Hacker News Reader

> He could have just smooshed the big green button and scored one for the "not pointlessly defaulting to masculine terms" team

No specific change should be considered to be above the rules, and especially not those that have some sort of political agenda behind them.

I don't contribute to Node, but if I did, I would expect to follow all their procedures for accepting diffs, and Alex Gaynor's diff should have also been processed according to the same procedure. Why should his diff be more "special" than a one-line change I make in some code?

He gave a perfectly reasonable explanation why he did what he did: https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015#issuecomment-29568...

You're forgetting two key points:

1) Ben is not a native English speaker, so as stated by Ben, he didn't realize it was a big deal.

2) The committer didn't sign a CLA yet.

1) Non-native speakers should know better than to pass judgement on linguistic issues without consulting others.

2) Ben rejected the change over 40 minutes after the submitter stated he had submitted a CLA.

I have issues with 1. Native speakers of English already enjoys tremendous privilege in open source world -- see antirez of Redis, another non-native speaker's take on this: http://antirez.com/news/61 -- and it should be native speakers who should be understanding of failings of non-native speakers, not the other way around. Check your privilege!

Noordhuis is considerably more privileged in the context of an open-source project than the people he's chosen to behave poorly towards.

True, but I was commenting on English privilege in general. (nknighthb's comment was also general.)

You are not addressing the subject I am addressing at all.

I am the only full-time monolingual employee of the company I work for, the only one who does not speak Mandarin, the only one whose mother tongue is English, the only one who grew up in a primarily English-speaking country, and one of maybe four who would be classified as fluent in English (and that count is probably high).

You can't imagine the things that pass through my inbox every day. I've worked for this company for years. This would be impossible were I not understanding of the failings of non-native speakers.

But when I need to correct their formal English (not often, because it only occasionally matters, since our target market is mostly Chinese), not one of my co-workers dismisses it out-of-hand. They know their limits, and immediately seek to understand what is going on, rather than ignoring the issue.

This has been my (much more limited) experience with non-native speakers from other parts of Asia and Europe, as well. Encountering a non-native speaker who does not behave this way is rare, I can think of only twice that I've personally run into it, and both times it involved people who had severe interpersonal issues well beyond language.

I can easily imagine things that pass through such inbox :) I am in a similar situation (a few who is considered good at English in a large group). In addition, I myself am a non-native speaker.

I imagine when you correct your co-workers' English, you don't assume malice instead of ignorance. I think you especially don't assume bad intentions when it has to do with tones, nuances, and cultural backgrounds. I am just requesting to extend similar consideration to people who are not your co-workers.

I am quite surprised to learn that you imply non-native speakers have "severe interpersonal issues" if they don't "know their limits". While I agree knowing one's limit is a good thing, when one doesn't you tell them, carefully, in non-condescending manner, not in the manner of "Non-native speakers should know better than to pass judgement on linguistic issues".

You are mixing contexts. I am not speaking to Ben. When this change was rejected, nobody had said a word against Ben, or anything to or about him at all. And at this point I have no reason to be charitable, he hasn't even apologized, and decided to run away instead.

> I am quite surprised to learn that you imply non-native speakers have "severe interpersonal issues" if they don't "know their limits".

I am relaying my own experience. The only two non-native speakers I encountered who were outright dismissive of linguistic tweaks did have severe interpersonal issues, and as I said, they went well beyond issues of language. We are talking about workplace violence-level issues.

If the reality of my experience makes you uncomfortable, so be it. That alters nothing.

> Ben is not a native English speaker, so as stated by Ben, he didn't realize it was a big deal.

But is it an actually big deal for native speakers? I realize that some people think it's important, but then some people also think that you can't swear in comments and can't use "retard" as a summary opinion about someone else. In live, non-corporate language would any native speaker in fact routinely use "they" instead of "he" when referring to a user?

Yup, it was 100% bikeshedding, plain and simple. It's almost like we need to amend Wadler's Law to include a 4th level, "4. Politically correctness of pronouns in comments" [0]

The entire time that nerd rage battle was occurring I wanted nothing more than to be able to magically erase both the original commit and reversion from history, since it had nothing to do with the project, wasn't productive and was a distraction of many people's valuable time from things that actually matter for Node.js.

Seriously, if you want to bikeshed over pronouns instead of contribute working code, GTFO and go blag about it somewhere else.

[0] http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Wadler's_Law

If you're male (or anyone else reading this), consider this cognitive frame: instead of thinking about "they" vs. "he", ask yourself if you would prefer "they" over "she". Do you feel any sort of preference for one over the other? (Honestly don't know what your answer will be, I just think it's a good way to approach the issue.)

Also: not passing any judgement on Ben's actions here, just talking about the gender politics.

I routinely read "she" in documentation to refer to the developer/user. I notice it the first time it appears in a text and then I don't anymore, it doesn't bother me in the least.

I'm male, and I will choose he or she or they pretty much arbitrarily. Usually it's "they". I believe that at some point in the recent past, people preferred "she" for an anonymous pronoun for some kinds of writing.

Well, I found if offensive that 9:10 examples in a sexism sensitivity training video I saw were men offending, or deriding, or otherwise abusive towards women, with only one example of the reverse.

In terms of comments in a source code or even documentation, I've read plenty of times where it's "she" or "he" and honestly don't care too much... "they" imho is a bit too generic and would rather see "the user" or just "user" as the generic.

I think it's mostly bullshit. Even more so given that some words in many languages have a gender leaning... is it "le user" or "la user"? Given that, one would probably be more appropriate.

> In live, non-corporate language would any native speaker in fact routinely use "they" instead of "he" when referring to a user?

Yes, lots of people choose to use words like "the user" rather than "he". Or they use "he" and "she" throughout the documentation. Or they'll use singular "they".

> But is it an actually big deal for native speakers?

For some people it is a big deal because they are that type of person. For other people it's not a big deal but they do it anyway, just because.

I routinely use singular they [1] when referring to someone where gender isn't relevant. E.g., "I want to find a new doctor; they should be smarter than the fool I'm using now."

What got me going on this was Douglas Hofstadter's "A Person Paper on the Purity of Language" [2], which I read long ago in college. For me it's been a very gradual change; I don't like language forcing me in directions I don't want. Similarly, I've experimented with E-Prime [3] over the years.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

[2] http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/purity.html

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime

A friend once patched an ircd so that it would not accept messages not written in e-prime.

I thought it a brilliant hack.

Yes, every day. It would feel unnatural to use 'he' as a generic pronoun in that context.

Each person makes his own decision about this, but some prefer to use "they". To each his own.

Everyone has his own reason for choosing a particular pronoun. Some people do it because they think it is less sexist. Some people do it because they want to be part of the in-group, and they see others doing it. Some people are personally offended by the generic "he" and want to refer to both genders so they use the singular "they" or the awkward "he/she".

As a fellow Dutch native speaker, let me shed some light on this. Here is how Ben explained stuff:

" To me as a non-native speaker, the difference between 'him' and 'them' seems academic but hey (...)"

The difference here is not so much in language as in culture. The Dutch language has similar gender distinctions as English. Subtle differences are that: - Our nouns are male/neutral or female, similar to French 'le' or 'la' - We cannot make neutral possessive ('its') and are limited to 'his' or 'her'

For the rest it is pretty much like English, including 'him', 'her', 'they' and 'them'. Also Ben should have good knowledge of English as any young and educated dutchman.

The difference is more likely cultural. Americans seem much to be much more easily triggered by signs of potential gender inequality or racism. The Dutch are more tolerant/rude and the humor often flirts with political incorrectness. In short Ben (and I) would not have sensed this as a potential agitator.

"butthurt" is slang for rape.

I suggest you edit your comment to remove the offensive language and make it more inclusive to the Hacker News community.

No, it's not. It references rape, but is not synonymous.

Its current definition is roughly synonymous with "unreasonably upset".

I see, I've suggested a very simple change to a single word of your comment which would make it more inclusive to the community, but you have refused to change it and instead taken a stand of principle.

I now have the choice of respecting your decision, or pressing the big red button to incite an internet mob upon you and score one for radical feminism.

I'll let you know my decision shortly.

You should found a company and then not hire that guy but then write a blog post about how you would totally fire that guy.

I think it's a bit ironical that you seem to be acting "butthurt", threatening with internet mobs and such (and the gloomy prospects of someone losing their job if they don't bow down to your pressure).

Unless you are a rape victim you have no right to determine what is and isn't acceptable usage of the term.

Please respect the triggers of other people and check your privilege.

butthurt isn't slang for rape, and you don't get to decide what the community understanding of the meaning is. Which is someone unreasonably upset.

source: my understanding, peer understandings, and every post on urbandictionary

Evidence? Know Your Meme documents it as related to spanking:

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/butthurt

That matches my understanding of butthurt as an overreaction to being chastised or shamed.

"butthurt" is the pain you feel in your anus after being anally raped.

If you scroll down on that knowyourmeme page that you linked, you will see a set of memes in the "Buttfrustrated" category. The Brony meme has a set of insults that reference the anal rape: "Im sur thers sumpony who can help fill ur ass with semen laced hrut".

The percentage of cases in which a person is referencing "butthurt" to indicate a spanking is vanishingly small. Play the game "League of Legends" and complain when you lose. Ask people what they mean when they claim you must be "butthurt".

Did I just type those words?

I could believe some people use it that way; I just disagree that's the primary meaning.

Yep, you just said that!

+1 for defending women's rights while using the term 'butthurt'.

You're missing one very important detail: the person issuing the pull request didn't sign a CLA.

I don't subscribe to the idea of property rights for information, so that detail is irrelevant to me.

It is irrelevant to you, but not to libuv. All committers must sign a CLA, otherwise, pull requests issued by those that haven't signed the CLA will be rejected.

Edit: I might point out all pull requests that only have two lines of grammar change in documentation. Those lines which really don't mean anything to someone who speaks a language with gendered pronouns applied to inanimate objects.

Yes he did. After the PR, before the initial close.

> I feel like wanting to remark that Bryan Cantrill only fanned the fire here in all of this.

You've expressed a thought, not an emotion. Please use "think" instead of "feel".

http://www.wildmind.org/applied/depression/distinguishing-th...