Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

On 9/20/18 9:17 AM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Obviously every case is different, but in the case of python, i can't
> see how this helps slaves and as Steward nicely described the desired
> semantic is quite well represented by the prior choice of language
> (master/slave). 

I don't think it's particularly difficult to find other terminology,
but I'll agree that the will to do so appears lacking.  Anyway, the
Python folk really are committed to building and diversifying their
community and are proactive about reaching out to people from
countries where human trafficking is a current and pressing problem.
I grew up in the US south and am old enough to have known the
children and grandchildren of slaves.  We are shown time after time
after time that universalizing our own experience leads us to make
some fundamental mistakes, as you do here.

I'm also really unclear on what you expect the outcome of replying
"No, you actually don't" to people who say "I care about <x>" will be.

Melinda