From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#38002: Please remove this joke Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2019 09:46:39 +0100 Message-ID: <8736f6acnk.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <86bltxng32.fsf@inmotica-integral.es> <87k18k7ugd.fsf@gnus.org> <3th83oen14.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <874kzna7mb.fsf@mbork.pl> <86eeyrtkwd.fsf@inmotica-integral.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="112396"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 27.0.50 Cc: nipponpost@airmail.cc, bug-gnu-emacs , rms@gnu.org, 38002@debbugs.gnu.org To: cpardo@imayhem.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 02 09:48:30 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp5B-000T6G-Ay for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 09:48:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45722 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp58-0005Lu-I7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:48:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56105) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp4n-0005Kw-Eu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:48:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp4k-0004tS-0Z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:48:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp4j-0004sD-SG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:48:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp4j-0002Op-OX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:48:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Marcin Borkowski Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2019 08:48:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 38002 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch fixed Original-Received: via spool by 38002-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B38002.15726844219139 (code B ref 38002); Sat, 02 Nov 2019 08:48:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 38002) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Nov 2019 08:47:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58083 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp3l-0002ND-Ds for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:47:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([195.110.48.8]:46492) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iQp3c-0002Mt-LF for 38002@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 04:46:58 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1401DE6302; Sat, 2 Nov 2019 09:46:50 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mojserwer.eu Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X8j2hSrHaEI2; Sat, 2 Nov 2019 09:46:46 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (jeden09-dwa27.echostar.pl [213.156.109.227]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 58B20E62FC; Sat, 2 Nov 2019 09:46:46 +0100 (CET) In-reply-to: <86eeyrtkwd.fsf@inmotica-integral.es> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:170772 Archived-At: On 2019-11-01, at 21:13, cpardo@imayhem.com wrote: >> Marcin Borkowski: >> >> The problem is, this one particular joke isn't bad at all, quite the >> opposite - irrespective whether one laughs at women or hacker's >> stereotype of women. (I think both interpretations are valid, and none >> is too offensive for my taste. The previous joke in the file is >> definitely more offensive, for instance.) IOW, I consider it a feature, >> not a bug. (And I repeated it to many of my friends, and we all had >> a good laugh.) > > Who does the previous joke offend? Are you sure you are reading the Well, apparently I expressed myself wrong - I should have said that some people might consider it blasphemous, which is way worse than just "offensive". (I gave it some thought and I personally _think_ it's not, though I'd definitely not tell it anyone - it's extremely bad taste.) > correct one? The removed joke demeans women by describing them as > unpredictable, irrational beings. If you enjoy that kind of humor, good I don't entirely see why being unpredictable and irrational is necessarily inferior to being predictable and rational. There are cases when these are exactly the qualities which may be needed. And even if not, _if_ we assume than women indeed possess these qualities (in some statistical sense, of course), this does not make them "worse" than men at all. There are other qualities women may have than men lack, and all that implies is that men and women are _different_, and neither sex Pareto-dominates the other one, so to speak. Besides, it is your interpretation (as I mentioned, I consider it a valid one). Another, equally valid one is that the jokes demeans hackers by describing them as believing women are unpredictable and irrational (whereas the truth is more complicated), and fear of women might be somewhat implied. Yet another interpretation would be that a joke is on a meta level, and what is really the object of laughter is the simplistic _stereotype_ of women. This interpretation seems not to demean anyone. > for you. But hosting it the distribution of one of the flagship software > pieces of a project based on ethics if obviosly wrong. > >> This is not only false perspective, but it is plainly dangerous. >> Pitting men against women (or women against men) is exactly what >> feminists do, and it is one of the reasons feminism is such a poison for >> the society. > > Feminism aims for equality of the sexes. Such poison. I obviously do not share this belief. And even if it did aim for _equality_, actually defining it is crucial. Some kinds of equality are morally good. Some are morally bad. In a sense, you don't want "too much equality". (We had a certain movement towards it here in Eastern Europe, btw. It didn't end well.) Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://mbork.pl