[Crm-sig] New Issue: Re-label E22, E25, E71 to remove "Man-"
martin at ics.forth.gr
Fri Apr 12 20:47:50 EEST 2019
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
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
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...
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!
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
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,
Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Crm-sig