Ceist Beag
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,445
I disagree with this."boys and girls thing is nonsense."
Nonsense to whom?
It's certainly not nonsense to me.
The words we use reflect the attitudes we hold.
Be careful of your thoughts, because your thoughts become your words, your words become your deeds, and your deeds become your character.
I completely agree with this. Some people might struggle to find the right word sometimes or might just be in the habit of using a certain word. I certainly wouldn't take offence at the use of a word based on the word alone. Context and tone are important in conveying the intent.To me it is not always the word that is important, it is the context and tone in which the word is used. If I'm doing a pitch to senior execs in a major company, I'll tailor my language appropriately and differently to if I'm having a conversation with people I've known for years.
One where Mike and Jane have mutual respect for each other.What world do you want to live in
Times change and we must change with them.
Once upon a time calling an African-American a certain name was considered acceptable. It's now considered so offensive that it is only referred to as the N-word whilst (somewhat ironically) other curse words are happily printed and voiced in newspapers and cinema, that word won't be.
There once used to be a toy doll, the first part of the name was Golly... - we don't have those any more.
Black and White Minstrels were once an acceptable song and dance entertainment, in fact they were even used many decades ago as tokens to promote Lyons Tea. These days 'blackface' is considered racist.
Female professionals such as doctors, pilots, were once defined by gender 'lady Doctor', 'male nurse'... we now view that as unnecessary and sexist.
So no, I don't believe you have the right to 'speak freely' and not be concerned about causing offence.
That would be scenario 1 then...One where Mike and Jane have mutual respect for each other.
We evidently disagree on what constitutes respectful behaviour. However, I don't see much value in continuing here, so I'll bow out at this point.That would be scenario 1 then...
Of course we should be concerned about causing offence but I do wonder if we perceive offence occurring when none actually was intended or perceived by the recipients
Scenario 1
Jane: "Hi Mike, how are you? It's a lovely day isn't it?"
Mike: "It's a grand day girl, more power to it. How are you?"
Jane: "I'm good Mike but I'd prefer if you didn't call me girl."
Mike (said with a wink): "Ah sorry, no bother at all girl, I mean Jane!"
Mike and Jane laugh and move on.
Why? Why not just apologise? Why add winks and laughs?he replied with his apology he did it in a light humoured way
Current research is indicating that AI is tending towards learning human bias also.God help the makers of AI robots
Current research is indicating that AI is tending towards learning human bias also.
That's my point. God help them when it comes to "how" to say things rather than "what" to say!
Just imagine if they also have psychological and visual assessment abilities, one could imagine them asking for a persons name by saying something like "Please tell me the name of the fat ugly narcissist with dandruff".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?