102
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
102 points (89.2% liked)
science
14595 readers
49 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.
2024-11-11
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I couldn't find a single example of a racist bird name in that article. You'd think they would give one.
You can find a list on https://birdnamesforbirds.wordpress.com/historical-profiles/bios-by-region/ if you're interested.
He was "stubborn and uncompromising", which makes him "antagonistic", therefore a colonialist and racist. That's a pretty low bar. I don't think it makes sense to define racism in a way that makes all 19th century naturalists racist.
You could have also picked the dude that desecrated indigenous graves to do phrenology.
Edit: Jesus Christ you left out that this dude was a literal colonizer in New Zealand. He was an officer in a militia during the New Zealand Wars.
He was also a committee member of The New Zealand Company, which existed to systemically colonize New Zealand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_John_Swainson#New_Zealand_estate
So maybe it is slightly misleading to say he was labeled racist for being “antagonistic”??
Admittedly, I only checked this one article. I think it's hard to judge how evil he really was. Either way, not a hill I'm going to die on.
This is a terrible source, as is Lemmy tradition.
Here's a better source I really wish that op would have been better about that. It's linked in the article they linked.
It appears that they are concerned with the tradition that the first person that scientifically describes the species gets to name it.
And, well, those people have been white.
Seems like stupid rationale IMO.
Do you think artists should be able to name their works?
Why shouldn't scientists also be able to name their works?
That's exactly what I'm saying. They should be able to.
It's hard to communicate with pithy texts only. I misunderstood.
I agree that the renaming effort is an over reaction trying to be more DEI for no apparent benefit.
That's why people should be concerned. There's likely an ulterior motive here.
I'm curious what the ulterior motive for renaming birds could be?
Obviously it's about globalist world domination plot
To sell new bird guide editions, obviously.
I have no fucking idea but it only makes sense there would be one, if there truly was no bigotry behind their original names.
Calm down there Alex Jones
Lol, what? What exactly is concerning about renaming birds to be more descriptive?
Not everything is a conspiracy, my guy.
First, they rename birds.
And then, they'll make all of our kids gay trans Korean lizard people!!!!
READ BETWEEN THE LINES SHEEPLE