General > General Technical Chat
'Master' and 'slave': Tech terms face scrutiny amid anti-racism efforts
maginnovision:
Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.
Simon:
changing words does not change meaning nor does it reduce the ability to take offence where non was given.
Kjelt:
--- Quote from: maginnovision on July 05, 2020, 08:22:06 pm ---Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.
--- End quote ---
I agree but by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism.
Example in our country the news media always mention what group the purpotrator is from, so if a maroccan person attacked someone, they say dutch from maroccan heritage or even when they are polite and politically correct they call him an immigrant with non western heritage. Why should you mention from what group someone is? Or color skin? Can't they justvsay a person was attacked by another person?
So using these kind of words add unnecessary information that only triggers certain people into "you see another of those marroccans, they are all criminals" which is totally racist. Stop labelling people.
langwadt:
--- Quote from: Kjelt on July 05, 2020, 10:15:48 pm ---
--- Quote from: maginnovision on July 05, 2020, 08:22:06 pm ---Most of the black people I know would say they're black, or american. Not afro american, not african american. Probably because none I know came from africa.
--- End quote ---
I agree but by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism.
Example in our country the news media always mention what group the purpotrator is from, so if a maroccan person attacked someone, they say dutch from maroccan heritage or even when they are polite and politically correct they call him an immigrant with non western heritage. Why should you mention from what group someone is? Or color skin? Can't they justvsay a person was attacked by another person?
So using these kind of words add unnecessary information that only triggers certain people into "you see another of those marroccans, they are all criminals" which is totally racist. Stop labelling people.
--- End quote ---
https://youtu.be/RSi9nEbvexE
PlainName:
--- Quote ---by naming the color of someones skin you already categorize them and set the pavement for racism
--- End quote ---
There are two issues you're conflating there. One is what to call a person's colour, and the other is when it's appropriate to mention that.
The first has been decided by people of colour (I think that's the currently preferred term; don't shoot me if I'm a month or so behind the times). The actual word isn't important because if you don't use one you'll have to use another. You can't not notice a person's skin colour, and pretending it doesn't exist is promoting the mindset that it's a forbidden thing, exactly the opposite of what you intend. Ideally, you should be able to notice the colour, race, whatever and think nothing more of it.
The second is tricky, but a good test is if you'd use some other innocuous description instead or as well. Would say 'fat bloke'? Or 'fair-haired girl'? If so, then 'black' shouldn't be a problem either, and if it is then it's because you're making it a problem.
As to whether any description is appropriate, technically it probably isn't. You could argue that 'a person argued with another person' is already more than you need to know, but if some noun adds relevant information then why not use it? In the case of an immigrant breaking the law then it probably is relevant that they are an immigrant.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version