Dear all,

Martin's reflections are good.


An extra comment: As we all know language use reflect social and power 
structures.  It is my view that one should try to make the language (English) 
in this case as gender neutral as possible. In many languages gender neutrality 
is difficult to obtain, perhaps not possible since it is integrated in the 
inflection morphology (e.g. Russian).



However, there is no reason to make CRM labels gender specific except for 
mother and father.  In English ‘man’ can be used in the meaning ‘humanity’ and 
unspecified persons (as far as I understand it) which is not very good for 
gender equality.  Maybe one should try to replace ‘man’ by ‘human’.  This is a 
big task, and perhaps not possible in many groups (like the one represented by 
J R-M). In the group of CRM users it should not be problematic.



The question is:  Should we replace ‘man-made’ by ‘human-made’, or by ‘made’.  
‘human-made’ is already in use (‘The planet's average surface temperature has 
risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th 
century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other 
human-made emissions into the atmosphere’ NASA) and stress the fact that humans 
are involved. Rob  mentioned that ‘human made’ is quite a mouthful. Well, it 
will add one syllable and two letters which is not very much.​


Best,

Christian-Emil

________________________________
From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin Doerr 
<mar...@ics.forth.gr>
Sent: 12 April 2019 19:47
To: crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] New Issue: Re-label E22, E25, E71 to remove "Man-"

Dear All,

I would like to stay neutral in this issue. Personally, I do not believe that 
changing language is the way to make sure we respect men and women equally and 
give them equal chances, and it gives me a taste of distracting from what 
should be discussed. Therefore I am not happy about it.

I have the impression that even the etymology given in wikipedia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_(word) is not complete. As a German speaker, 
I distinguish between "Mann" (male) and "Mensch" (human), and I suspect that 
the English "man" is actually a derivative of both, rendering it a homonym.  
Homonymity would not imply a bias.

In Italian, French, Spanish the Latin term "vir" for adult male actually got 
lost in favor of derivatives of "homo" (human). Would be interesting to learn 
if this was actually connected with an increasing male domination or not, or if 
being "vir" became unimportant.

Man-Made appeared to me a good, established term, and we prefer established 
terms.

In German, we rendered it as "artificial object".

Asian languages such as Chinese and Japanese do not have default gender at all. 
Much better.

Anyway, if some people think it makes a difference...

Cheers,

Martin

On 4/12/2019 7:38 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:

Dear all,

On behalf of the Linked Art consortium, I would like to propose that the labels 
for E22 Man-Made Object, E25 Man-Made Feature and E71 Man-Made Thing be changed 
to drop the unnecessarily gendered “Man-“.  In this day and age, I think we 
should recognize that inclusion and diversity are core features of community 
acceptance, and that including gender-biased language is alienating.

Thus the proposal is: E22’s label should be changed to Made Object, E25 changed 
to Made Feature and E71 changed to Made Thing.

The “human” nature of the agent that does the making is explicit in the 
ontology, in that only humans or groups there-of can be Actors and carry out 
Productions or Creations, so there is no ambiguity about non-humans making 
these.
This issue was discussed at length, and has been open in our profile’s tracker 
for 12 months now. We would greatly prefer that it be solved by changing the 
labels in the documentation, and thereby in the RDFS, rather than other RDF 
specific approaches such as minting new terms and using owl:sameAs to assert 
equality, or rebranding only in the JSON-LD serialization but persisting in 
other serializations.  The change is consistent, reduces the length of the 
class names, and is an easy substitution. The comprehensibility of the label is 
still the same. Given the renaming of Collection to Curated Holding, migration 
of existing data has the same solution - just substitute the labels.

As a second choice, if the above is not acceptable, we propose to instead 
replace “Man-“ with “Human-“ … only two additional characters, but a bit more 
of a mouthful.

Many thanks for your engagement with this issue!

Rob



_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr<mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig



--
------------------------------------
 Dr. Martin Doerr

 Honorary Head of the
 Center for Cultural Informatics

 Information Systems Laboratory
 Institute of Computer Science
 Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)

 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
 GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece

 Vox:+30(2810)391625
 Email: mar...@ics.forth.gr<mailto:mar...@ics.forth.gr>
 Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl

Reply via email to