highlands wrote:

I can just see my niece saying to her baby when she says 'dadda' for the first time....
"no, not 'dadda'...'non-lactating parent'! "

By then you won’t be able to use the word “baby” as it’ll discriminate against someone/something and/or offend someone/something.

  

HWN wrote:

LT wrote:

Quote:

Is "colour" different to "race"?

Seriously?

Colour comes from racial background. But, true, "mixed-race" != "race".

Mixed race was/is a poor description in my opinion.

As a method of distinguishing racial categories, skin colour, which has evolved along a spectrum, has such a vast variation within the different skin colour groupings, it's basically useless.

In other words, two people of very different skin colours but from the same race, could have a child who some would misleadingly refer to as mixed race.

Race and ethnicity are frequently confused and I believe opinions differ as to the core definitions of both. I'm certainly no expert, but have a child who studied anthropology at university.

RRSTDV8 wrote:

I'm with LT - refer to someone as they want to be referred. I don't agree with Stonewall requiring organisations to make blanket changes, but if an employee / customer wants to be referred to as "mother" or "person who gave birth", then respect that wish.

Monty Python were so far ahead of their time