Re: Prefer non-gender specific pronouns

[Léa Gris]

Le 05/06/2021 à 18:47, John Passaro écrivait :
> I can see a couple reasons why it would be a good thing, and in the con
> column only "I personally don't have time to go through the manual and make
> these changes". but I'd happily upvote a patch from somebody that does.

I can see so many reasons why it would be a bad thing to let the cancel 
culture adepts slip in here, rewriting bash documentations with their 
custom grammar.

These insidious gender neutral rewrites of manuals, books and so many 
reference texts, movies, songs, is a cancer spreading everywhere.

I can't see anyone decently take offense because the fictive user 
character in a Bash manual that was written 30+ years ago is of a 
defined non neutral fictive gender.

With less heated reaction statements; I argue against changing bash 
documentations to use gender neutral because:
- This change brings no additional value to the meaning, quality, or 
intelligibility of the Bash documentation.
- Moreover, it could likely cause damages, by offending people who don't 
recognize gender neutral applied to characters, even fictive rhetorical 
ones.

Please do not mix cleaving, clearly still non consensual, still heavily 
hot debated and politically loaded changes into technical projects like 
Bash.

--
Léa Gris