> This whole exercise is mere posture. It reeks of "Yes minister" logic,
we must do something about injustice, this is something, therefore we
must do it.
Many of us feel it is more like: we need to be more inclusive, this is an easy first step, let us do it. Changing the language to be more inclusive conveys a better impression, and might change people's attitudes. Some people will summarize this with the term "virtue signalling," often in an attempt to be dismissive. I'm okay with that, my response is "yes, we are trying to be virtuous and this is a first step."
Will it become a cudgel and used to toss people out? Viktor is confident that will be the outcome. I am equally confident it will not be, although I admit that it will be hard, for a while, for me to work with some people. On the other hand, Keith and I are managing to agree more than I would have ever thought possible, so perhaps there is hope for us all.
