[llvm-dev] Inclusive language in LLVM: can we rename `job` in source code?

[antlists via llvm-dev]

On 25/06/2020 11:14, Jules Penuchot via llvm-dev wrote:
> The comparison between oppressed people claiming back space in 
> high-stakes domains like computer science and an authoritarian regime 
> that enforces a new language just to suppress revolutionary ideas is 
> irrelevant.

To the best of my knowledge, NO oppressed people care about the language.

> People are protesting around the world because they've been 
> living under constant monitoring and oppression by representatives of 
> states that are authoritarian towards them (e.g. systematically 
> unpunished murders from police officers, unlawful arrests, severe 
> judgements, etc.).

Then we should do something about that oppression. I think the real 
problem here is that America claims to be "The Land of the Free" - 
what's that on the Statue of Liberty about "Send us your oppressed" etc 
etc, but Blacks feel oppressed in their own land.

> This is what leads us to question vocabulary that 
> directly refers to the roots of that discriminatory violence.

And in the conteXt of this sentence, "us" means "The White Morally 
Superior Brigade". And my eXperience of this in Britain is that Blacks 
etc object strongly - "stop making things worse!".

Unfortunately, America is by far the worst offender in this regard of 
actual abuse. If we can fiX America, maybe we can fiX other countries, 
but in Britain I'd say it's not intentional, and it's down to ignorance.

We have something called "Stop and Search", which Black people hate. 
Let's say the Police stop 100 people, and find 8 black people with 
knives, and four whites. We had a Chief Police Officer make a similar (I 
can't remember it eXactly) argument on national TV. EXcept there's a 
*crucial* piece of information missing. That 100 includes 80 blacks. NOW 
do the maths ... That's just ignorant prejudice, not malicious.

Cheers,
Wol