Current Events > Washington Post: Birds are racist

(+) Yeah! (+)

Your thoughts on this?

Wtf?!

---

The more you use a word, the more meaningless it becomes

---

Samurontai posted...

The more you use a word, the more meaningless it becomes

The more you use a phrase, the more meaningless it becomes.

bloodyarts posted...

The more you use a phrase, the more meaningless it becomes.

Also true

---

For those wondering "why?", they acknowledge that a lot of North American birds have names that are linked to slaveowners and advocates of old-timey white supremacy.

---

ITT: Nobody reads the article and the uneducated right wing masses make a fool of themselves again

The article itself is behind a paywall, but you can get the gist here https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/4/22518931/racist-bird-names-black-birders-washington-post

Some 150 birds named for people tied to slavery and white supremacy could eventually get new monikers as part of an ongoing reckoning with racism within the world of birding. That includes Jamesons firefinch, named for a British naturalist who bought a young girl while in Africa as a joke and then drew pictures of her being brutally killed. In a new story this week, Washington Post reporter Darryl Fears breaks down the horrific history of ornithology that has managed to be scrubbed clean in many history books.

I cant do justice to Fears reporting here; youll have to read it yourself. But I can tell you that while the movement to end systemic racism within environmental science and conservation has picked up steam, its far from new and theres still a long way to go.

The Audubon Society, the leading bird conservation nonprofit in the US, is still named after a man who enslaved Black people and criticized the emancipation of enslaved people in the Caribbean. In April, the CEO of the Audubon Society, David Yarnold, stepped down after employees came forward with their experiences with racism and sexism.
...
Fears recent reporting follows Black birders and ornithologists making inroads in spaces that have often pushed people of color to the margins. He tells the story of Corina Newsome, one of the original organizers of the Black Birders Week that began last year following a now-notorious episode of a white woman calling the police on a Black birder in New Yorks Central Park. (Its Black Birders Week again this week.)

---

RadiantJoyrock posted...

ITT: Nobody reads the article and the uneducated right wing masses make a fool of themselves again

Yeah, lemme reach through my screen and turn the pages real quick

Antifar posted...

The article itself is behind a paywall, but you can get the gist here https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/4/22518931/racist-bird-names-black-birders-washington-post

Yeah I could see how that could be a problem

---

The article isn't calling birds racist. Why be dishonest

Anyway, interesting info I guess. I would disagree if the end goal was to like, rename birds, but as just an article, it's fine.
---

emblem boy posted...

Why be dishonest

You know why.

---

emblem boy posted...

The article isn't calling birds racist. Why be dishonest

Because he didn't read the article

That is a very unprofessional headline. What is the real life version of clickbait?

---

Blackbirds.

---

Click bait.

A half truth is still a lie. They are not calling birds racists. This is about the history of some of the names of birds.

---

Damn_Underscore posted...

That is a very unprofessional headline. What is the real life version of clickbait?

It's not unprofessional at all. It's a very good headline without being misleading

til people don't understand the word "legacy"

---

RadiantJoyrock posted...

It's not unprofessional at all. It's a very good headline without being misleading

It's not.

By not specifying bird names, it's impossible to know what the article is talking about.

It's a shocking headline intended to get people to turn to the article... real life version of clickbait.

---

Cpt_Pineapple posted...

The more you use birds, the more meaningless they become.

---

RadiantJoyrock posted...

It's not unprofessional at all. It's a very good headline without being misleading

Its an incredibly stupid and heavily misleading headline

---

Headlines designed to get people to read the article? What will they think of next?

---

it's a fine headline that you misunderstood. possibly because of TC's clickbait.

---

So, whats the end goal with linking so many seemingly small things back to white supremacy? Does that reduce the suffering of the victims of racism? Im not opposed, but I wonder what actual effects it will have, if any.

---

If I saw that in the paper I would have said "wtf?" and then read the first paragraph of the article and said "oh"

This is something you would expect to see from Buzzfeed, not the Washington Post.

---

Medussa posted...

it's a fine headline that you misunderstood. possibly because of TC's clickbait.

you know what, you're right

---

There comes to be a certain point where its simply too minuscule to care, and this is one of them. Depending how far back you want to go, you can find this kind of minor shit everywhere in probably any culture. This is just someone with nothing legitimate to actually write who wants to cause controversy in a space where none currently exists. I get not wanting to honor shitty people, but who the fuck truly cares about the origin of a species name if you cannot tell the context from the name itself?

Damn_Underscore posted...

It's not.

By not specifying bird names, it's impossible to know what the article is talking about.

It's a shocking headline intended to get people to turn to the article... real life version of clickbait.

A title isn't supposed to give the full story. It gets attention and gives the gist of the article.

Easy solution: Cats

---

RadiantJoyrock posted...

A title isn't supposed to give the full story. It gets attention and gives the gist of the article.

Ok, the main headline is fine. They want to get attention, ok.

The fact that they didn't specify bird names and/or the organization in the sub-headline is what's not fine. The sub-headline explains nothing about the headline, which is already vague/unspecific.

---

Nemu posted...

who the fuck truly cares about the origin of a species name if you cannot tell the context from the name itself?

My guess would be black people who are into birdwatching care.

Also I think youve got it backwards when you talk about causing controversy in a space where none exists because I know people who are into birdwatching and they are incredible dorks who care way too much about their hobby. The kind of drama that springs up in these sorts of insular groups all the time. Think about this very community as an example. Now, if you wanted to make the argument that an internal dramatic struggle of a very small group doesnt make a great story for a general population readership like the Post has, I could see your point there. I cant imagine anyone outside of this website wanting to read an article in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal about the MAGA board (and later its unofficial replacement) getting the axe from the Admins at GameFAQs dot com, but that doesnt mean the drama around it wasnt real for this community.

---

Anyone offended by the name of a bird is a fucking idiot lol

---

RadiantJoyrock posted...

ITT: Nobody reads the article and the uneducated right wing masses make a fool of themselves again

Would you read a right wing article if it had a ridiculous headline and had to set aside 10 minutes to read it knowing you wont change your mind anyway?

---

had a parrot call me a cracker once, felt real racist.

---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

Anyone offended by the name of a bird is a fucking idiot lol

Not really, they're valid complaints.

We need to give birds racial sensitivity training

---

abolish bird names there is too many

---

Birds aren't even real

---

Irony posted...

Birds aren't even real

There are some real birds that exist underground, but the above ground flying ones are just government drones used to spy on us yeah.

---

Do you guys ever worry about real issues or do you all just want to keep arguing over bird names?

The article is about how the birdwatching community was more or less founded by a super racist guy and his shadow is cast over all of the hobby. Similar to with lovecraftian fiction.

Of course racists are among those who have no critical thinking skills so they decide one of America's leading newspapers really is arguing that birds themselves are racist without bothering to read the article

---

The Washington comPost is just exactly thatmanure, shit, poop, feces, etc.

---

Journalism is dead

Thomas Edison was also racist, so any of you who uses lightbulbs are racist.

---

BilalPowell posted...

Thomas Edison was also racist, so any of you who uses lightbulbs are racist.

I'm always amused by dumb posts late in a topic like this where people have have already had a substantive conversation showing why said post is really dumb

---

N3xtG3nGam3r posted...

The Washington comPost is just exactly thatmanure, shit, poop, feces, etc.

gamer167 posted...

Journalism is dead

And yet this is a good article.

Imagine making a whole-ass topic about how you didn't read past the headline

---