Posts by Andre_Lamont

    Dear Florian, I'm sorry to interrupt your rant against a supposed spirit of exclusion of my friend and colleague ITSupporto, but it seems you decided to find what you were looking for... that wasn't there! See, the sentence "what do you think he should see?" refers to the word player, not the entity, not the genre, and it so happens that the word player is masculine in many latin rooted languages. Players can be males, females, can be without a genre or display several genres at the same time, the word itself is masculine. Don't see here a patriarcal reference, there are many words that are feminine on that same principle (table, car, house...) Dare I to even go farther: such a terrific and meticulous language as German even considers a third genre referred to as "neutral".


    Actually, pointing at another language or group of languages for their very principles or their lacks or insisting on the origin or the low education level of anyone when they reveal that they do not fully grasp the consequences of every word they choose (e.g. such as explaining to someone that his choice of words is politically incorrect) could be seen as both elitist and sectarian (maybe also racist) and be perceived as a harmful political incorrectness...

    But anyway, please do grant us your forgiveness and accept our apologies: the fact that a round 90% of DO players are indeed males should not dictate to refer to a potential "he" when mentioning a hypothetical player.


    Correct syntax should have been "think of totally new playerS who never played DO before: what do you think THEY should see?" Therefore, the supposed close-minded ITSupporto would have drowned her exclusion reflex in the approximation of a general plural inclusive genre and soothed your (legitimate) desire for politically correctness.

    We hope we did not offend anyone by the use of careless and amputated semantics and if we did, we sincerely apologize: it was not our intention to make anyone feel excluded.


    PS: political correctness will always run faster than those who serve it and the appropriate term recommended to use by the GLAAD association is now "LGBTQIA+". The use of a mere reduced and excluding LGBTQ by can potentially be felt as exclusive and stigmatizing to some. Whoever has been carelessly using the acronym LGTBQ should probably get ready to formulate an appropriate public apology.