No, it's the sexualization specifically. If we had named the language "James", people would not be joking about how they were spending late nights with James or commenting on how attractive James is. Perhaps it's our bad for picking a feminine name, but I still like the name and hope that I don't come to regret it. It makes me wince every time someone refers to Julia as "she" because while that's fairly innocuous in itself, a majority of the time the next statement is something that makes me uncomfortable. And if it makes *me* unconfortable, then it's guaranteed that it makes others feel unwelcomed and like outsiders – which is not ok.
Carlos, I want to apologize for making an issue of this at the risk of alienating or shaming you – that is absolutely not the intention and I hope it doesn't have that effect. For what it's worth, I don't think that your comment was meant maliciously and I wish I didn't have to say any of this. But standing by our community standards is too important not to say something. On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Zheng Wendell <[email protected]> wrote: > I think what the community standards object is not the sexualization, but > more generally the anthropomorphism. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Carlos Pita <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> this is specially true for Julia, considering that -by now- people are >>> mostly courting her because of how beautiful she is >> >> >> Please don't do this. Not everyone may be aware, but our community >> standards <http://julialang.org/community/standards/> specifically ban >> sexualizing the term Julia. As it says in the standards: while “Julia” is a >> female name in many parts of the world, the programming language is not a >> person and does not have a gender. >> > >
