Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

writing guidelines #32

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 20, 2016
Merged

writing guidelines #32

merged 4 commits into from
Apr 20, 2016

Conversation

krl
Copy link
Contributor

@krl krl commented Jun 14, 2015

Ungendering proposal

@jbenet jbenet added the status/in-progress In progress label Jun 14, 2015

To avoid gendering in community interaction has multiple benefits. Avoiding the alienating feeling of documentation implicitly misgendering you, "the user and his computer".

This this is true of roughly half the population.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • "This this"

@krl
Copy link
Contributor Author

krl commented Jun 14, 2015

jbenet wrote:

agree with ungendering as much as we can, though i think it's fine for things to say "her"
too. Lots of academic papers use this form (don't think it's a big deal if males take the
back seat for a while). -- the problem with just using plurals ("the user installs ipfs on
their computer"`) is it reads poorly on academic writing, because it is grammatically
incorrect.

Sorry my push -f ate all your comments :/ i thought it would be more clever.

I did not propose singular plural, but actual plural, "computers" not "computer". I agree that female gendering is less problematic, but ungendered expressions should still be prefered.


#### Motivation

To avoid gendering in community interaction has multiple benefits. Avoiding the alienating feeling of documentation implicitly misgendering you, "the user and his computer". This is true of roughly half the population. Using plural forms is a good hack on the english language to get around this problem. This also includes extraterrestial beings and future lifeforms.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"Avoiding gendering" is more natural.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure this gets the point across. How about:

Avoiding gendering in community interaction has multiple benefits. Using a male or female pronoun alienates and unfairly prioritizes one gender in favor of another. For instance, saying "the user and his computer" may feel alienating to women, or vice versa. Luckily, in English, the pronoun 'their' can be used as both a singular and a plural form (cf. Singular they). Saying, "the user and their computer" is entirely acceptable and alleviates the issue. Furthermore, this also includes extraterrestial beings and future life forms.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree: guidelines should include some basic pronoun examples.
That way reader does not have to look it up elsewhere.

@RichardLitt
Copy link
Member

IAAAL*, so added a line note about singular they. This is a totally legitimate form that some 19th century pedants (read: jerks) didn't like, and prescriptivists (read: jerks) have issues with, but we can 100% use with impunity. It solves all the issues.

*IAAAL: "I am actually a linguist"

@dignifiedquire
Copy link
Member

I suggest adding a note about using the female version, if there it's not possible to use "their" or plural.

@RichardLitt
Copy link
Member

@dignifiedquire that shouldn't happen. Since this is a guideline and not a rule, anyway, I think it's not really necessary to do that.

@RichardLitt RichardLitt merged commit 6b9c341 into master Apr 20, 2016
@RichardLitt RichardLitt deleted the guidelines branch April 20, 2016 17:53
@jbenet jbenet removed the status/in-progress In progress label Apr 20, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants