On 6/8/23 8:19 PM, Shivan Kaul Sahib wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 16:58, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> wrote:On Jun 8, 2023, at 4:47 PM, Wes Hardaker <wjh...@hardakers.net> wrote: > > Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> writes: > >> That was one of my suggestions, don't define it or declare it obsolete. >> It will ofcourse take time for people to stop using it. > > There were a number of us in favor of this option, I think. But the > consensus was certainly not there to stop using the term. Maybe the > tide is shifting, as it seems like more are in favor of defining new > terms now than the previous discussion round. If y'all are going to choose a new term, please do so for the right reason. This thread was started by Kazunori saying "the word "lame" may have a discriminatory meaning". I spent hours a few years ago looking into this when it first came up, and I believe he is incorrect, or at least too concerned. In the US and UK, the use of "lame" is mostly descriptive, only occasionally derogatory. Of course it is a negative word: that's the point. But it's not used against people in the same way that some other negative words are.Specifically commenting on this: I don't think it matters how two countries in the world (US and UK) use the word if that's not how the rest of the world interprets it.
The word "lame" is also problematic in the US:2015 Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/05/13/lame-stand-up-and-other-words-we-use-to-insult-the-disabled-without-even-knowing-it/
2021 BBC: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210330-the-harmful-ableist-language-you-unknowingly-use
-- Katherine
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
