I really do not get the point of refering to some period, are you a historian? I am not doing any research on this subject but, the white/black good/bad dualism[1] goes as far back as 1000BC, who are we (current generation) to stamp this as being racist and alter the meaning of it's use in the 1000's of years before. If you are using a few hundred years as an argument. I have a few thousand years as counter argument. And lets be honest, US culture is nothing compared to eg Chinese. If it where not for their gun powder invention, there would not have been a genocide killing around 50? million native Americans.
Your arguments do not make sense, because you are not able to judge this with your limited knowledge of the situation, (as I am not qualified). Do you get that this is beyond your capabilities? You are deciding something that a team of 100 experts al with higher IQ than yours, specilized in the various aspects that come into play, probably have difficulties giving a general advice. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang -----Original Message----- From: Kevin A. McGrail [mailto:kmcgr...@apache.org] Sent: dinsdag 14 juli 2020 21:16 To: mar...@gregorie.org Cc: Rupert Gallagher; Marc Roos; Dave Goodrich; SA Mailing list Subject: Re: IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR PEOPLE RUNNING TRUNK re: [Bug 7826] Improve language around whitelist/blacklist and master/slave I would posit that the 1962 date is rooted as much in the US Civil Rights movement in the 1960's as anything else. Before then white and black definitely had negative connotations such as whites-only restrooms, areas on busses, restaurants, water fountains, neighborhoods, and whatever other atrocities people thought of to inflict on people by race. SA is going to stop legitimizing and perpetuating the use of racially charged language. For those who insist, you have backwards compatibility and I hope the change is embraced. -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 3:08 PM Martin Gregorie <mar...@gregorie.org> wrote: On Tue, 2020-07-14 at 12:24 -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > We'll have to agree to disagree. To me it is clearly racially charged > language and you are cherry picking your sources. Here's a well > researched > and documented article from a medical journal on the topic with expert > citations: https://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/490 The > abstract > The first *recorded* use of the term 'blacklist' or 'black list' was in 1660 when Charles II of England used it to refer to a list of those who had killed his father, Charles I. From the context it is far more likely that 'black list' was referring to the sin of regicide than to anybody's skin colour. I notice that the abstract you quoted has no references earlier than 1962, so I find it hard to take it seriously, especially as the earlier religious links between 'black' and 'sin' appear to be ignored by it. This is odd considering how much influence religion had on society in the 17th century and that there was no slavery in North America before about 1640. Out of pure curiosity, when was the current racist use of 'black' first coined and where did that happen? Me? I grew up in NZ where the social norms were against any attempt to denigrate Maoris: anybody who would not let a Maori meter-reader in to read his electricity meter would not be sent a pakeha meter reader and so was more or less guaranteed to get a heavy fine for late payment and failing to get his meter read. Similarly, I don't remember the All Blacks, national rugby team, ever not having Maoris in it. Martin
