[Tweeters] Leaving tweeters, and encouraging the rest of you to leave too

[Elizabeth McManus via Tweeters]

Hi tweets – this will be my last time here because I also am leaving. I
guess I make three by Nelson's count. I hope there's more.


I’m not interested in lending my time, attention, or tacit approval to a
group that seems bent on prioritizing comfort for those in positions of
power and authority over harm to people who would like to be included in a
community that cares about birds. Gross. Also, not helpful for birds or
bird conservation. The “distraction” related to name changes that I’ve
witnessed is mostly people who have been around for a long time freaking
out in opposition to change. In my mind, those sincerely interested in
focusing resources on the wellbeing of birds and the places birds need want
to grow the birding community and welcome more people, in part by actually
listening when they talk about ways they currently are made to feel
unwelcome instead of trying to silence them with, among other things, your
age and experience.



I don’t know if Steve Hampton is still here, but regardless, I’ll draw
folks’ attention to this publication on his excellent blog, the Cottonwood
Post. (How Birding Can Save the World | The Cottonwood Post
<https://thecottonwoodpost.net/2024/01/25/how-birding-can-save-the-world/>
) I’ll quote here, at length, because I certainly cannot say it better. His
framing of this made me much less willing to stand by and make
compassionate space for people who might be slower to come on side. On the
topic of common arguments against changing common bird names, Steve writes:



“1) When society’s morals change, the present morals should not be applied
to people of the past.
~ This is a white issue. By “society,” they mean white society. Blacks have
always opposed slavery, Natives have always opposed ethnic cleansing. We
can debate how much white society has changed. What has most obviously
changed is that now there are other voices at the table. These voices have
grown up with different narratives about history and about how their
families were impacted.

2) This is “wokeness” and “virtue-signaling.”
~ These are accusations by whites of whites. One doesn’t say a Black person
is virtue signaling when they talk about police brutality. And one doesn’t
call a Native woke when they talk about tribal sovereignty. No, woke and
virtue-signaling are modern variations on “n-lover” and “squ*w men.” The
use of these terms presupposes that the new initiatives are coming from
white liberals. In fact, there are lots of people of color involved.

3) Competency and quality (for example, as a committee member) should
always come before diversity.
~ This is insulting to women and people of color. It echos claims that
underqualified people are given positions as charity, as “diversity hires.”
Women and people of color have their own narrative – that they work twice
as hard to get half as far. That they are, in short, often over-qualified.
Diversity strengthens organizations so they don’t make the kinds of
mistakes we are witnessing today, and also serve as inspirations to attract
new people from across the demographic spectrum.

Another version of this is to point out how accomplished and important the
angry white men are – that the bear has been poked too much, and thus the
pace of change should slow down. Such arguments are both circular and
ironic. The whole point is that there should not even be a bear. And if the
bear is so angry about a symbolic measure, what about more concrete
measures? We should all be on the same team, building a better world for
birds and birders.”

In this forum the negative consequence of confusion has come up. If I am
weighing the negative consequence of an ebird update and the need to update
guidebooks and any related confusion against the negative consequence of
making people who want to be part of a community that supports birds and
the places birds need feel excluded, I know which I’ll choose. I think the
birding community actually is pretty nimble in this regard - I don't have
the age (or the experience) of many, but I have successfully made my way
through a bunch of lumps and splits in the past dozen years; and I've
definitely seen those new names take hold, and take over.

If you’re still reading, I’ll add three more things. First, I’m not a young
birder, and I certainly don’t speak for them, but I will say: look around
tweets – the young birders mostly are not here, and they’re not at WOS
meetings. After the past few days, their absence surprises me less and
less.

Second, for those of you who may be low-key (or all in) in support of
changes to common bird names but don’t feel like being part of this
conversation, I encourage you to visit the AOS site and register your
support for and interest in participating in the name change process. We
can be better together. English Common Names Pilot Project Interest Form
(google.com)
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScUz1CwIKGTogp1gahcLmjMsL1qFU6D_0-p4d_NbU4KA0Z3Vw/closedform>


Finally, consider the whatsapp group Open Washington Bird Chat as an
alternative forum for birdy discussions. Or let's make another more
welcoming and more interesting space.



Elizabeth McManus

Olympia, WA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20240627/471e33a8/attachment.html>