The International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAA) and its Federative International Committee for Equality and Diversity in Anatomy (FICEDA) recommended that terms relation to pudere (to be ashamed) should be removed from Terminologia Anatomica (TA) for 3 reasons: 1) they are unscientific and outside the descriptive objectivity of science; 2) biologists should not regard as ’shameful' the essential functions undertaken by structures in the perineum; 3) the terms have sexist connotations that lie beyond the principles of Equity, Diversity and Inclusivity (EDI) in the anatomical sciences. The IFAA Executive subsequently required the Federative International Programme for Anatomical Terminology (FIPAT) to make ALL necessary changes to terms derived from pudere . However, only partial changes were enacted by FIPAT. The matter is presently unresolved and has provoked controversy. This article provides a review of the course of events and offers arguments against those criticisms levelled against changing pudere -related terms. In light of the IFAA’s EDI principles, and as social thought and practice generally evolve, it is essential that the terminology on pudere is altered to reflect acceptable and unapologetic norms.
Moxham et al. (Wed,) studied this question.