[Tweeters] Inappropriate posts - from the thread Amerigo Vespucci

[Teresa Michelsen via Tweeters]

I am completely in agreement with Steve’s post, and the request to stop discussing it in this venue. If you can’t see that even having an argument about this issue is alienating to so many I’m really not sure what to say. Inclusiveness in enjoying the wild world around us should take precedence over one’s own opinion about something not actually relevant to appreciating and studying birds. In your own mind you’re welcome to call them whatever you wish, whether old or new names or those you’ve made up yourself!

Teresa Michelsen
60, white female
Hoodsport, WA

From: Tweeters <tweeters-bounces at mailman11.u.washington.edu> On Behalf Of Kevin Lucas via Tweeters
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 7:13 AM
To: Steve Hampton <stevechampton at gmail.com>
Cc: TWEETERS tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] Inappropriate posts - from the thread Amerigo Vespucci

Steve,
Thank  you very much.
Sincerely,
Kevin Lucas -- A white male not yet over the 65 year old threshold, in Yakima County, WA
Qui tacet consentire videtur


On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:37 AM Steve Hampton via Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu<mailto:tweeters at u.washington.edu>> wrote:
In the absence of any intervention by a Tweeters administrator, I will reply.

These posts against proposed bird name changes - usually with incorrect information and speculation regarding scope, costs and benefits, and other aspects - are inappropriate here and do harm to the birding community and the use of Tweeters as representative of the birding community.

Without trying to convince anyone why bird names (and organization names) matter, I'll point out that they seem to matter to a lot of people. Regardless of the rationale, there are three basic facts about this issue:

1) The demographic breakdown on this issue is stark. Most younger people and people of color support the changes. Nearly all of the opposition comes from white people over 65. This tells me, from a diversity, equity, and inclusion perspective, there is a "there" there. We should pay attention to why this is.

2) Due to historical biases and discrimination in opportunities and privileges, the former group are the exact same demographics that are under-represented in birding; and the latter are far more likely to be today's field trip leaders, esteemed ornithologists, and conservation organization leaders. This is evident and much has been written about it.

3) Having the latter group publicly dismiss the former group (on any issue) is both insensitive and reckless when it comes to the future of birding. Using Tweeters as a safe space for the latter group to openly gripe and plan opposition is "gatekeeping" - public actions that preserve the status quo and drive certain newcomers away. Intentions don't matter here; impacts do. This is why so many younger people and people of color do not participate in Tweeters, certain other social media groups, many birding organizations, and their field trips.

I'm dubious anyone will learn from this post, or be inspired to learn more. And I'm dubious about my continued participation in Tweeters.

I do wish everyone good birding,


--
Steve Hampton
Port Townsend, WA  (qatáy)


_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu<mailto:Tweeters at u.washington.edu>
http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20240625/caae75ce/attachment.html>