Maybe we should call this one fog computing? Over the weekend, Amazon Web Services, the cloud computing subsidiary of the online retailer by the same name, announced something called Dedicated Instances for its Virtual Private Cloud services. In short, it takes what is supposed to be a multitenant cloud and not only locks …
Attempt at humour crosses line to offensiveness
"It's the difference between having full-time girlfriend and a high-class escort service."
You're implying that your readers are men. Don't. What you're doing is "othering" (http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Othering), implying that women aren't in your audience and don't belong here.
I appreciate the humour in The Register, but this one fell flat.
Re: Attempt at humour crosses line to offensiveness
Not really. It's a readily-understood simile that happens to pertain to the masculine. I hate all that fannying about with "a full-time girlfriend or boyfriend and a high-class escort service (male or female)". Who needs that?
Also, well, Reg readers are overwhelmingly male. I doubt very many women read this article at all, and if they did I doubt they were offended by the 'othering'.
Seriously, we've got enough to worry about and this isn't... worryable.
Is it really that tough?
"...a full-time girlfriend or boyfriend and a high-class escort service (male or female)".
Or just say:
"...a full-time partner and a high-class escort service."
I read this post as well and happen to agree with the first poster..
enough with the marginalisation already
Does anyone else see a molehill shooting up into the sky? It was an off the cuff remark that was clearly never meant to offend. Frankly trying to make everything into a sexist issue only undermines the real cases.
I agree that on the scale of sexist behaviour what happened here is mild. I also agree that it's unlikely Tim meant to offend.
But if a choice of words does cause offence (or causes a reader to never come back) isn't it a good idea to adjust them? I called attention to it to encourage Tim and Reg readers to think about the effects of what they say.
If I pointedly ignore you when it would be polite to acknowledge you, is that OK because I "clearly never meant to offend"?
If I call attention to habits and ways of thinking that are mildly sexist, I hope that would encourage people to think about what they do and say, and with a little awareness there might be fewer "real cases". I don't see how calling attention "undermines" real cases, unless you have an injustice awareness limit, so after you've had your fill of minor cases you will tolerate major ones.
I suspect I'm not the only one to think that Tim's words were already a sexist issue and I didn't make it into one. Indeed, one other reader has taken the time to say they agree with me. If your interpretation is different to mine, it might still be useful to know not everyone thinks that way.