Are the terms WhiteList and BlackList racist??
It’s kind of a simple question, but I can’t find a specific answer. Do the terms, WhiteList and BlackList, that we commonly use these days to block/allow e-mail, web sites and comments have racist origins?
I can’t find the answer. I think about it every time I modify instructions for our mail filtering at work, just waiting for someone to ask me, but I can’t find an answer anywhere on the history of it. I’ve found some things when looking on-line related to hollywood (usually political writing) and on blackballing people (also from work or organizations) but nothing on the origins of the word even in that context.
I’ve seen some software FAQs skate around it with some stupid explanations to avoid the issue, but I think red + green universally mean stop + go so greenlist and redlist makes sense and since we don’t have green people it wouldn’t be considered racist (or even incorrectly thought to be). Maybe this is a non-issue, but I’m wondering what you think.There are tons of options: stop/go, allow/deny, junk/non-junk, etc. Also, even if it doesn’t have racist origins if people perceive it to be, then how much of a difference is there.
Later: Ah, I found this and I do recall part of the origins of blackball, I knew this, I just forgot that I knew it….
Also see these (similar) items:
Okay… according to THE Oxford English Dictionary… the origins of black-list are dated back to 1619 and explained as “The blacke list of those That have nor fire nor spirit of their owne”, by writer of the time Philip Massinger. There is no reference whatsoever to race in the OED… but culturally and historically… all the way back to early religious representations, “white” was considered a heavenly, good color… and black, its opposite, therefore “bad”.
I think it matters less if the original intention was racially derived or not. You’re right, it doesn’t make sense to use those terms now. Similarly, why are “white lies” acceptable?
I like the red/green idea. Let’s have green lies and red ones.
I’ve got two answers and a couple of links in answer your question.
When I Googled racist computer term blacklist THIS post by you was the first site listed! Yeah! A fun, but not helpful result.
My first answer is to point to the Hollywood cowboy terms “black hat” and “white hat” as one possible set of predecessors to blacklist and whitelist. Also, there’s the term “Hollywood Blacklist” and its neologism “whitelist” but answering either of those just sidesteps the question of racist origins because of course were those terms originally racist or have morphed into being racist…?
Here’s a link to a related controversy about two other electronics terms (master and slave) that got some press a couple of years ago: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/master.asp
Here’s my second (and hopefully more thoughtful and considered) response to your question: I think it is very telling that you (and I) feel sensitive enough to at least in passing wonder/worry whether the terms blacklist or whitelist are racist or not, BUT that we’re still too isolated from the “black” community to know whether that is truly the case or not.
Hell, the “Think Different” Apple advertising poster that I have at my desk is the one with Martin Luther King jr. on it, and I’ve had it up there for YEARS, not just for the month of February, and to paraphrase the man, I would really like to think I do not judge by the color of skin but by the content of character. Having said all that, however, I have to admit that I can still be just as confused as you are by the simple question you posed. At least wondering whether a term is offensive or not, is a start. KNOWING, and knowing because we don’t feel so separated that we have to wonder, would be much better.
Here’s one more link to a nine minute audio commentary (podcast) that is worth listening to on the subject of “color or skin/content of character”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4456353
A really good book to read to smaller kids is “Old Turtle and the Broken Truth” by Douglas Wood. (Illustrated with great watercolors by Jon J. Muth (yes, that Jon J. Muth of comic book fame)) which of course you can pick up at The Book Beat in Oak Park, Michigan (and yes, I am going to finish this post by plugging them and posting their url…)
http://www.thebookbeat.com/
I Googled “is blacklist racist” and ended up here. Whilst I hoped for a definitive answer, in a way I was pleased that there was none!
My research about the term led me to the old English public school tradition of writing the names of naughty school boys in a black leather bound book, called the Black List. Obviously, this was in no way a racial concern. However, the origins of phrases are not necessarily a good barometer of the situation today and the white=good/black=bad distinction certainly carries racist undertones that need to be acknowledged.
I like the red/green list approach, although for the time being, it would have to be explained in terms of its black/white equivalent!
Great discussion. Redlist as a replacement for Blacklist might be offensive to Native Americans since the term “Redskin” in a very derogative term that implies that a Native American is “not human.” I propose that we use the terms “Goodlist” and “Badlist”
Interesting. I was in the same quest when I stumbled here. I have been using allowlist and denylist for my firewall and email server. In a different context, where allow/deny is not so meaningful, I was considering goodlist and badlist as Jim suggested. On a second thought it occurred to me that I am thinking within the box xxxx-list. Why not good-ones and bad-ones?
I see it as more than political correctness and sensitivity – for me, goodlist/badlist or good-ones/bad-ones is more meaningful than black/white/green/red list. Same goes for black box and white box. I would find close box and open box more meaningful – you don’t need to define them.
I think what has happened is that, like “backronyms,” racist implications have been suggested in terms whose origins have never been related to race. If we get trapped in worrying about being politically correct about everything, we may have to rethink the whole belt system as it relates to karate and other martial arts. After all, why should a “white belt” represent the most amateur and “black belt” the most advanced?
Whitelist and blacklist by their very definition and usage are clearly racists terms. What is wrong with pushing the concepts of accept list and deny list, or watchlist, blocklist, trusted sites, etc.?
I want to write a longer comment, but I’m pressed for time, however…here’s a quick test I think will work:
I believe using terms like “white”=good, fair etc. and “black”=evil, negative, wicked etc. are definitely racist and archaic. I really like the whole red/green or just negative/positive…the list goes on and on of OTHER words we could use.
My test is this…for anyone who doesn’t feel the same…try using all of those negative “black” terms and replace them with “white” and tell me how that makes you feel.
There’s your answer. =)
At (mt) Media Temple, several years ago we had this discussion and the answer was pretty simple. We changed our terms to “block list” and “allow list”.
I was also wondering this evening about the origins of the word ‘black’ in blacklist. And I agree with those people that propose to avoid the use of this word because the origins seem to be unknown. And if it has something to do with ‘black-book list’, then it should be called ‘blackbook list’, and not ‘blacklist’, as blacklist has easily a racial tone to it. I agree with proposing to use ‘blocklist, banlist, badlist’ etc.
I think the racist act was not in coining the term “blacklist,” but in assigning the terms “black”–with its figurative meanings of dark, strange and other, and “white”–with its figurative meanings of known, seen and light, to groups of people who’s skin is “brown” or “cream” respectively.
Secondly, while “blacklist” seems to have its origins in the figurative sense of the word, “black,” the term “whitelist” seems to have been coined using the same false black/white dichotomy. Instead of perpetuating this false dichotomy (and bad analogy, since blacklists and whitelists are not, in fact, opposites–i.e. not being on a blacklist doesn’t place on a whitelist), why not use more descriptive terms, such as those proposed by Demian and others?