Cool. Now, can we finally also ban "white rice" and "brown rice"? I'm offended to no end by these racist terms.
Agree. PC gone completely bonkers and OTT.I'm all for the protests over police misconduct but there comes a point where things are going overboard and this is a perfect example. The failure of diversity is not something that can be overstated but if we allow ANY word or phrase outside of the obvious (like the N word) then our society & culture become meaningless.
This whole thing is getting dumber and dumber. If you're in good financial shape, you are said to be in the black. Is that racist? Shall we change it, too?
Lol. One day when I was in a shop and jamming AC/DC's Back in Black. The service advisor was escorting a black customer to look at his car and I'm over here jamming out and he looked at me crazy.. I get in the red more times than I care for so I'm very happy to get back in the black.No no no, silly!
If you're in good financial shape, you're in the Persons Of Recent African Descent and if you are in more perilous financial shape, you're in the Persons of One Of The Various Indigenous Nations Of North And/Or South America But Quite A Bit Less Recently Of African Descent.
'Cuz it Began In Africa.
I propose all over sensitive people are sent away to a designated place for only over sensitive people. I hear Syria is lovely this time of.. All year round!No. Context matters. And the IT context shouldn't care about overly-sensitive people's feelings (not that they were racist terms to begin with).
All the illogical people calling for this should get blacklisted from making decisions lol.
Master/Slave terminology probably should be abolished, and I have no strong opinion one way or another on Black/White. I can see where the argument to replace the Black/White terms comes from, and somewhat agree with it. At the end of the day, its just names and buzzwords. If someone thinks they should be changed and you disagree, ask yourself, is this really the hill you want to die on?
Except those monuments were erected not immediately following the civil war, but during the Jim Crow era. They're also to the generals of a traitor nation that failed within 4 years of being founded. Save the history of losing side for the books and museums, where they can be presented with context, not for random street corners of neighborhoods that were populated with the descendants of former slaves at the time those statues were erected.
Firstly they're not actually confederate monuments. They're mostly put up by the KKK or similar organizations during the Jim Crow era as away to tell black people what white people in the area thought their place in society was. Secondly, you'll notice that in every single country on earth, people try to put up statues of people they admire, to celebrate them and their legacy. What legacy is there to celebrate about a bunch of people who committed treason because they didn't want their slaves taken away from them?
If you want a museum telling the story, I'm all for it. But statues and monuments are to celebrate actions or individuals, and celebrating those that fought for slavery sends an interesting message to coloured people doesn't it?
Exactly. They are words that have clearly understandable meanings. The master drive was the one in charge and the slave drive was the one that wasn't. While it might make you think of slavery, it certainly doesn't make you want to bring it back. They're just words.Master and slave were terms used for the primary and secondary hard drives on a single IDE (pre-SATA for the millennials here) ribbon cable (there could only be 2). It was necessary to designate one of them master and the other slave.
They rebelled against the federal government, they fired the first shots of the war by firing on the Union Fort Sumter (you don't just get secede and then go 'oh, by the way, give us free stuff' - if they wanted control of any forts, they should make sure they actually controlled them before seceding), then we had a long 'discussion' about who was right and determined that the confederates were wrong: a state's rights end at the beginning of an individual's rights.How was the south a "traitor nation"?
Thank you for the only sane post in this thread. For a group of people complaining about PC and snowflakes, they sure are precious about changing a few terms. The irony of saying "it's just words!" then complaining about changing said words seems lost.The ignorance from some users on here is amazing.
Regardless of the history and intention of white/black list, the connotation is black = bad, white = good. This is called casual racism.
Given how easy it is to change to the new modern preferred terms of allowed and not allowed, this really should not be an argument.
If you think white/brown rice is the same as this you are a part of the problem.
Dear Tech Companies, make the change. we will cope just fine.
My problem isn't with the words. Change them if you want. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.Thank you for the only sane post in this thread. For a group of people complaining about PC and snowflakes, they sure are precious about changing a few terms. The irony of saying "it's just words!" then complaining about changing said words seems lost.
Set A: Terms we use which can cause offense to a group or groups of people.
Set B: A more specific set of terms we could use, which do not cause offense to anyone.
How could changing from Set A to Set B be controversial, unless you have an issue with a group that might be offended?
They rebelled against the federal government, they fired the first shots of the war by firing on the Union Fort Sumter (you don't just get secede and then go 'oh, by the way, give us free stuff' - if they wanted control of any forts, they should make sure they actually controlled them before seceding), then we had a long 'discussion' about who was right and determined that the confederates were wrong: a state's rights end at the beginning of an individual's rights.