Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Not every society needs to confront the same issues or troubling legacies.

I live in a country where painting your face black is perfectly acceptable. It’s done by thousands of people every February and blacks and “lubolos” (whites in black face) perform all together in ensembles called “Comparsas”. It’s been going on since the 1870s.

See [https://carnavaldelfuturo.uy/2006/12/15/la-historia-de-los-negros-y-lubolos/] in Spanish, Google translate can be your friend.

We do have a troubling past when it comes to our land’s native inhabitants.

If we are to re-engineer all language, then it would only make sense to aim for the “lowest common denominator”, that language that offends no one and triggers no one. I believe this subset of language to be the empty set or very close to it, but that’s just IMO.

/Carlos

On 24 Jul 2020, at 6:11, Masataka Ohta wrote:

I'm saying the document and the references are all too
much US centric ignoring both the original and established
meaning of "slave".




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux