Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (6227)	5/21/2003 11:30:04 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 7720

"None of them really stuck but I think eventually something will,... I doubt that any label will ever "stick" in this case. It would involve a cultural change. The problem has not been with finding the right label, it has been what happens to the label once it comes into use. If the term were never used except as a clinical method to distinguish between IQ categories there would be no reason to worry about it. However, this is unrealistic. The first time a label is used effectively as a term of denegration it becomes contaminated. In some cases it is impossible to find an appropriate label. "Native Americans" or "Indians" or any other term that is derived from the English language can not appropriately and respectfully label the people we think of when using the terms. If they were here before there was an America, then they can't be Native Americans. Indian means someone from India. Since there are or were over 500 distinct civilizations on the Americas when the invaders from the other hemisphere arrived, then there is no one term that can adequately show respect to them. If you look in one of the native languages to find a term that means human being and can use it in the right context, it does not properly label all the people from the other native societies.