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 …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections

This topic is closed for new posts.

Wednesday 30th March 2011 08:56 GMT Concrete Gannet

Attempt at humour crosses line to offensiveness

Timothy,

"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.

2 1
1. Wednesday 30th March 2011 09:07 GMT Sarah Bee
  
  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.
  
  1 0
  1. Wednesday 30th March 2011 10:21 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    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."
    
    1 1
  2. Wednesday 30th March 2011 11:07 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Wrong
    
    I read this post as well and happen to agree with the first poster..
    
    enough with the marginalisation already
    
    0 0
Wednesday 30th March 2011 13:01 GMT daemon_byte

hmm

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.

2 0
Thursday 7th April 2011 08:56 GMT Concrete Gannet

Re: hmm

@daemon_byte:

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.

0 0