Poll - Do you agree or disagree with the AOS's recent decision to abandon the use of eponymous bird names? (2 Viewers)

[opisska]

I just find stunning that someone takes the response of this Howell guy seriously, or even praises it, when it's just a terrible pile of self-centered hubris.

He:

• entirely refuses, even for one second, to see any point that his opposition has. Just dismisses it as absurd and that's it.
• "cannot imagine that any sentient person objects to the petition". Oh, I am not sentient then, thanks for the evaluation. Should I take the Turing test?
• compares promoters of changes in names to Nazi Germany, Stalin and Mao. Is he even for real?
• makes a monumentally stupid argument where he relates naming birds for male characterisrics to human gender issues
• and then repeatedly declares his response "rational"

How can any sentient being be interested in the opinion of such a terrible person is truly beyond me.

 

[Paul Chapman]

I just find stunning that someone takes the response of this Howell guy seriously, or even praises it, when it's just a terrible pile of self-centered hubris.

He:

• entirely refuses, even for one second, to see any point that his opposition has. Just dismisses it as absurd and that's it.
• "cannot imagine that any sentient person objects to the petition". Oh, I am not sentient then, thanks for the evaluation. Should I take the Turing test?
• compares promoters of changes in names to Nazi Germany, Stalin and Mao. Is he even for real?
• makes a monumentally stupid argument where he relates naming birds for male characterisrics to human gender issues
• and then repeatedly declares his response "rational"

How can any sentient being be interested in the opinion of such a terrible person is truly beyond me.

Thankfully even on this debate, the bizarre extremist voices are limited. 😀

And those voices mainly seem obsessed with paraphrasing inaccurately opposing viewpoints.

 

[Andy Adcock]

Folks, I've just been cancelled, I posted a thread about policing the scientific lexicon and it was deleted, I copy it here. I expect to be banned again but those who want to contact me, have my email.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c2d0/cd7a532a1c03e4e5e225767efadc279f6d22.pdf?_gl=1*1llinkh*_ga*MTU2OTEwNTcwNi4xNzAyMDQ0MjU0*_ga_H7P4ZT52H5*MTcwMjA0NDI1NC4xLjAuMTcwMjA0NDI1NC42MC4wLjA.

 

[Mono]

Folks, I've just been cancelled

What are you on about? The post you made didn't contain that link, it contained a link to a long screed about the eponym debate and a link to a press article about a two year old recall election for the San Francisco school board that had nothing to do with birds or birding. I deleted the second link and locked the thread as we don't need a fourth thread about eponyms.

 

[Mysticete]

Some excellent points in these responses Andy - Van Remsen's is especially worth reading for its brevity and directness : 'an edict from the Global North to the Global South'

Although its a bit hypocritical for Remsen (and at least some other members of SACC), who is arguably the driving force of SACC to say this, given that last I heard Louisiana isn't part of the "Global South".

 

[kb57]

Although its a bit hypocritical for Remsen (and at least some other members of SACC), who is arguably the driving force of SACC to say this, given that last I heard Louisiana isn't part of the "Global South".

You can surely be capable of recognising cultural imperialism without being geographically located in the affected area.

 

[Andy Adcock]

What are you on about? The post you made didn't contain that link, it contained a link to a long screed about the eponym debate and a link to a press article about a two year old recall election for the San Francisco school board that had nothing to do with birds or birding. I deleted the second link and locked the thread as we don't need a fourth thread about eponyms.

You didn't even read it properly, I'm sick of you chasing me.

 

[qwerty5]

I don't understand why is it even a problem, because it's not a problem to me!

What are you saying, that anyone who says there's a problem is automatically right? That's nonsense. Sorry, but claiming that eponyms are exclusionary doesn't make one automatically right. Applying logic to that claim and showing whether it is true or false is what ought to be done. And as of yet, I have seen no AOS supporter on this forum or anywhere even attempt to defend that claim with logic or facts. If you want to abandon reason and go down the road of "it's not a problem to you so you have no room to speak", then go ahead. The rest of us will stay in the realm of rationality.

 

[cajanuma]

Although its a bit hypocritical for Remsen (and at least some other members of SACC), who is arguably the driving force of SACC to say this, given that last I heard Louisiana isn't part of the "Global South".

Half of SACC is Latin American, though, whether Remsen is the driving force or not the other members have equal standing and voices.

And speaking of scientists from the Global South and their stance on eponyms, this came out today: Five exquisite new species of vipers discovered

It's snakes and not birds, but this particular multi-national team, with most authors from the Global South (Ecuador, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico and Costa Rica) saw it fit to coin several new eponyms, both for the scientific and suggested English names. It seems like the individuals whom the new pit-vipers are named after are mostly people who made financial contributions to the field, and I know some people turn up their noses at this, but surely it is up to the authors who put in countless of hours of work to study and describe these taxa to be the arbiters of that, right?

Perhaps the one thing that I find most off-putting about the anti-eponym movement is the way it claims to be couched in 'anti-colonialism', and yet so breezily ignores the opinions of scientists, birders etc who are actually from the Global South (and I realize that there is a wide variety of opinions there as well).

 

[cajanuma]

I just find stunning that someone takes the response of this Howell guy seriously

I think the hyperbole in that particular statement does him no favours and I agree that it's over-the-top, but "this Howell guy" is easily one of the most respected birders and field ornithologists of the last 50 years, and has authored real milestones like the Birds of Mexico and Northern Central America guide, the Rare Birds in North America book, Oceanic Birds of the World, and several other truly groundbreaking books.

So yeah I will always take his opinion seriously, even though I might not agree with it or its tone sometimes.

 

[pbjosh]

I think the hyperbole in that particular statement does him no favours and I agree that it's over-the-top, but "this Howell guy" is easily one of the most respected birders and field ornithologists of the last 50 years, and has authored real milestones like the Birds of Mexico and Northern Central America guide, the Rare Birds in North America book, Oceanic Birds of the World, and several other truly groundbreaking books.

So yeah I will always take his opinion seriously, even though I might not agree with it or its tone sometimes.

I read his statement and was sort of second-hand embarrassed for him. Yeah he's a smart guy, and yeah he's been known for being direct and a bit of a firebrand in the past, but I don't think I'm the only person who lost a little respect for him over what he wrote - irrespective of agreeing with him or not, the style of the argument was not something I would expect from someone as sharp as he is.

 

[François Doyen]

More walls of text that are composed of the same major ingredients:

• I don't understand why is it even a problem, because it's not a problem to me!

Maybe if people claiming it's a problem would bring some evidence that it actually is there wouldn't get so many people against it. Can't really prove something doesn't exist. Without evidence of it, changing ALL the eponyms will always feel like people pushing their own preference on everybody else because they've the authority to do so while disregarding the disruption and confusion it causes (which should be the main concern of people having this authority)

I agree with changing clearly problematic names. I don't think eponyms are the best way to names birds (but lots of non eponyms names are just as bad or worse) but I really don't like the mess that is created by changing so many names. They could have simply started by changing these more problematic names and see if there was really that much of a need/demand to change the rest.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Maybe if people claiming it's a problem would bring some evidence that it actually is there wouldn't get so many people against it. Can't really prove something doesn't exist. Without evidence of it, changing ALL the eponyms will always feel like people pushing their own preference on everybody else because they've the authority to do so while disregarding the disruption and confusion it causes (which should be the main concern of people having this authority)

I agree with changing clearly problematic names. I don't think eponyms are the best way to names birds (but lots of non eponyms names are just as bad or worse) but I really don't like the mess that is created by changing so many names. They could have simply started by changing these more problematic names and see if there was really that much of a need/demand to change the rest.

And indeed the vast majority of those that object to a wholesale change in one part of the world understand why some eponyms are a problem and indeed, they would be happy to see them changed.

I remain of the view that some new names being eponyms or otherwise representative of those minorities who are disproportionately excluded from the birding community would be a positive step.

But changing Zino's Petrel or Blackburnian Warbler or Kirtland's Warbler moving through the strength of arguments on the topic remains utterly unconvincing to me.

I have little experience of the United States but my brief experience comprising maybe only six weeks in total has suggested as with Britain far more pressing issues to address in an inequitable society.

All the best

Paul

 

[cajanuma]

or Blackburnian Warbler

If AOS does go ahead and change all the eponyms for North American birds, can we at least keep that one? It's wasn't until relatively recently that I learned it was an eponym and named after Anne Blackburne. I had always figured it referenced the bird's plumage, which features black and the color of fire, and I always though it was such a cool and fitting name. Could't it be made a non-eponym by fiat? Like the AOS issuing a statement saying Blackburnian non longer commemorates Anne Blackburne, but is now a descriptive modifier related to the bird's plumage.

I'm serious.

 

[pbjosh]

If AOS does go ahead and change all the eponyms for North American birds, can we at least keep that one? It's wasn't until relatively recently that I learned it was an eponym and named after Anne Blackburne. I had always figured it referenced the bird's plumage, which features black and the color of fire, and I always though it was such a cool and fitting name. Could't it be made a non-eponym by fiat? Like the AOS issuing a statement saying Blackburnian non longer commemorates Anne Blackburne, but is now a descriptive modifier related to the bird's plumage.

I'm serious.

By the same logic I very genuinely believe that Steller's birds can become Stellar if the names are to change.

 

[Paul Chapman]

By the same logic I very genuinely believe that Steller's birds can become Stellar if the names are to change.

I suspect that in order to match the new world values & the end of the old inequalities which the eponyms reflect that the likes of Coca Cola, Esso, Disneyland, etc will be represented.... ☹️

 

[Kirk Roth]

By the same logic I very genuinely believe that Steller's birds can become Stellar if the names are to change.

Cooper's Hawk is no longer named after William Cooper, but instead the barrel-colored plumage of the immature birds...
Audubon's Shearwater is not named for John James Audubon, but the Audubon Society, and so is merely a "societonym."

This is fun.

 

[kb57]

I suspect that in order to match the new world values & the end of the old inequalities which the eponyms reflect that the likes of Coca Cola, Esso, Disneyland, etc will be represented.... ☹️

Corporate sponsorship of birds...there's an idea to attract more resources for their conservation...

Prior to the Saudi takeover at Newcastle we could've renamed black-legged kittiwake as the Sports Direct Gull ©

 

[opisska]

I think the hyperbole in that particular statement does him no favours and I agree that it's over-the-top, but "this Howell guy" is easily one of the most respected birders and field ornithologists of the last 50 years, and has authored real milestones like the Birds of Mexico and Northern Central America guide, the Rare Birds in North America book, Oceanic Birds of the World, and several other truly groundbreaking books.

So yeah I will always take his opinion seriously, even though I might not agree with it or its tone sometimes.

He might be an expert on birds and ornithology, I have nothing against that. But this is not an ornithological issue, it's an issue of society and ethics, no amount of knowledge on zoology is going to help him if he is this clueless.

 

[Paul Chapman]

By the same logic I very genuinely believe that Steller's birds can become Stellar if the names are to change.

It has started already....