Huh? Source?

I signed up to Lemmy without knowing much about instances, can’t remember exactly why I picked lemmy.ml but it wasn’t politics.

Is this really a generalisation people have? Should I move…?

Haha yeah blame those victims

Just go double or nothing a few times! Simple!

Checking in from NZ, sounds familiar to me

Really? You haven’t seen a rise in facts being deemed false? Or maybe news being deemed fake? Maybe there’s even been a new term created for it that is being thrown around a lot by one side in particular.

Doesn’t seem like a good idea to give them more examples they can point to when they want to discredit your facts

From an outside perspective on the other side of the world, I disagree. Any lie, once uncovered, makes it so much easier for even the the worst positions to be defended. ‘See, they have to make shit up about us, they have nothing’. Bam, now even all the other factual points are discredited in the eyes of many people who may have been on the fence.

Jd is a creepy weirdo, but the couch story was made up.

Not directed at you (unless you already knew it was fake, I guess) - I fucking hate it when people feel the need to make up stuff about someone who already has plenty of real red flags that need attention.

The first Headless I encountered in Sekiro. I was seeing enough progress and understanding what was being asked of me just enough to be stubborn as hell and kept trying to fight it head on, without having any knowledge yet of any helpful items that make the fight less rage-enducing.

Outside of Fromsoft, my NG+ encounter with the green swamp monster thing in Lies of P seemed SO much harder than the first time. So I’m not sure if this boss is considered easy or hard, but I didn’t consider it to be very hard going in for a second time and got quite stuck for a while…

I mean, yes. In some cases on some issues, some people get offended at things that are frankly a waste of anger.

Agreed. Though I’m not sure how this is a good example, as the PR just fixed it without any anger or offence taken.

Then, there was anger after the PR got rejected because apparently being inclusive to women is ‘political’. This is where you can see that the maintainer didn’t just make a mistake, they made a choice and are sticking with it for reasons. This is where it becomes an issue.

Ah, women are just choosing to be unreasonably offended by the patriarchy. Got it.

Also - this wasn’t even about someone being offended. It was a quiet PR to fix a grammatical mistake, and the reason given was simple and correct: the pronoun used was needlessly non-inclusive. It’s everyone else who has an issue with this that seems to be offended, in my opinion

Right, so continue that thought into why you wouldn’t be affected by it.

Perhaps you wouldn’t actually feel quite so unwelcome in an education role as women might in STEM. I did a quick google to see if teaching was as female-dominated as STEM is male-dominated, and while yes it’s very close, hilariously the first result was about how there is still a gender based wage gap issue even though it’s so dominated in the other direction… Interesting.

So while you might think you can really put yourself in their shoes by imagining yourself in a teaching role, now try imagining yourself as a woman in a male-dominated field, in a male-dominated society, in a male dominated world. Could be a little bit different, maybe

That’s great! Same here, to be honest. But I also realise why it doesn’t affect me, because as a man I’ve never felt unwelcome in these spaces purely on account of my gender.

Kind of like how as a white guy, I wouldn’t really feel much other than a bit of surprise if someone called me a cracker. I haven’t felt oppression and prejudice connected to that word, or any other that is to do with my whiteness. But I do NOT then turn around and say “well why are people upset about being called n-words? They should just move on with their day like I can!”

So, not ‘exactly this’. I wrote that in my example an assumption had been made, whether I intended it or not.

Same as in the documentation this post is about, therefore the problem existed before it was pointed out.

The grammatical error to be fixed was the assumption in the language used. Both of these things are true. Pointing it out very simply, as part of providing the reason for the change, is completely normal

Ah OK, I think we’re getting to the heart of why you are saying that this wasn’t an issue.

When you say that the author wasn’t assuming anything, what exactly do you mean? If, for example, I write in a guide that if a user of my software does ‘a’ then he can expect result ‘b’, do you disagree that I am assuming my users go by he/him pronouns?

I might not have done it with intention, but there is an assumption being made there. Words mean things.

You seem very, very sure of there being “LITERALLY” no problem with the gendered pronoun being used for an unknown user.

Instead of hand-waving it away as the author being male and just prefering his own pronouns in his writing, we could maybe consider where it is being written and why it might feel particularly non-inclusive? ie: a field that has historically been very intentionally uninviting to women?

Also, it’s not like this was someone petitioning for a boycott over one assumed pronoun, they just quietly fixed the grammar and submitted the change. Absolutely nothing idiotic about it.

Here’s the first one I found. Maybe there’s more, who knows? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-04-29/emotional-buswell-admits-to-chair-sniffing-incident/2419558

So I’m assuming you misread it, but let’s pretend for a moment that it was a Democrat pouring water into a Republican’s bag - that would make you ok with it?

Try to not fall into that ‘us vs them’ at all costs mentality… You should hate it even more when ‘your team’ does something shitty like this, it lowers them and makes it far easier for the opposition to look better in comparison

Hmm. While I can see that and appreciate the inclusiveness of it, it still feels like the wrong choice to me. Maybe times are changing (obviously) and I need to get used to emojis being used in a more serious tone? But I don’t know… Are we there yet?

Holy shit I hadn’t clicked yet and hoped you were joking. I’m sure they mean well but I find that really disturbing, what a weird use of emoji…