Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] wrote:
> 
> A while back, I was tasked with reviewing an academic paper that used the technical terminology of ‘master/slave’ to describe a process.
> I found myself writing in my review that that terminology was no longer considered acceptable, and would just have to be replaced. And I was very aware, while typing out my friends-of-the-offended-and-oppressed piece, that I was was concocting this explanation to be read by the authors of the paper, who all had African heritage, and who attended a US educational institution in a US state considered remarkable for its previous use of slavery.
> Those authors would clearly have far better and more nuanced perspectives on the mechanisms and oppression of racism and slavery than I ever will, not least from lived experiences. They had simply used technical terminology, they were clearly in agreement that that use was fine, and their paper was otherwise excellent.
> So, once my review had explained to them that Black Lives Matter, and just how appalliing those terms were and how triggering and insensitive they were inadvertently being, I had fulfilled my solemn academic duty, and my head exploded from the irony of it all.
> I now believe that double-blind reviewing has its advantages, while continuing to distrust the intentions of those willing to censor language. It’s so Owellian ++ungood;
> 
> Lloyd [e-mail],uk
> have we cancelled Star Wars because of its slaves yet?
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that it is still a mistake to use terms like blacklist/whitelist and master/slave in technology documentation.  I am not the only one who thinks so. There are some who believe this is not a mistake.  Oh well, that's why we have "rough consensus" here.  There are probably other terms and mindsets which have resulted in off-putting or even exclusionary behavior. I will not propose a list here (easy one: why our 1-1-1 policy doesn't include other continents?), but I would consider anything in that category to be a mistake. Likewise, treating slavery as purely a black/white issue through the lens of US history is also a mistake.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>