You can now flag a discriminatory name

SinRopa wrote: MP says that's not allowed now.

I am going to bet beer money that MP trolls are flagging route names for kicks and giggles, and Nick has no time to go through all the flags just yet

Running this dog and pony show has to be as tough as being a politician, no matter what you do someone is going to be triggered.

Throw them a bone, hope they calm down and watch them move on to the next subject. This is #1 in the politicians playbook.

amariuswrote:

I am going to bet beer money that MP trolls are flagging route names for kicks and giggles, and Nick has no time to go through all the flags just yet

Anybody who doesn't understand the truth behind this has their head in the sand. Classic projection: "But then anybody can just flag anything they want as offensive!"...proceeds to flag said stuff to make their own "point" while those of us who care are flagging stuff like "Two Faggots Don't Make a Right". Imagine purposefully not wanting your sport to be more inclusive to other groups of people. What scares you all about black people at the crag? Onsight crushing your proj or something? Jesus.

T Legowrote:

Anybody who doesn't understand the truth behind this has their head in the sand. Classic projection: "But then anybody can just flag anything they want as offensive!"...proceeds to flag said stuff to make their own "point" while those of us who care are flagging stuff like "Two Faggots Don't Make a Right". Imagine purposefully not wanting your sport to be more inclusive to other groups of people. What scares you all about black people at the crag? Onsight crushing your proj or something? Jesus.

I totally agree with you. However, what bothers me is your insensitive derogatory use of the name "Jesus" at the end of your comment. Is that necessary? Folks like me consider it blasphemy and seems to me a bit hypocritical on your part. So if we're going to be offended by what other say and honest about all this discrimination, you need to include religion and spiritual beliefs.Thoughts on that?

I don't understand why people are so offended about the idea of changing route names that are actively harmful and offensive. I recognize that there is the "preserving history" argument, but why would we want to preserve the history of racism, sexism, and homophobia in our own community? Is it so important to preserve the current culture of the climbing community that we are willing to tolerate climbs named things like The Black Bitch, Lynch Mob, or A Case of the Fags? Plus, history will still be preserved....the climb will remain, the FA's name with remain, and the FA will have a chance to rename the route. I have seen the names of climbs that people are advocating to change and they are not names like Superman that trolls most likely are flagging, it is names like A Jap in the NBA, which got flagged and is now The NBA.

Way to go Nick, great to see you addressing this issue. The same old drama queens but just more of them on MP now.  

SinRopa wrote:

Sure, and “Happiness” is probably one of those cases, but it highlights the problem of considering a name offensive merely because someone claims they’re offended.

No it doesn't highlight that, because that's not happening. No one is considering the name offensive merely because someone claims they're offended. The name hasn't been changed and I doubt that it will be changed.

The message doesn't say "We consider this route offensive", it says, "The name of this route has been flagged as potentially discriminatory."

If you click the "More Info" button, it says, "Mountain Project is working to address the issue of route names that are discriminatory in nature, including racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry. At this point, we are cataloging route names that are potentially discriminatory. We have not made a decision about this route yet while we continue to plan how to evaluate each name and what actions we should take." (Emphasis mine)

EDIT: Actually, I think we're both missing part of the story here. In the description is says the route was originally called "Happiness In Slavery", and it was changed to "Happiness". This creates the appearance that someone flagged the name "Happiness" as discriminatory, but it seems more likely that someone flagged "Happiness In Slavery" as discriminatory, and the discriminatory name flag wasn't removed when the name was changed to "Happiness".

Dylan Harriswrote:

I totally agree with you. However, what bothers me is your insensitive derogatory use of the name "Jesus" at the end of your comment. Is that necessary? Folks like me consider it blasphemy and seems to me a bit hypocritical on your part. So if we're going to be offended by what other say and honest about all this discrimination, you need to include religion and spiritual beliefs.Thoughts on that?

Taking your Lord's name in vain is not on the same level as using language that has historically been used to discriminate against and perpetuate hate towards specific groups of people. Unless you can otherwise point out how I just did that, I will continue to hold this view. With that said, I respect that it does offend and you be more mindful of disrespecting others beliefs in the future. To wrap: while both types of language may be offensive, the language rooted in racism and hate is more dangerous in my opinion.

Thankfully, we now know that T Lego's opinion is more valuable than Dylan Harris'. ^^^^^^
What about 20 years from now, when the LDS Church dominates all of politics and society?  Based on that future morality (and power structure), you may just lose your job over this post.

Dylan Harriswrote:

Thoughts on that?

you chose that life. there's a difference - despite the whole "attack on christianity" bs narrative.

As a white dude, I always find it.... odd when the group of people who are least negatively effected by route names that are racist, sexist, or homophobic also seem to be the loudest about keeping them.

For another perspective, someone in our local Facebook group posted a heartfelt story about a time she took a group of new female climbers outside for the first time. It was an amazing experience filled with excitement, enthusiasm, and stoke, until she looked up the route they were climbing, which was called “Fat Chicks Trying To Be Sexy.” Ruined the whole vibe for everyone.

Names can be changed. The rock stays the same. Just ask Mt. McKinley.

Karl Kwrote: Thankfully, we now know that T Lego's opinion is more valuable than Dylan Harris'. ^^^^^^
What about 20 years from now, when the LDS Church dominates all of politics and society?  Based on that future morality (and power structure), you may just lose your job over this post.

My opinion is not more important, it is just my opinion. I know this may seem a little meta, but you are allowed to have an opinion on the importance of things without that affecting the importance of your opinion over another's.

I'll help you out here...my opinion is not more important. BUT, my opinion is that I believe racist hate language is more important to stamp out than taking Jesus' name in vain. I'm hoping that with further explanation, you will now understand.

I assure you that I won't fire myself in 20 years, but thank you for being considerate of my well-being!

T Legowrote:

My opinion is not more important, it is just my opinion. I know this may seem a little meta, but you are allowed to have an opinion on the importance of things without that affecting the importance of your opinion over another's.

I'll help you out here...my opinion is not more important. BUT, my opinion is that I believe racist hate language is more important to stamp out than taking Jesus' name in vain. I'm hoping that with further explanation, you will now understand.

I assure you that I won't fire myself in 20 years, but thank you for being considerate of my well-being!

I don't know, a bigot is a bigot.

On second thought, I believe people can change so I should say a bigoted statement is a bigoted statement.

Which of these do you think is worse to say:

Jesus

or

...well, my post would get removed if I typed it.

*insert John Mulaney quote, something something*

Dave Olsenwrote:

I don't know, a bigot is a bigot.

On second thought, I believe people can change so I should say a bigoted statement is a bigoted statement.

I don't think that anyone would argue that bigoted statement is a bigoted statement, but tautologies aren't all that enlightening.

If someone says "Jesus Christ that's a hard move!" when they fall off a climb, is that bigoted? I don't think so.

EDIT: Edited to account for your edit.

Dylan Harriswrote:

I totally agree with you. However, what bothers me is your insensitive derogatory use of the name "Jesus" at the end of your comment. Is that necessary? Folks like me consider it blasphemy and seems to me a bit hypocritical on your part. So if we're going to be offended by what other say and honest about all this discrimination, you need to include religion and spiritual beliefs.Thoughts on that?

Agreed, cool it with that Jesus shit!

One can only hope that every route named 'Unknown' and every 'Project' route with sends gets flagged, so that something useful might come of this.

Thanks Nick, this is an issue that has bothered me for some time.  Glad MP is addressing it along with many other groups.

As a Jewish person (Bar Mitzvah'd and the whole nine yards), I don't take much of an issue with the anti-semitic route names. Yea they suck and are in bad taste, but I just roll my eyes and move on with my life, I have bigger things to worry about.

also

Good luck trying to work with Jim Beyer to change his route names such as "Knifing Zionist Racists" lmao.

EDIT: I should add that this flagging system may or may not work, I am just curious to see how the curating process of changing or removing route names will go. Is it good to have and will result in more positive route names?  Probably.

I think that the system should allow for a community vote for "change" or "No change" if the route developer won't change particularly offensive names.

Dave K wrote: Religion can be very personal but it ultimately a choice.

Race is not a choice.

See the difference? Let's move on from this overused strawman.

But race is a choice. It's a story many of us choose to believe in. Race does not exist, it is a social construct. The color of a person's skin should be as relevant as their hair or eye color to society. Racism only exists because we all still choose to elevate the importance of skin tone for some reason.