Twiter phasing out traditional words for “more inclusive ones”

Re:Twiter phasing out traditional words for “more inclusive ... by red_admiral on Sunday July 05, 2020 @04:56AM (#23737440)

Looking at the examples here, with one small exception I don't see any problems. Using primary/replica instead of master/slave for databases is overdue anyway - not just because of inclusive language but because "replica" is actually a more accurate description of, well, a replica.

The small exception is I'd like to know the context for the "avoid gendered pronouns" one. I'm absolutely fine with using they for a generic unnamed person (e.g. "the user") but when referring to a named individual, if their preferred pronoun is he or she, I hope Twitter will continue to use that.

I'm sure someone could reply with a list of over-the-top examples of trying-to-be-inclusive language, or controversial ones (e.g. the kind JK Rowling complained about) but the ones in this list all look like boring, uncontroversial, won't-hurt-anyone examples.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twiter phasing out traditional words for “more inclusive ... by chrismorgan on Sunday July 05, 2020 @05:03AM (#23737465)

I find fault with “dummy value”: “placeholder” and “sample” each can overlap in meaning with “dummy”, but broadly mean two fairly different things. And that’s a common thing in these discussions—they routinely replace words with other words that lose either substantial meaning or nuance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twiter phasing out traditional words for “more inclusive ... by thealistra on Thursday July 09, 2020 @04:39PM (#23784905)

There are languages without obvious genderless pronouns without grammatical acrobatics.

I wonder how they will tackle that in translations

[ Parent | on HN ]