zlacker

[return to "Bro pages: like man pages, but with examples only"]
1. blahed+f7[view] [source] 2014-01-25 18:32:37
>>_yfoe+(OP)
Great idea; shame about the name.

Here's the problem with using words like "bro" (however jokingly): the problem is not with what you[0] are thinking when you read the word "bro", but with what other people, especially newcomers, are thinking. The locker-room atmosphere that stuff like this creates is a huge barrier to entry for a lot of people, women especially, who infer that on top of all the technically difficult stuff that everyone has to learn to be CS types, they'll also have to deal with a constant barrage of "you're not our kind" flung at them by the in-group. You personally may not be intending that as your message, but I assure you that your personal intent does not matter when you are using language that has been associated with exclusion and discrimination.[1]

The problem here, if this program is actually intended to be used, is that just typing in the command would be a constant reminder of an entire subculture that is widely seen as[2] putting up walls and doors that say "NO GIЯLS ALOUD" around the programming profession, an attempt to preserve privilege. Those of you suggesting an alias are either being disingenuous or missing the point entirely.

[0] Meaning individuals, of whatever gender/race/class/whatever, that are likely to be reading HN.

[1] If you don't believe me, ponder for a moment sentences like, "But I like Negroes just fine!" Language matters.

[2] Again, you might not mean to reference that when you use words like "brogrammer". But it's how an awful lot of us read it.

EDIT: Rereading other posts on this page, I should add that I almost certainly got the phrase "shame about the name" stuck in my head from reading dewitt's post. Four words, such a concise summary of my attitude! :)

EDIT 2: "they'll have" -> "that everyone has" to clarify argument. Thx vezzy-fnord.

◧◩
2. overga+lc[view] [source] 2014-01-25 19:45:59
>>blahed+f7
Absolutely, lets throw away our sense of humor and wordplay because there are theoretically people that might be offended (maybe, kindof. You know. In theory.).

(N.B. the people that seem to be offended so far are offended on other peoples behalf..)

Isn't it way more offensive to assume that women are such dainty delicate creatures that like, they won't get the joke?

◧◩◪
3. glesic+Zd[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:05:18
>>overga+lc
Another offended man checking in. Why is it so hard to accept that sexist language and actions are offensive to men?

I suspect that most people would agree that white people can be offended by the use of terms like "nigger", or jokes about slavery. So then why can't men be offended by misogynistic language or jokes that are likely to create a hostile environment for women?

I clicked, I saw the name and was a little turned off but thought maybe it was just a clever shortening of a reasonable word I hadn't thought of (the way "man" is short for "manual").

Then I saw the "girls are bros too" thing and I realized that nope, the authors are just insensitive at best, jackasses at worst. They saw the complaints coming, but they thought it was more important to make some sort of off-color joke than to have their product taken seriously as the useful tool it could be.

◧◩◪◨
4. nacs+Df[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:26:57
>>glesic+Zd
> Another offended man checking in.

And yet you typed out a racist, highly offensive word (far more offensive than "bro" I'm pretty sure) in your own 2nd paragraph.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. glesic+zh[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:54:15
>>nacs+Df
Are you joking? Seriously, I recently confused a sarcastic comment for a serious one on HN, so I'm asking honestly. Because if you're serious, then I just don't know where to start. I'll keep it short. Using a term to facilitate a discussion of that term is completely and entirely different from using it in other ways. I assumed the intellectual maturity of this audience was higher than it would be on, say, Reddit. Perhaps I was wrong.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. nacs+Ci[view] [source] 2014-01-25 21:06:52
>>glesic+zh
No I'm not joking. There are many more offended by the word you used than the word 'bro'. The discussion is not about race nor that word so it's not relevant.

Next time you argue over such an intellectually deep matter such as whether the word 'bro' may be offensive or not, you may wish to be a bit more cautious about the use of such words.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. glesic+Kk[view] [source] 2014-01-25 21:36:21
>>nacs+Ci
I wasn't arguing about whether "bro" was offensive. I was arguing over whether it is legitimate for a man to be offended by sexism, please read the GP before responding next time.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. really+Kn[view] [source] 2014-01-25 22:11:17
>>glesic+Kk
Is the word "bro" sexist? If a woman says, "Hey guurl" is that sexist? They're both exclusionary, right? But aren't they just friendly greetings and anything more you put into it is your own personal baggage? Let's be adults and retain some perspective.
[go to top]