Do you feel about this proposed way of approaching the dialogue for more inclusive language would be hurtful?
I do, because it unjustly posits that the person saying “guys” (or whatever phrase you choose) is by default wrong, and that they are morally naive and insufficient, otherwise they wouldn’t have committed the perceived hurt. It removes any blame on the accuser’s part before a good faith discussion can be had. And when the accused feel they have been wrongly so, you can bet that a significant number of those conversations either don’t go well, or they generate more division than union.
I feel that instead, the tried and tested “when you X, I feel Y” conversation starting point creates better outcomes, as the person who feels hurt can explain what event triggers those feeling, and then together they can navigate solutions (which don’t default to “don’t use that word”, but also don’t preclude it). Are you going to have this conversation with someone maliciously using language to segregate and hurt? No. Is this conversation going to be effective with strangers? Probably not. But having this conversation format with a person whom you respect and trust will generate far more success, and those are the people that matter most.
Although you say that in context (which context?), the word guys is innocuous, I'd also like to highlight the following quote from the blog post:
‘I feel excluded whenever someone addresses a group I'm in with the words "hey guys."’
So, not very ideal perhaps.
Perhaps I shall rephrase that in a future edit. My intention was, when used in the right context, with the right people, that that word is not harmful at all. It is untrue to say that the word “guys” is always harmful, all of the time, and as such, I don’t feel it should be dropped from our vocabulary.
Additionally, that quote has no context. Is the default stance that if the word “guys” is used that hurt feelings of exclusion occur? What was the makeup of the group being referred to? If it was 0:1 male-to-female, that doesn’t make sense to me. If it was 10:1 male-to-female, I can see how that could induce those feelings. But without the context, it puts everyone else at fault for their words by default. It creates an environment where the use of the word “guys” makes you automatically wrong, however I hope we can find common ground in that context is vital, and that such an environment should not exist.
It’s up to us to navigate those conversations and determine what language should be used in each given situation, not unlike choosing to greet someone formally or casually. The way I speak with my brother is different to how I would speak with a client.
it unjustly posits that the person saying “guys” (or whatever phrase you choose) is by default wrong, and that they are morally naive and insufficient, otherwise they wouldn’t have committed the perceived hurt. It removes any blame on the accuser’s part before a good faith discussion can be had. And when the accused feel they have been wrongly so, you can bet that a significant number of those conversations either don’t go well, or they generate more division than union.
Interesting. Is that how you respond to all feedback you receive, or just on misgendering people? What accuser? The post proposed to kindly ask people to use inclusive language, and not blame any person and just focus on language.
when used in the right context, with the right people, that that word is not harmful at all. It is untrue to say that the word “guys” is always harmful, all of the time, and as such, I don’t feel it should be dropped from our vocabulary.
The blog post did not propose to remove the word "guys" from vocubulary. It simply highlighted that using this gendered noun to address a group of people of diverse genders causes those in the group not identifying as "guys" to feel excluded. I hope this clears it up.
But the very person using the word 'guys' IS using inclusive language as far as they're concerned. They almost certainly meant nothing by it, and the automatic assumption that they did is - I think - what is being referred to as unjust. Is it right to automatically think the worst of everyone? Words mean different things to different people and the free flow of information is impeded by having to negotiate the minefield of eggshells that gets set up by policing language in this way.
I'm all for embracing and celebrating our differences, but dictating how people should speak and the 'correct' way to interpret words, or telling them that they're wrong for using language that is totally normal to them seems pretty exclusionary and intolerant to me.
Everyone is different. Embrace and accept that. Be happy. Live and let live. If you look for reasons to be offended, you'll find them everywhere - but why subject yourself to that?
Interesting. Is that how you respond to all feedback you receive, or just on misgendering people? What accuser? The post proposed to kindly ask people to use inclusive language, and not blame any person and just focus on language.
I always consider the context around feedback received, as well as the motives of the person providing it. How else are you supposed to respond rationally? If someone gave me some feedback but it was clear their motives were malicious, I’m not going to take that seriously. This is why I suggested an alternative conversation starter (“when you X, I feel Y”), which I feel would yield better results. I’m not against having these conversations, I’m all for them. Honest and open discussion is the only way to reduce division and find common ground.
The blog post did not propose to remove the word "guys" from vocubulary. It simply highlighted that using this gendered noun to address a group of people of diverse genders causes those in the group not identifying as "guys" to feel excluded. I hope this clears it up.
I agree with you, the post did not call for the word to be removed from our vocabulary. The point I am making is that suggesting we replace the word with “more inclusive variations” is the same thing. You could argue that you can still use the word “guys” when addressing a group of men, but the you can argue “don’t assume they identify as men, so use a ‘safer’ word to address the group”, and we end up in a circular argument.
I don’t have a solution to this conundrum. I don’t believe forcing everyone to change widely acceptable language is the answer. I also don’t think that continuing to take actions that negatively affect others is the answer. I’m just hoping to have honest, meaningful conversations and help others to do the same.
Appreciate your thoughts.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I do, because it unjustly posits that the person saying “guys” (or whatever phrase you choose) is by default wrong, and that they are morally naive and insufficient, otherwise they wouldn’t have committed the perceived hurt. It removes any blame on the accuser’s part before a good faith discussion can be had. And when the accused feel they have been wrongly so, you can bet that a significant number of those conversations either don’t go well, or they generate more division than union.
I feel that instead, the tried and tested “when you X, I feel Y” conversation starting point creates better outcomes, as the person who feels hurt can explain what event triggers those feeling, and then together they can navigate solutions (which don’t default to “don’t use that word”, but also don’t preclude it). Are you going to have this conversation with someone maliciously using language to segregate and hurt? No. Is this conversation going to be effective with strangers? Probably not. But having this conversation format with a person whom you respect and trust will generate far more success, and those are the people that matter most.
Perhaps I shall rephrase that in a future edit. My intention was, when used in the right context, with the right people, that that word is not harmful at all. It is untrue to say that the word “guys” is always harmful, all of the time, and as such, I don’t feel it should be dropped from our vocabulary.
Additionally, that quote has no context. Is the default stance that if the word “guys” is used that hurt feelings of exclusion occur? What was the makeup of the group being referred to? If it was 0:1 male-to-female, that doesn’t make sense to me. If it was 10:1 male-to-female, I can see how that could induce those feelings. But without the context, it puts everyone else at fault for their words by default. It creates an environment where the use of the word “guys” makes you automatically wrong, however I hope we can find common ground in that context is vital, and that such an environment should not exist.
It’s up to us to navigate those conversations and determine what language should be used in each given situation, not unlike choosing to greet someone formally or casually. The way I speak with my brother is different to how I would speak with a client.
Appreciate your questions 😊
Interesting. Is that how you respond to all feedback you receive, or just on misgendering people? What accuser? The post proposed to kindly ask people to use inclusive language, and not blame any person and just focus on language.
The blog post did not propose to remove the word "guys" from vocubulary. It simply highlighted that using this gendered noun to address a group of people of diverse genders causes those in the group not identifying as "guys" to feel excluded. I hope this clears it up.
But the very person using the word 'guys' IS using inclusive language as far as they're concerned. They almost certainly meant nothing by it, and the automatic assumption that they did is - I think - what is being referred to as unjust. Is it right to automatically think the worst of everyone? Words mean different things to different people and the free flow of information is impeded by having to negotiate the minefield of eggshells that gets set up by policing language in this way.
I'm all for embracing and celebrating our differences, but dictating how people should speak and the 'correct' way to interpret words, or telling them that they're wrong for using language that is totally normal to them seems pretty exclusionary and intolerant to me.
Everyone is different. Embrace and accept that. Be happy. Live and let live. If you look for reasons to be offended, you'll find them everywhere - but why subject yourself to that?
I always consider the context around feedback received, as well as the motives of the person providing it. How else are you supposed to respond rationally? If someone gave me some feedback but it was clear their motives were malicious, I’m not going to take that seriously. This is why I suggested an alternative conversation starter (“when you X, I feel Y”), which I feel would yield better results. I’m not against having these conversations, I’m all for them. Honest and open discussion is the only way to reduce division and find common ground.
I agree with you, the post did not call for the word to be removed from our vocabulary. The point I am making is that suggesting we replace the word with “more inclusive variations” is the same thing. You could argue that you can still use the word “guys” when addressing a group of men, but the you can argue “don’t assume they identify as men, so use a ‘safer’ word to address the group”, and we end up in a circular argument.
I don’t have a solution to this conundrum. I don’t believe forcing everyone to change widely acceptable language is the answer. I also don’t think that continuing to take actions that negatively affect others is the answer. I’m just hoping to have honest, meaningful conversations and help others to do the same.
Appreciate your thoughts.