Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In my experience, autistic people are far less likely to offend people than charismatic "leader types", mostly because they are willing to learn and don't just blow off feedback with some bullshit about having the right to be offensive. Don't use them as a shield. And yes - people who don't agree on the value of inclusion cannot be included without destroying the inclusivity. Popper, paradox of intolerance, etc.


Bullshit shallow understanding of autism. The people from your experience are people who are clearly autistic, enough so you know that they are, and hence get some leeway. The majority of them are not so obvious, whom you will gladly burn at the stake for saying the wrong things.

Even besides that, this extremist view of "if saying X offends Y, we must ban saying X" is bullshit. If you are offended by the use of gendered pronouns as a 0.1% who does not fall into male/female, tough shit. Its not used out of some hatred towards non-binary people, its simply a matter of convenience. You are talking about "inclusivity", but arguing over which goddamn pronoun to use.. there are real problems to solve re: inclusivity.

Ands its great that tiptoeing around gendered pronouns is easy for you, it might not be so easy for people who don't speak English well. I will be "inclusive" of them by assuming good intentions rather than assuming they are trans-hating assholes simply because they used a "he" instead of a "they".

Anyways, great job fighting for inclusion via nitpicking pronouns. Rosa Parks would be pumped knowing all it takes to bring about racial equality is to get the slaveowners to stop saying the N-word.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: