It is necessary? is it unnecessary? Does it give you the same? What do you think?

  • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why would I want to use exclusive language? If I know it’s going to make someone feel worse instead of better, why would I use?

    The only argument for not using it that I can think of is that you don’t give a shit about other people…

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The alternative is not exclusive, but traditional. Some words have double meaning, traditionally. A word “man”, for example, can mean male, but can also be inclusive. Nobody in the right mind would argue that the word “mankind” means only male part of humanity.

      • fiat_lux@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Traditional homonyms reinforce ingrained cultural stereotypes.

        Nobody in the right mind would argue that the word “mankind” means only male part of humanity.

        Perhaps not, but it does support the outdated tradition of considering the male gender to be the “default person”. This has had many lasting negative consequences, in areas ranging from scientific research to product design.

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I seriously do not think that when people use the word mankind they do anything that has negative consequences. The word has very gender neutral meaning today and if anyone would want today to change it, then they actually do disservice to equality movement because they look like crazies.