Re: [Offlist] IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

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

 



Masataka Ohta wrote on 31/07/2020 09:50:
> In Japan, whiter women has been considered better for these
> 1,000 years, even when there was no broadcast, not even
> printing.

Humans have been voluntarily changing their appearance since as long as
we've been knocking rocks together to make fire.  E.g. in some cultures
it's fashionable to have a tan, but things may differ in other cultures.

But all of that is beside the point.  This discussion resolves around
whether it's appropriate to use terms which have been historically
associated with discrimination based on colour / gender / ethnicity /
etc, and where those terms have recently changed to one degree or other
to make them less acceptable in common parlance due to the connotations
that those terms have.

All cultures have skeletons in this particular cupboard, bar none.
Words and phrases have subtleties and undertones, and sometimes these
connotations can cause offence.

It happens the other way too, incidentally: once upon a time, the word
"occupy" was considered to be crude and offensive, but over time it lost
those connotations and is once again entirely acceptable in polite
conversation.

Languages change and cultures morph over time to adapt to changing
circumstances.  The only thing that would be abnormal would be for
society not to recognise this and to fail to adapt.

Nick




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

  Powered by Linux