Re: On the "Words Matter" issue (was Re: The request of words matter updated; quotes deleted)

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 11:34 PM Bart Schaefer
<schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
>
> Thoughts and questions.
>
> I see a number of people have capitalized "Words Matter".  I also find
> it interesting that this thread was initiated by IBM employees in
> China who are apparently not regular participants in zsh-workers or
> zsh-users.  Is there an IBM corporate initiative called "Words Matter"
> that led to this discussion being opened at this particular time?  As
> has been mentioned, this topic has been around a long time (2007 at
> least; https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/masterslave/).
>
> Obviously the term "master" has definitions and connotations that
> reference skill level, origin of concept or data, etc.  Those
> connotations are typically clear from context.  On the other hand, the
> word "slave" always refers to subservience and captivity (whether or
> not accepted by "consenting adults"), and therefore carries the
> emotional baggage that also attaches to "master" when the words are
> paired.  (The Snopes article is some evidence that this is not just a
> "white knight" issue.)
>
> Arguments focused on those other connotations of "master" are missing
> the point.  Whether or not one thinks emotional baggage is being
> self-righteously exaggerated or is a valid basis to make a technical
> change, it can't just be waved away with "but that shouldn't matter in
> this abstraction."  If they weren't evocative, those words wouldn't
> have been chosen to begin with.

All good points and questions, but I have to point out a fact of our
cultural zeitgeist.

Today a person saying the n-word with certain skin pigmentation would
be labelled a racist, whereas a person with a different skin
pigmentation would have no problem. A person opining about abortion
who happens to be male would be told to shut up, whereas a female
never would. A woman wearing inappropriate clothes would be
criticized, but not a trans woman. My point is that in today's society
superficial features of your identity do matter: the color of your
skin, your sexual orientation, genitals, etc.

So, as a cis whilte male my opinion objectively does not matter. Which
is why if I say "I have no problem with the term 'master'", nobody
cares. On the other hand if a black person says "I have a problem with
the term 'master'", everyone cares.

The problem is that **not a single** black person has claimed to have
a problem with the term "master". Have they?

Our sense of empathy has been emotionally blackmailed to have sympathy
for these hypothetical people that do not exist. We are bending over
backwards thinking about an intrusive change that benefits *no one*,
because we are told some oppressed minority might benefit.

But this doesn't change the fundamentals of logic: he who makes the
claim has the burden of proof. The people who are proposing the change
have the burden of proof.

Has anyone proposing the change brought forward a black person who
finds the term personally offensive?

We should not be listening to people being offended *by proxy* saying
"I think some people will find the term offensive". Does anybody find
the term personally and directly offensive themselves?

-- 
Felipe Contreras