Comment by concordDance
1 year ago
I don't think I particularly disagree.
> Here you and I are having a civil discussion and meta-conversation. We can literally talk about how the word is used, misunderstood, weaponised, etc.
I want to warn you that that does not apply to all words. I was informed by moderation that the following is not acceptable: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38680523
I'm pretty curious if you agree with them there (I've actually been meaning to get around to asking someone else for their opinion but it's still emotionally a bit difficult). (I think this subthread is dead enough that no one but you will read this)
> that the following is not acceptable
I read it. What specifically did you hear was unacceptable - there’s no moderator comment attached to your writing so I cannot tell what they told you is unacceptable.
Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38680537
(I was avoiding going to that thread again because looking at it stresses me out, I took a week long break from hackernews after that)
jumping in from the new comments page because you seem so earnest. those summations on that thread you think are unfair really don't come across as unfair summations of what you're trying to say. you call them a bald faced lie, but it's a fair reading of how what you actually wrote actually lands. what you wrote comes across as those summations. therein lies the problem. your writing doesn't land how you think it lands. there's no two ways around that. you say X, people hear Y, you say but I didn't say Y, but you really are saying Y with how you're saying X. you're trying to say Y without actually saying Y and think that if you say Y absolutely precisely enough, that Y is actually okay. so you insist you're saying X when you're saying Y, and Y simply isn't okay here. really deeply consider how you're really saying Y when you think you're saying or asking X.
take the word eugenics, for example. we've decided that's not okay. by asking modern questions around it, you think you can make it okay to support eugenics. but unfortunately words can have two meanings, and the word eugenics has picked up the meaning that non-blonde blue eyed white people are to be euthanized. thus, you can't use the word eugenics. you want it to mean one thing, but the rest of us have agreed it means this other thing, and you're left confused because you're saying X and everyone else is hearing Y because Y is what that word means to everyone else.
1 reply →