list them again as I truthfully have not consumed them. From all of this I would actually assess that yourself is the one who should be grouped with the "check your privilege" friends I have as you actually have no intention in engaging in healthy debate but rather prefer to lean on deflections and an incredible lack of feeling the need to validate things.
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point. And I keep asking: does the complete removal of a word that describes an insidious modern day practice not make it less likley that we will discuss it? Pot calling kettle black. Which I keep answering with we should be removing it, and discussing it less. I keep saying - we should only be referring to it as a past reference and not something we normalize, continue to harbour and even encourage. I am not saying we should find words otherwise to describe what has happened in the past, but I am saying when it isn't necessary we should NOT be using it. It is not a term that need have various applications, and I am fully supporting the idea that we isolate its use. At which point my question remains - should we not be moving to completely remove it, functionally as well as just the word itself, from modern day practices. Not so long as it remains a modern day practice that needs to be addressed. If we remove the word (even from seemingly unrelated applications such as this) we discuss it less as a topic. If we discuss it less as a topic we become less likely as a society to take action to try and prevent it. Put it this way: Should the word "race" be taken out of use? There is obviously no such thing as race when referring to humans, only generalised ethnic groups based off genetic ancestry that are visible to the naked eye. An argument can be formed that the word only serves to reinforce/promote division. The fact is however, these divisions and privileges based off it exist. Talking about "race", collecting data on it and basing policy off it will hopefully lead to better socio-economic outcomes for those in an underprivileged position.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point. And I keep asking: does the complete removal of a word that describes an insidious modern day practice not make it less likley that we will discuss it? Pot calling kettle black. Which I keep answering with we should be removing it, and discussing it less. I keep saying - we should only be referring to it as a past reference and not something we normalize, continue to harbour and even encourage. I am not saying we should find words otherwise to describe what has happened in the past, but I am saying when it isn't necessary we should NOT be using it. It is not a term that need have various applications, and I am fully supporting the idea that we isolate its use. At which point my question remains - should we not be moving to completely remove it, functionally as well as just the word itself, from modern day practices. Not so long as it remains a modern day practice that needs to be addressed. If we remove the word (even from seemingly unrelated applications such as this) we discuss it less as a topic. If we discuss it less as a topic we become less likely as a society to take action to try and prevent it. Put it this way: Should the word "race" be taken out of use? There is obviously no such thing as race when referring to humans, only generalised ethnic groups based off genetic ancestry that are visible to the naked eye. An argument can be formed that the word only serves to reinforce/promote division. The fact is however, these divisions and privileges based off it exist. Talking about "race", collecting data on it and basing policy off it will hopefully lead to better socio-economic outcomes for those in an underprivileged position. Crap, what would we call races then? Like.. a bike race
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xDon't you all find this removal & denial of history to be profoundly creepy? Modern civilisations are literally built on doing this. SFC1987 - like I keep saying, is the entire idea not to completely remove slavery from society? You seem to be insistently fishing for someone to bite so you can describe how it is currently happening, whilst monumentally missing the point. And I keep asking: does the complete removal of a word that describes an insidious modern day practice not make it less likley that we will discuss it? Pot calling kettle black. Which I keep answering with we should be removing it, and discussing it less. I keep saying - we should only be referring to it as a past reference and not something we normalize, continue to harbour and even encourage. I am not saying we should find words otherwise to describe what has happened in the past, but I am saying when it isn't necessary we should NOT be using it. It is not a term that need have various applications, and I am fully supporting the idea that we isolate its use. At which point my question remains - should we not be moving to completely remove it, functionally as well as just the word itself, from modern day practices. Not so long as it remains a modern day practice that needs to be addressed. If we remove the word (even from seemingly unrelated applications such as this) we discuss it less as a topic. If we discuss it less as a topic we become less likely as a society to take action to try and prevent it. Put it this way: Should the word "race" be taken out of use? There is obviously no such thing as race when referring to humans, only generalised ethnic groups based off genetic ancestry that are visible to the naked eye. An argument can be formed that the word only serves to reinforce/promote division. The fact is however, these divisions and privileges based off it exist. Talking about "race", collecting data on it and basing policy off it will hopefully lead to better socio-economic outcomes for those in an underprivileged position. I believe we are heading to a similar conclusion here. I am trying to prompt a movement to remove the existence of it, and you are saying it does need to be addressed. In my eyes in reference to the word race that you've brought up.. we are talking about what can be a useful tool in identifying locations, physical attributes, etc of different people. It is only when those components are used to oppress people that it becomes the issue, which is racism (a different word). Slavery though, that is an illegal act that is far less of a natural instinct to humans, and in essence cannot be used in a good way like the word race can in comparison. Race can be used in a variety of applications, some in a helpful way, whereas jules&I are arguing that slavery is a word that it is completely unnecessary to apply it to most other things it currently is.
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
WFYB: PaulBagz has been sober for 3 days! Well done matey
|
|
|