zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. lowboy+(OP)[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:02:19
The etymology is inoffensive, but the term itself is still exclusionary by way of "man" also being a gendered term. We are (and should be) more cognisant of these issues these days.
replies(3): >>dreamf+B1 >>noddin+t2 >>Shish2+n4
2. dreamf+B1[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:22:48
>>lowboy+(OP)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homonym
3. noddin+t2[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:33:06
>>lowboy+(OP)
No, you're wrong. "man" is the obvious abbreviation for "manual" when trying to reduce the number of characters used. Not once as a teenager learning unix shell commands did gender (or cultural stereotypes) enter my mind when using the 'man' command, but I guarantee it does when looking at the 'bro' command.
4. Shish2+n4[view] [source] 2014-01-25 20:59:48
>>lowboy+(OP)
If something is obviously not meant to be offensive, but by some coincidence it is, then we should be offended by it?

One day I hope to live in a world where people judge text by what it means, not which particular squiggly patterns ended up on the screen...

replies(1): >>skybri+Oe
◧◩
5. skybri+Oe[view] [source] [discussion] 2014-01-25 23:37:25
>>Shish2+n4
We should trust that they meant well, but still tell them their fly is down. It's not that big a deal as long as you fix it.
[go to top]