Racist plant names, common, scientific

evo said:
It’s pop culture from 1950…. I can guarantee First Nations folks wouldn’t condone naming a cultivated mutation after themselves.
Read ‘the golden spruce’, for many reasons, but it will give you some perspective.


Granted it’s unknown if these specific cultivars have the similar cultural significance.
Click to expand...
Made my morning, thank you.
-AJ
 
  • Love
Reactions: evo
Ahhhh......... from plants to birds to team sport politics. The universe has come full circle yet again. My unsolicited opinion nobody asked for...........There is so much horrible stuff going on in the world today, I can't create things in my life to become upset about. There are horrific things happening to unaccompanied children crossing our border. There's an open comment period on the Unaccompanied Children Program foundational rule making process that could actually save someones life or keep them from a life of physical and sexual abuse. There's a million atrocities happening to peoples all over the world who could use our advocacy. There's issues in my town that deserve attention. To me personally, if I focus on things with such little significance to humanity yet turn away from greater injustices where the actions I took could actually help humanity.................idk. thats just my ramblings. I started loosing interest when the Coke vs Pepsi politics got tossed in.
 
Last edited:
Are all uses of names connected to "race" racist?


Curious about what people think of the Yakima tribe being in favor of being respectfully used as a mascot and The Puyallup Tribe's choice to put Puyallup Tribe of Indians in their super spendy sign along I-5.


32 years ago, I attended University of Illinois with the Fighting Illini (sp?), named after the native Illini/ Confederation of Tribes of Illiniwek.
This mascot was in dispute at that time (guessing even longer).

Supposedly, ritual dances were performed at Halftime.

To me, that is not respectful.




Perhaps it's wrong to call it Mormon Tea when you use the ephedra- containing plant that Mormons, before becoming Latter-Day Saints, made into tea.


Thoughts?
 
Changing plant and animal names should be on the bottom and back page of any to do lists for this society. With all the other heavy lifting to be done and social ills, this is the last priority. How about term limits for Congress or the Supreme Court? How about keeping a democratic system in place that a majority of the population can get behind? How about health care? How about cutting an exorbitant military budget? Nah, let’s go after the most politically charged issues that divide everyone further. Gender, abortion, sexuality, and political correctness should all be secondary but instead they are put at the forefront by politicians since it divides everyone the most instead of the issues that would actually bring everyone together.
 
southsoundtree said:
Are all uses of names connected to "race" racist?


Curious about what people think of the Yakima tribe being in favor of being respectfully used as a mascot and The Puyallup Tribe's choice to put Puyallup Tribe of Indians in their super spendy sign along I-5.


32 years ago, I attended University of Illinois with the Fighting Illini (sp?), named after the native Illini/ Confederation of Tribes of Illiniwek.
This mascot was in dispute at that time (guessing even longer).

Supposedly, ritual dances were performed at Halftime.

To me, that is not respectful.




Perhaps it's wrong to call it Mormon Tea when you use the ephedra- containing plant that Mormons, before becoming Latter-Day Saints, made into tea.


Thoughts?
Click to expand...
The examples of the Yakima tribe, and Puyallup are of the peoples own accord. Which is incredibly different than if I propagated a cultivar and named it ‘Brave warrior apache pine’ invoking a perverted romanticism for some sort of status symbol in some rich persons garden.
Ephedra viridis was and is used by many tribes, which is the first time I have had it and was introduced to it. The name I learned for it was ‘Stick tea’ and it was a good few years before I heard the name ‘mormon tea’. I’m sure there are at least half a dozen traditional names for it.
 
Last edited:
RyanCafferky said:
Changing plant and animal names should be on the bottom and back page of any to do lists for this society. With all the other heavy lifting to be done and social ills, this is the last priority. How about term limits for Congress or the Supreme Court? How about keeping a democratic system in place that a majority of the population can get behind? How about health care? How about cutting an exorbitant military budget? Nah, let’s go after the most politically charged issues that divide everyone further. Gender, abortion, sexuality, and political correctness should all be secondary but instead they are put at the forefront by politicians since it divides everyone the most instead of the issues that would actually bring everyone together.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, but meanwhile we all could put in very minimal effort and simply use alternate names, or be more selective when we use a common name or taxonomic.
 
I do think with bird names, it’s pretty annoying that it’s like, a Wilson’s this and a Swainsons that. You gonna climb a Wilson pine? A Swainsons Oak? No thanks. That’s why the move away from proper names in ornithology makes so much sense.

I do think it’s hella insane to call an instrument of war after an indigenous tribe, like an Apache helicopter. But it’s way more insane what we do with those war machines.

I really appreciate this thread, it made me have a revelation about how we on the left have used semantic battles to deflect the real work that would cause structural change. We police people’s words and it deflects the actual work of confronting the terrible histories and current insanities of the world which would require us to actually change something. Like, let’s help people, not sit around finding a reason to hate each other.
 
Stumpsprouts said:
I do think with bird names, it’s pretty annoying that it’s like, a Wilson’s this and a Swainsons that. You gonna climb a Wilson pine? A Swainsons Oak? No thanks. That’s why the move away from proper names in ornithology makes so much sense.

I do think it’s hella insane to call an instrument of war after an indigenous tribe, like an Apache helicopter. But it’s way more insane what we do with those war machines.

I really appreciate this thread, it made me have a revelation about how we on the left have used semantic battles to deflect the real work that would cause structural change. We police people’s words and it deflects the actual work of confronting the terrible histories and current insanities of the world which would require us to actually change something. Like, let’s help people, not sit around finding a reason to hate
Click to expand...
Yup, and while we as arborists cannot control what the military calls their helicopter, we as individuals can control the names we use.
So in my original example with ‘Chief Joesph‘ pine, in my reports, quotes etc I will simply pause and call it “golden needle pine“ or ‘pine cultivar’
Hence the point of the thread, if we can all chill, grab a beer and think of names in current usage then make an alternate list that we can all use great.
Or we can argue about all the details of why and what efforts should be put where…
 
I think if a name, whatever it is on is offensive to a group, they should be the ones to ask that it be changed.
Maybe the Apache people like that a powerful fighting helicopter is named after them. I don't hear any of them complaining about it. There seems to be a lot of white folks who want all these names changed. Let's erase all non-white symbols so that everything is named after white people. Sort of sucks if you ask me. Which you didn't.
 
evo said:
So in my original example with ‘Chief Joesph‘ pine, in my reports, quotes etc I will simply pause and call it “golden needle pine“ or ‘pine cultivar’
Click to expand...
Exactly. When you’re the tree expect it won’t be long before many people swear by that being the accurate thing to call the thing.

The only common tree name I take issue with is tulip poplar. It ain’t a dang poplar!
 
Shadowscape said:
I think if a name, whatever it is on is offensive to a group, they should be the ones to ask that it be changed.
Maybe the Apache people like that a powerful fighting helicopter is named after them. I don't hear any of them complaining about it. There seems to be a lot of white folks who want all these names changed. Let's erase all non-white symbols so that everything is named after white people. Sort of sucks if you ask me. Which you didn't.
Click to expand...
Correct your opinion wasn’t asked. It was made very clear.
Another way of looking at it, is simply asking the culture one would like to name something after.
 
evo said:
Yup, and while we as arborists cannot control what the military calls their helicopter, we as individuals can control the names we use.
So in my original example with ‘Chief Joesph‘ pine, in my reports, quotes etc I will simply pause and call it “golden needle pine“ or ‘pine cultivar’
Hence the point of the thread, if we can all chill, grab a beer and think of names in current usage then make an alternate list that we can all use great.
Or we can argue about all the details of why and what efforts should be put where…
Click to expand...

evo said:
I don't really know the history of the Chief Joseph Pine but it looks like it was found on or near Chief Joseph mountain, near Joseph City. Perhaps the name just reflects the geographic location or is a commemoration to honor the Chief and his people. Perhaps we should change the name of the mountain or city as well? IDK, I would also defer to the community/people in question of being offended as they might be offended by people changing the name. Except for the donaldtrumpi moth, he can take it lol. Overall I don't really care that much, refer to the botanical or common name that you feel more comfortable with. We don't need to start another movement over it.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH
Herein lies my issues with the entire discussion.............."Yup, and while we as arborists cannot control what the military calls their helicopter, we as individuals can control the names we use." ...................Why is any human focusing their concern and efforts on what that helicopter is called and not screaming at the top of their lungs about WHAT ITS BEING USED FOR. It was designed and built to rein the largest amount of death and destruction possible to any human who is on the opposition end of its owners policies and philosophies. In this context please tell me how the name makes any difference at all. Why not try to control what its used for instead of being upset about what its name is? Have we lost our way? I also see the shot across the bow letting people know their opinion wasn't asked. Isn't posting something on an open forum a carte blanche invitation to anyone with access to post their opinion or are opinions only welcomed when they are in alignment with the initial thoughts? Seems to be a similar tone on recent threads. Only like minded folks need reply.
 
Last edited:
Bendroctanus said:
If only we could ask the trees what they call themselves…
Click to expand...
As silly as it sounds and I did mean a certain ounce of silliness to it, it’s not completely semantical. We know that trees can communicate with each other so I think it would be safe to say that they can identify different individuals within and outside their own species and genus and the like (they probably have a much more acute taxonomy than we do). SO, they must have identification in same form or language, or in other words, names they use for themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom