>I'm not a fan of the use of the word "pimp" in this context
In this context it means "to adapt or embellish in an ostentatious manner".
In this context it means "to adapt or embellish in an ostentatious manner".
I am not the language police and I am not going to "cancel" this Show HN for the use of what I consider an offensive term. I am an investor and an advisor, so my advice is to not use that term. I feel that it is juvenile and shows a lack of concern. You may disagree and point towards normalizing behavior (MTV, evolving slang, etc.) as your justification.
My philosophy is why bother to offend if you can avoid it. I also will fight for your right to be offensive. But I won't invest in your startup or star your Github repo.
Implying saying something someone might find offensive requires active intent.
OP clearly isn't trying to be offensive. It's ethically wrong to imply, suggest, or act as if they are. The commenter doesn't like the word pimp, and wants others to feel the same distaste they're afflicted by. What the OP intended to do is irrelevant.
More directly why bother to offend if you cant help it. Because someone will happily take offense to anything. So to avoid it would mean not interacting at all. Which is exactly why we can't have nice things. OP is trying to be nice sharing something they feel is useful. Only to be be accosted with the accusation they're intentionally trying to be offensive. If you're going to make something someone will find useful, and it only costs some offense to someone trying to find a way to feel offensive, you then try to cause offence.
Yes, people can choose to take offense at anything. There isn't much we can do about that. In my own interactions, there are certain words and phrases I choose not to use. This works for me, doesn't harm others and generally improves my quality of life.
We exist in a world of many intersecting values and beliefs. We navigate through them in differing ways. There is room for many differing points of view, although recent events make it seem like this is a less viable belief.
Back the the OP, this is a Show HN. My input is I think the name is lame. I won't censor, down vote, blacklist or otherwise assign any other intent.
The comment expressing dislike for the name didn't accuse or say anything about intentional offensiveness, only that they felt it wasn't appropriate in a professional setting. "Someone will happily take offense to anything" isn't true but many commenters have expressed dislike for this particular name. Nobody's coming for the words "bread" or "computer" anytime soon.
"Beautify my readme" or "glow up my readme" would convey the same meaning without the unnecessary sex trade connotation. That would let the work be shared in professional settings and put off fewer people, both positives! Charitably, the original author may not have considered negative connotations for the name. At least now they know it's not universally beloved.
> The comment expressing dislike for the name didn't accuse or say anything about intentional offensiveness, only that they felt it wasn't appropriate in a professional setting.
Their comment includes a rant about sexual exploitation. By it's nature as a comment directed at the OP, implies it's relevant to the name of the project. The best interpretation I was able to come up with is they thought OP didn't know, and thought it was important to point out that the word pimp is 'bad in their opinion'. diskzero's reply is a perfect counter example, they're careful to speak to the reasons objectively. Observing vs complaining (admittedly what I read as complaining.)
> "Someone will happily take offense to anything" isn't true but many commenters have expressed dislike for this particular name. Nobody's coming for the words "bread" or "computer" anytime soon.
But it is true, I can cite plenty of examples of people not being allowed to do cool things because someone complained. It's great that no ones' coming for bread or computer. But I already have so few words, I'm not willing to let anyone "come for" any of them. not even the ones I think are stupid. Not now, and not after soon, however big soon is.
(to be clear I don't think that's what anyone is trying to do, only that It is a hill worth dying on)
Disagree, as clearly did the author.
Your philosophy is sensible, but policing vocabulary at this point is premature optimisation.
There are just so many names to pick from! I find the choice very confusing. Too cringe-y for me to consider sharing or using personally, but I’m sure some will and I hope they enjoy it.
An intuitive case for most people: we all recognize the car from The Dukes of Hazzard, but you probably shouldn’t put the confederate battle flag on your own car as a reference to it.
Known? It seems like many people are disagreeing with you. Who knows that it is offensive? Who decided? Can you tell me or did you just write it in this way to avoid saying directly that it is just your personal opinion that this word is offensive?
But that’s entirely separate from the question of whether the word “pimp” is, in fact, offensive. I think failing to acknowledge that it is a generally offensive word is more a testament to obstinacy than anything else.
Unironically, virtue signalling is offensive to me. What now? Who defines offensiveness?
>you probably shouldn’t put the confederate battle flag on your own car as a reference to it.
Who are you to define a cultural symbol for other people?
I think we need to recognize that offense is not given, it is taken; and it is up to the individual to recognize that context matters before taking offense. The alternative is effectively authoritarianism, dictation of culture and weaponization of victimhood.
If you feel offended by other people saying that they are uncomfortable with things (which, again, doesn’t clearly translate to “virtue signaling” to me), then that sounds like a “you” problem. It’s worth introspecting on why others’ feelings affect yours that much, and why that comes out in such breathless language as “authoritarian,” “weaponization,” &c.
This is only true if you live in an urban bubble. The confederate flag represents more than racism and slavery to southerners, frankly, you are narrow minded. And your interpretation is, ironically, offensive to those who live in the south.
Herein lies the conundrum. You have no right to dictate, what is and is not cut and dry to other people.
>why that comes out in such breathless language as “authoritarian,” “weaponization,” &c. Because inevitably those among us who are the loudest regarding political correctness use it as a tool to grab at power that more often than not is undeserved. They are aggressors in a culture war which is has long ago consumed academia and is rapidly spreading through industry; political correctness is literally thought control and as such forms a foundation for authoritarianism.
I repeat, you have no right to dictate what symbols mean to me - your culture does not supercede mine. All symbols must be considered alongside within the context of intent. I am not offended by people saying that they are uncomfortable, I am offended by such people telling me I am not allowed to use certain symbols or language, or have certain thoughts, under penalty of termination of employment or blacklisting, since ultimately this is a unilateral imposition of culture.
And in fact when such political correctness spreads to other countries, when westerners start insisting that, say, Japan is not diverse or LGBT friendly enough, this is modern cultural imperialism. I don't need it at home and it isn't right abroad either. This is about far more than pronouns and flags.
I don't think they are. My impression was merely they're attempting to convey the general perception. Their's to be sure, but also what they believe to be the accepted consensus.
> This is only true if you live in an urban bubble. The confederate flag represents more than racism and slavery to southerners, frankly, you are narrow minded. And your interpretation is, ironically, offensive to those who live in the south.
This isn't the first time I, an urbanite have heard this. I thought it was stupid then, and I still do. I've never seen a single person wave the confederate flag that wasn't also in the best possible interpretation for them, at the very least, ok with with the confederacy generally. The amount of willful and intentional ignorance as to the reason the confederacy exists, itself is egregious enough. The confederacy exists to promote human slavery. Totems and emblems of it, are inexorable tied to slavery. To fly the confederate is to condone the one of the worst mistakes in American history. "But it doesn't mean racism to me!!!!" You're flying the flag, you should know why it exists. Why did the confederacy exist? "States rights!!!!" States rights, to... do... what? You can continue to lie to both yourself and to me, but that's my point about willful and intentional ignorance of reality.
But I'm more than willing to be convinced I'm wrong, or mistaken. What does the confederate flag mean that's so important, or so valuable that it's existence as a symbol of the group willing to kill to protect the ability to own human slaves should be ignored?
> All symbols must be considered alongside within the context of intent.
I completely agree with you, only I think the responsibility to consider the context and intent lies with both the listener, *and* the speaker. Se why are you willing to ignore the negative connotation or context of the culture?
> I am offended by such people telling me I am not allowed to use certain symbols or language
That's one interpretation of it... I'm not sure it's reasonable. I'd frame it more like: "I wouldn't let someone scream racist obscenities in my ear." Only I'm willing to go farther than that, I'm not willing to let someone display a symbol I believe to be in existence to promote racism at my coffee shop. If the owner agrees, good, if they disagree. Then it's really not my coffee shop. I'll go somewhere else. It just happens to be that there's more people unwilling to tolerate racism than there used to be. And those that are willing to tolerate it are now outnumbered.
> under penalty of termination of employment or blacklisting, since ultimately this is a unilateral imposition of culture.
No, it's the rejection of a harmful culture. I wouldn't willingly work with someone constantly threatening to harm someone. I wouldn't work with someone constantly exclaiming that I'm going to hell because I'm going to the wedding of my gay friend. And I won't willingly work for someone I know owns a slaves. The difference is that instead of me leaving the community, it's me refusing to allow someone spewing such toxicity from joining one I'm already a member of. I'm not saying you can't fly your symbol of racism. In fact I'm glad if you do fly it. Because it makes it easier to know where you stand on the importance of racism. It saves me the trouble of wondering how you feel about racism and slavery.