Redlining racist?

[rocket21]

Long story short, I was accused of "passing the buck" to the Grid Trust, abusing my role as group admin, and "actively perpetuating racism in the hiking community". Instead of arguing with this individual, I agreed to allow a thread on the topic, which they said they'd post in a couple of days. 10 days passed, and I honestly felt a bit held hostage, like the hammer was going to drop at any time, on my group. An email forwarded to me from another individual, detailed that the writer of the link in the OP, was going to release the linked article, and "didn't want anyone to be blindsided". It read like a thinly veiled threat, at best. You can muddle through the thread to see how the discussion unfolded.

A controversy was manufactured that resulted in driving traffic to a White Mountain blog that just happens to sell products to hikers? Deja vu.

 

[peakbagger]

Over the years I have run into two individuals that claim to have hiked all the trails in the white mountain guide long before the official list of finishers was started. I had no way of verifying the veracity of their claims but they were quite knowledgeable of the trails. Both had similar approaches with respect to finishing the list which was effectively "been there done that". There is most likely a similar larger contingent of AT thru hikers that do not register with the ATC to get the certificate.

The question is, is it an individual accomplishment if no one else acknowledges it?.

 

[jfb]

A controversy was manufactured that resulted in driving traffic to a White Mountain blog that just happens to sell products to hikers? Deja vu.

That's what I noticed. If I were a woke hiker, I'd want to stay at the Notch Hostel in North Woodstock. Unless I stayed at the campground with the solar panel array near the outhouse or the motel with the "Nous Parlons Francais" sign in the window.

 

[Hachi]

The question is, is it an individual accomplishment if no one else acknowledges it?.

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound? Or as my guy and I like to joke, If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman to hear him, is he still wrong?

I find this topic fascinating, and liken it to a discussion we have often with mental illness. Many times, not knowing your audience, you can easily say someone or something is retarded, or moronic, and offend people who live with these diseases. I have quietly mentioned to a friend here and there, - hey, you know that "so and so's" child is autistic, right?" You might want to be careful with that term.

It is not the intention of the person to hurt anyone, it is just ignorance and in most cases, there is an "aha" moment. We still slip, as old habits are hard to break, but at least we are more mindful.

 

[Mike P.]

That's what I noticed. If I were a woke hiker, I'd want to stay at the Notch Hostel in North Woodstock. Unless I stayed at the campground with the solar panel array near the outhouse or the motel with the "Nous Parlons Francais" sign in the window.

Well, the Notch is very nice, that's why I would stay there. Other than that, I'm there to hike and if people are yapping, I ain't listening. (Selective hearing shouldn't just be saved for your SO)

 

[maineguy]

Ya know, the whole idea of awarding patches and certificates smacks of a form of white privilege to me. I call it Hiker Privilege. It promotes inequity among the hiking community. Everyone should be awarded a patch and certificate for whichever accomplishment they desire. To not do so will harm their self esteem.

 

[Mike P.]

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound? Or as my guy and I like to joke, If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman to hear him, is he still wrong?

I find this topic fascinating, and liken it to a discussion we have often with mental illness. Many times, not knowing your audience, you can easily say someone or something is retarded, or moronic, and offend people who live with these diseases. I have quietly mentioned to a friend here and there, - hey, you know that "so and so's" child is autistic, right?" You might want to be careful with that term.

It is not the intention of the person to hurt anyone, it is just ignorance and in most cases, there is an "aha" moment. We still slip, as old habits are hard to break, but at least we are more mindful.

Yes and worst yet, you don't even realize you were wrong which often needs to more trouble. (One hiking mistake is rarely what causes a rescue or recovery, it's several. Also, while there are more men hiking than women, those numbers are shifting yet the SAR reports are still dominated by men. Kate and the few others are few and far between. Gathering stats that correlate percentages of overall hikers by gender and then at SAR or Accidents in Mountaineering to see if those ratios are consistent.)

 

[Barkingcat]

After all they have been through in this country, if Black folks find the term “redlining” objectionable, then it’s easy enough to use another word.

What’s the big deal?

Exactly.

I knew of the term as it was used in the 1930s before I knew of it as applies to the WMG. But then, I grew up in the south, so perhaps the exposure to it was different because of that.

 

[B the Hiker]

I have been active in the rock climbing community for the last decade or so, and there has been a lot of soul-searching recently. The American Alpine Club has launched a new initiative called Climb United to grapple in an institutional manner with issues that have...gone unseen by some of us, because we come from backgrounds that benefited from our position in the world. For example, there is a climb at the Gunks called "Bitchy Virgin." I love the route, but the name, not so much. We call things like this "microaggressions." I suspect the route name will be changed, hopefully sooner rather than later.

I'm an insurance historian--yes, that's a thing! I wrote my doctoral dissertation on the role of insurance in the American social safety net. Insurance companies bought the bonds of banks they knew were redlining, and they themselves redlined by not allowing agents in certain urban neighborhoods.

I would invite people to step back from the initial knee-jerk reaction (which I myself shared), and let the idea mellow for a day. Use that time to remember that almost all of us on the forum are white, and that other races may have different understandings of certain terms. Once we have all mellowed, maybe we think about "hiking united," as it were.

I suspect that we would all agree on two things:
1) In the hiking context, the term is not used in a racist manner.
2) It did have a racist connotation in others.

If we agree on these two, then the question becomes, should we do something about it?


Brian

 

[ChrisB]

Ya know, the whole idea of awarding patches and certificates smacks of a form of white privilege to me. I call it Hiker Privilege.

Good observation!

Hiking is definitely a white privilege activity. That's why so few people of color are seen on our trails, although that is slowly changing.

To its credit, the AMC has long supported initiatives that get economically disadvantaged minority city kids off the streets and into the backcountry.

And while these kids might never red-line the WMG, their horizons expand and possibly their interests. Plus they get to use and enjoy public lands, of which they are co-owners. How great is that?

 

[dug]

I'm actually glad when I started this (and won't finish) 25 years ago I used a black marker....

 

[dug]

Over the years I have run into two individuals that claim to have hiked all the trails in the white mountain guide long before the official list of finishers was started. I had no way of verifying the veracity of their claims but they were quite knowledgeable of the trails. Both had similar approaches with respect to finishing the list which was effectively "been there done that". There is most likely a similar larger contingent of AT thru hikers that do not register with the ATC to get the certificate.

The question is, is it an individual accomplishment if no one else acknowledges it?.

It is for me, since I'm an individual who accomplished something and never went through with a patch. I go outside for my reasons, and my reasons alone. Therefore, the only one needing to be satisfied for said acknowledgement is myself.

 

[Grey J]

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound? Or as my guy and I like to joke, If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman to hear him, is he still wrong?

I find this topic fascinating, and liken it to a discussion we have often with mental illness. Many times, not knowing your audience, you can easily say someone or something is retarded, or moronic, and offend people who live with these diseases. I have quietly mentioned to a friend here and there, - hey, you know that "so and so's" child is autistic, right?" You might want to be careful with that term.

It is not the intention of the person to hurt anyone, it is just ignorance and in most cases, there is an "aha" moment. We still slip, as old habits are hard to break, but at least we are more mindful.

It's true that one may easily say that someone is "retarded" and offend someone, but in making the point you have done so. The word has long been considered a slur against people with developmental disabilities, a group with which I worked for most of my professional career. It is also incorrect in a technical sense to refer to people with developmental disabilities as having "diseases." This only further stigmatizes them.

The debate about the term redlining is more subtle. To me, the practice of redlining is racist but the word itself is not. Voter suppression and gerrymandering are often inherently racist practices but the words are not racist. There's a difference. Certain words now commonly excised from civil discourse are intentionally pejorative and merit their new status. To me redlining is not in that category.

 

[SpencerVT]

My personal general view towards these things is that it is more about intent than the word itself. What is the intent of the word or phrase being used? In my opinion, that is what matters most. However, I think, generally speaking, it's up to the group that could be hurt by it to make the ultimate call/feedback about these things - for the same reason I don't weigh in on the pains of child birth.
Another sometimes used Hiking term is "Death March." This is used to describe a ludicrously long and tough climb, like the Presidential Traverse in a day. "Death March" has an extremely offensive and evil historical context so I choose not to use that term for a grueling long climb. I think in these two situations it's easy enough to implement replacement terms that achieve the same hiking terminology objective while simultaneously not stirring hurt in others.
These questions and discussions though are complicated, and will continue to be as society grapples with them.

 

[Hachi]

It is also incorrect in a technical sense to refer to people with developmental disabilities as having "diseases." This only further stigmatizes them.

You are right, I was thinking more about other mental illnesses as I was writing that but it was inconsistent with my example. Guess I should have used "crazy" as it relates to bipolar or schizophrenia. At any rate, most labels suck for the people they are applied to.

 

[dave.m]

I have been active in the rock climbing community for the last decade or so, and there has been a lot of soul-searching recently. The American Alpine Club has launched a new initiative called Climb United to grapple in an institutional manner with issues that have...gone unseen by some of us, because we come from backgrounds that benefited from our position in the world. For example, there is a climb at the Gunks called "Bitchy Virgin." I love the route, but the name, not so much. We call things like this "microaggressions." I suspect the route name will be changed, hopefully sooner rather than later.

I'm an insurance historian--yes, that's a thing! I wrote my doctoral dissertation on the role of insurance in the American social safety net. Insurance companies bought the bonds of banks they knew were redlining, and they themselves redlined by not allowing agents in certain urban neighborhoods.

I would invite people to step back from the initial knee-jerk reaction (which I myself shared), and let the idea mellow for a day. Use that time to remember that almost all of us on the forum are white, and that other races may have different understandings of certain terms. Once we have all mellowed, maybe we think about "hiking united," as it were.

I suspect that we would all agree on two things:
1) In the hiking context, the term is not used in a racist manner.
2) It did have a racist connotation in others.

If we agree on these two, then the question becomes, should we do something about it?


Brian

Thanks you for this post!

 

[Mike P.]

Ya know, the whole idea of awarding patches and certificates smacks of a form of white privilege to me. I call it Hiker Privilege. It promotes inequity among the hiking community. Everyone should be awarded a patch and certificate for whichever accomplishment they desire. To not do so will harm their self esteem.

I have them, however, they stay at home. Patches, we don't need no stinkin' patches. I also don't wear any bling on my Scout Uniform. For hiking, if we talk on the trail or summit great, you can figure out if I know what I'm talking about by talking to me. For scouts, if you are trusting your child with me, you better be talking with me, interviewing me, if you are looking at some patches to determine if your child will be okay with me in the woods or if I know better than to take your kid out in a bad storm, that's not wise.

(I do most of my dumb@$$ stuff solo. I just listen to all the voices in my head to know whether to turnaround, no go forward )

 

[Salty]

It is for me, since I'm an individual who accomplished something and never went through with a patch. I go outside for my reasons, and my reasons alone. Therefore, the only one needing to be satisfied for said acknowledgement is myself.

Yup. I quietly finished my lists with a group of friends, and granted, while I got the patches at that time, for me they are a personal and pleasant reminder of well-earned accomplishments. They're not on any equipment or clothing, and without them I would have still done it. I had a few goals that I wanted to accomplish, the lists were a means to that end, and patches were not a goal in the least.

 

[Grey J]

I have been trying to think of another word that has multiple meanings, one of which has either a racist intent or history but whose common usage is benign. I have come up with sundown as in Sundown Towns or Sundown Laws. For those unfamiliar with the practice, many southern towns once displayed signs warning Black people to leave town by sundown. The signs were often blunt, nasty, and patently racist. My dad, a New Englander, was shocked when he found these signs still prominent in 1940s Texas when he served in the Army Air Corps (later known as the Air Force) during WWII.

So in this context, the word sundown was tied to a disgusting racist practice. According to the logic being applied to the banning of the word redlining because of its association with discriminatory housing schemes, we could never use the word sundown again because in the past it was part and parcel of this horrible racial injustice. While I agree with someone who said that in general we should all take our cues from the offended party and alter our behavior so as not to offend, in this instance it doesn't seem practical or even necessary. If it was, we could never use the word sundown again.

 

[Puma concolor]

Neither the activity of hiking all of the trails in a given mountain range nor the offending definition that is the basis of this thread even rates in the top 6 on “Urban Dictionary,” which as we all know is the decider of all things.

Just goes to show how myopia increasingly tempers our views of the vast world. We are trained to see only the things that are directly in front of us. Most folks don’t care about either definition of redlining being discussed here but the excessive focus on identity politics so easily drags us into discussions such as the one that is the topic of this thread. I could go on and on about my feelings about the forced wokeness of today that is so contrary to the “content of their character” beliefs that I grew up on and served me so well in the real world ... but I won’t.

If you want to hike all the trails in the White Mountains and call it “redlining,” that’s totally cool. If you want to hike all the trails in the White Mountains and call it “Han Solo,” that’s equally cool. Folks just need to chill the heck out and stop worrying about how their own individual pursuits are viewed by folks who neither care about them nor the activities in which they are engaged.