{"id":4678,"date":"2022-02-02T17:56:56","date_gmt":"2022-02-02T16:56:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/?p=4678"},"modified":"2024-06-20T21:30:49","modified_gmt":"2024-06-20T20:30:49","slug":"no-the-word-grandfather-will-not-be-phased-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/2022\/02\/02\/no-the-word-grandfather-will-not-be-phased-out\/","title":{"rendered":"No, the word \u201cgrandfather\u201d will not be phased out"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Original article<\/a> (in Serbian) was published on 26\/01\/2022<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The website Republika announced that \u201cthe word grandfather will be phased out\u201d in America. The same source wrote that the new \u201cshocking list of unfavorable expressions has astonished the world\u201d. Yet nothing so dramatic and shocking has happened. Namely, experts have proposed replacing certain terms used in the IT sector with a discriminatory connotation. Among the controversial terms is the word \u201cgrandfather\u201d, but not in the sense in which this website interprets it. This term, which is used in law but also in the IT sector (meaning \u201cgrandfather policy\u201d), originates from American legislation in the late 19th century when \u201cgrandfather policy\u201d was used to prevent African Americans from voting.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The website Republika writes that language \u201chas obviously become the main field of conflict between different currents, especially those that are heavily committed to gender equality and the fight against discrimination\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn the latest dictionary, published by the American University of Washington, the label of undesirable words was given to \u201cgrandfather\u201d, \u201chousehold\u201d, \u201cpot\u201d, \u201cmantra\u201d, \u201ctotem\u201d, \u201cspiritual animal\u201d, \u201cbrown bags\u201d (used to describe dark circles around the eyes), as well as an expression that is translated from English into Serbian as \u201ceasy peasy\u201d\u201d, writes this tabloid<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no context or explanation in the text as to why this dictionary was published and why these words are problematic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is a language guide published by the Department of IT Technology at the University of Washington<\/a>. It contains a long list of terms from the IT sector that are considered controversial in the context of racial, gender and other types of discrimination. Hence, experts suggest alternatives for all of them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, for example, they suggest that the term \u201cgrandfather\u201d should no longer be used – but not in the sense of \u201cgrandfather\u201d, as the father of one of the parents, a male ancestor – but in a very specific sense. Namely, the terms \u201cgrandfather\u201d, \u201cgrandfather policy\u201d, \u201cgrandfather clause\u201d refer to an old, repealed rule that no longer applies to new and future cases, but still applies to old cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why is this term controversial?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because it originates from oppressive legislation against African Americans – at the end of the 19th century, some US states introduced a new rule that the right to vote must meet specific educational or tax requirements, which would prevent African Americans from voting. However, applying this rule would affect both poor and illiterate white people, so an exception was introduced or \u201cgrandfather clause\u201d – which allowed people who had the right to vote before the new legislation (i.e., white people) to vote without restrictions, including their descendants. African-Americans were thus excluded, and this provision was declared unconstitutional only in 1915, according to Britannica<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The website Republika also wonders why a term that could be translated into Serbian as \u201ceasy peasy\u201d and which in English it means \u201ccakewalk\u201d (cake, walk), a term used to describe simple and easy operations and tasks, is \u201cforbidden\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe term ‘cakewalk’ meant a slave dance before the Civil War, and the winner of that dance could get a cake. Due to such a history, this word should be avoided\u201d, it is stated from this university.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for the term \u201cbrown bags\u201d, Republika wrote that it means dark circles around the eyes, but this term has nothing to do with it. As they point out from the university, the term means a brown paper bag for lunch, i.e., a situation in which someone brings their lunch to a meeting or training. When you say \u201cbrown bag meeting\u201d, it means that participants are expected to bring their lunch to the meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This term, however, originates from discriminatory practices, the so-called \u201cbrown paper bag test\u201d, in which the color of the person\u2019s skin was compared to the color of the bag. Those whose skin was lighter than the color of the bag could have certain privileges – for example, to enter a certain object, unlike those whose skin was darker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cInvoking the ‘brown bag’ when we’re actually talking about hanging out at lunch calls points to an ugly period in American history that can alienate and offend people\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mentioned department also proposes that terms such as \u201cwhitelisted\u201d and \u201cblacklisted\u201d should be dropped from use. The terms are used to denote control mechanisms in information technologies – a thing that is on the \u201cwhitelist\u201d means that it gives everyone access. On the other hand, \u201cblacklist\u201d means not allowing users access.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using the words \u201cblack\u201d for something undesirable, wrong and bad, and \u201cwhite\u201d for something that is desirable, right or good, only repeats those concepts that served to oppress people of other skin colors. The use of simple language (for example, \u201cforbidden\u201d or \u201cpermitted\u201d) makes the meaning much clearer, the university writes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to terms that have a racially or ethnically discriminatory connotation, another list has been made, and it is a list of those terms that discriminate against persons with disabilities, the elderly, women and sexual minorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, the term \u201cmom test\u201d or \u201cgirlfriend test\u201d is used when presenting a product to people who do not yet know how to handle it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhy is this problematic? The assumption that – if a mother and a girl can use the program, everyone can – is sexist and ageistic\u201d, the university writes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The words on the disputed list do not refer exclusively to terms used in the IT sector. For example, the university also problematizes colloquial expressions such as \u201cguys\u201d. Namely, in English, the term \u201cguys\u201d is used when a speaker addresses a group, regardless of whether there are women in that group. The University of Washington proposes abolishing such practices and using, for example, \u201cpeople\u201d when addressing people in the area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They also believe that the pronouns for the third person, \u201cshe\u201d and \u201che\u201d, are also discriminatory and that \u201cthey\u201d should be introduced to include non-binary persons, i.e., persons who identify neither as men nor as women.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the university, \u201cwords do matter\u201d, and those that reflect racial or other discriminatory bias confront the values \u200b\u200bof diversity, equality and inclusiveness they advocate. That is why, they say, they have joined IT organizations at universities across the United States to change the racist, sexist, ageistic, homophobic and similar language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMost of the words listed in this document are usually found in the IT sector. The guide was created as a reference for revising the language used on websites, websites, online documentation, software and system applications and documentation on these applications\u201d, states the website.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can find the full list of words and phrases with explanations here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Updated January 27:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The day after the text of Raskrikavanje was published, the website Republika changed the original text (archived here<\/a>), which is now entitled \u201cIt is not true that the word grandfather is being phased out<\/a>\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Original article (in Serbian) was published on 26\/01\/2022 The website Republika announced that \u201cthe word grandfather will be phased out\u201d in America. The same source wrote that the new \u201cshocking list of unfavorable expressions has astonished the world\u201d. Yet nothing so dramatic and shocking has happened. Namely, experts have proposed replacing certain terms used in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4693,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[316],"tags":[13,10,28,15],"class_list":["post-4678","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fact-checks","tag-journalism","tag-politics","tag-serbia","tag-usa"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4678","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4678"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4678\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4681,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4678\/revisions\/4681"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4693"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4678"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4678"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4678"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}