Re:Statement on AI Risk
by olalonde on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @12:41PM
(#36127034)
I have no issue with her choice of pronouns. I just find it odd that she states them when ~100% of the population would infer them correctly from her name Emily (and picture). My guess is she put them there for "ideology signaling".
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Statement on AI Risk
by mrtranscendence on Tuesday May 30, 2023 @01:06PM
(#36127429)
This is unnecessarily cynical. Why should people who are androgynous or trans be the only ones who state pronouns? By creating a norm around it we can improve their comfort at extremely minimal cost to ourselves.
I disagree, but HN is probably not the right place for this kind of debate. Also, it seems that you don't follow your own recommendation (on HN at least).
They brought it upon themselves by indulging in sex mimicry. It's not the responsibility of anyone else to mitigate this.
And it's not necessarily a good thing to normalise wrong-sex pronouns, see e.g. https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/
> My guess is she put them there for ideological signaling.
Yes, and you attacking her for that choice is also ideological signaling. This isn't a case where one choice is totally devoid of signal and the other is pejorative-of-the-day.
Many people believe that using normative pronouns makes those who use different pronouns more comfortable. They may be right, wrong, misguided, whatever. But it's a well-meaning and harmless act, and extremely strange to mention in the same breath as overt racism.