American Ornithological Society changing the names of birds named after people
slate.com
slate.com
From a linked article within this article about changing the name of a bird in 2000.
I completely agree. These proposed changes are not always necessarily representative of what the majority wants.
You can gerrymander groups of people in more ways than just voting districts. Social power should be distributed to all, not just those who have found the pulpit from whose stage they will readily kick the rest of us back into the crowd who must listen.
I found the cutest video of an owl digging for prey in the snow: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Boreal_Owl/photo-gallery...
It's all about the little things
Edit: Baby owls! https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Eastern_Screech-Owl/phot...
The move isn’t about rejecting our white supremacist history - it’s about giving things names that are informative and meaningful with regard to the bird itself. The article explains this pretty well with several examples.
The white supremacy angle comes from the consideration that a bird that was known very well across indigenous generations as one name was decidedly named something like “John Smith’s Warbler” because John Smith “discovered” the bird and that’s what has been codefied. Meanwhile native knowledge of the same species was deliberately wiped from history by way of forced assimilation and genocide. The white supremacy bit being that whatever the predominately white folks learned or knew of a species superseded what the people who’d lived there for generations had known about the species.
That's clearly the motivation. Per the article: "The movement really began in 2020, when the group Bird Names for Birds successfully petitioned the AOS to change the name of a species of grassland bird then named after Confederate Maj. Gen. John P. McCown to the inoffensive (and more descriptive) Thick-billed Longspur."
> it’s about giving things names that are informative and meaningful with regard to the bird itself.
This is an after-the-fact rationalization to make the change seem more scientific. But names in general aren't mnemonics, they are just... names. Just consider the base names of most birds: duck, heron, eagle, hawk. The name itself tells you nothing about the bird, they are just sounds attached to a particular shape of bird (maybe they have some historical etymological meanings, but if so, they are not generally known). Yet people have no trouble remembering what a duck is. They don't need to call it a wide-beaked water bird.
This can even apply to names that are supposed to be descriptive, e.g. I had no idea what "pileated" meant until recently when I looked it up, but I've known what a pileated woodpecker is since I was a kid.
The same, of course, applies to all sorts of parts of nature: e.g. it's Mars, not "red planet", grass, not "bendy skinny plant", etc. (p.s. when are they coming for the planet names? We've claimed entire other worlds for the Roman empire!)
In English. Its English name became "John Smith's Warbler". Its Cherokee or Apache name was and is unchanged.
This is a symptom of a common Anglosphere/American perspective - that US culture and the English language belongs to and must somehow reflect the peoples of the world, and not just the English and their colonies.
I would respect the people advocating for this stuff a lot more if they weren’t blatantly using doublespeak to my face
Berlin, Ontario renamed itself to Kitchener in WWI. Now there's a (not very strong) movement to rename the city again because the British General the city was named after (Horatio Herbert Kitchener) was responsible for the creation of concentration camps in the Boer War.
Of course, like Saint Petersburg, Berlin wasn't the first name for settlements in that area.
People rename things and I personally am okay with that. Like Shakespeare said, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
> Given that these names are officially changing, when the AOS finalizes their name selections for sets released so far, it’s likely that we’ll make a pack of the renamed birds and offer them on our webstore. At that time we will also likely change the names of those birds in the game, rendering the historian bonus card an artifact of the past.
I would not want to keep GoldenPalaceDotCom monkeys [0] equivalents in the bird world.
"We just wanted to watch birds."
Can you explain the causal chain there?
Does it eventually cut off all the knowledge associated with the old name, due to the difficulties it introduces in discoverability? Is it harder for only the generation used to the old name, and not an issue for new generations that only know the new name? Or does the newer generation simply not know what they don't know?
I am generally in favor of renaming things to non-person descriptive names, like mountains (McKinley->Denali) or highways [0], which often run into the same accusations of "cancel culture." The power dynamic is certainly interesting to observe whenever it's being fought over, but people need to let go of ego and realize that they can't take birds, mountains, highways, high schools or military bases with them. Everything is temporary. Learn you some Buddhism.
[0]: https://www.ktoo.org/2022/03/09/bill-would-start-process-of-...
It's not about taking, it's literally about giving.
If I posthumously donate all of my wealth to building housing for the homeless, I want my goddamn name associated with the project. Not out of any sense of vanity (while alive, I'm only ever anonymously charitable) but because I want to set a example for future generations to follow. At some point people will ask "who the hell was this guy that I see his name every day" perhaps and see that this was testament to what I wanted to give back to the world, and why.
Taking my name away from it and calling it "Bird House for Humans" means nothing to anyone. Birds didn't build the fucking thing. It didn't just grow from seeds they shat while flying by either. Birds are assholes who give nothing, shit everywhere and steal everything. They would never build anybody a house, least of all one for you.
It's just more anti-meritocratic nonsense. There's no point in doing anything nice if you're just going to get written out of history books by shills for Big Bird. Nobody forgets Hitler, Pol Pot or Jeffrey Dahmer and what they stood for, but it's my name and values at risk of being deliberately forgotten because someone was on a power trip.
It's existentially insulting.
There's the rub, innit? If you're a eugenicist, we don't wanna follow your example anymore. But we'll keep the building.