Invitation to join mps diversity and inclusion group

Gotta say this is the most creative attempt yet to stifle discussion of diversity in climbing. 

Pat Lightwrote:

here's a free recipe for rice

Ingredients: white rice, water

Tools: stove, pot with lid

Concept: 2 cups water for every 1 cup rice, and you're gonna bring everything to a boil on high heat and then immediately after it starts boiling you'll turn it down to the lowest setting on your stove, cover it, and let it sit and cook (DON'T TOUCH IT) for twenty minutes.

Steps: honestly the steps seem superfluous at this point, it's all included in the basic concept above. Rice is even easier than steak.

oof. in my kitchen, local ethics dictate that the ratio is dependent on the type of rice. While 2:1 is OK for brown rice, 1.75:1 is a better ratio for jasmine or basmati and nishiki really prefers 1.25:1. You're free to do whatever you want at your home kitchen, but just know if you show up to my kitchen with that mushy ass rice the locals will make sure you have a crappy sesh.

simplyput .wrote:

oof. in my kitchen, local ethics dictate that the ratio is dependent on the type of rice. While 2:1 is OK for brown rice, 1.75:1 is a better ratio for jasmine or basmati and nishiki really prefers 1.25:1. You're free to do whatever you want at your home kitchen, but just know if you show up to my kitchen with that mushy ass rice the locals will make sure you have a crappy sesh.

See this is the kind of beta I am HERE for. Hype.

I've been cooking jasmine this way --- I'll try to drop off that extra quarter cup. Is the timing still the same for brown? Thanks for your free advice btw, I really appreciate that you took some time out of your day to build up the community

I wish people would stop spraying rice beta on here. I'm trying to onsight my rice, braj.

I don’t get the whole “we need diversity play”. From where I see it we already have a lot of diversity here in Southern California. At Stoney Point All are welcome- no matter what color your skin is, your language, how you XYZ or what you eat. Maybe in Colorado things are different, I don’t know, I don’t live there.

Nick should put his $$ and time into supporting the various groups that equip and take people out. I know groups like this exist in The Bay and in LA who do this stuff. Do you have them in Denver, Aspen? Maybe get gyms to give free admission or reduced rates to underprivileged kids.  Maybe use his site to gather gear, shoes, clothing and $$$ for trips. All I see right now are useless gestures (redacting root names- what a hoot) and nothing concrete.

But seriously, come on out to Stoney for the evening sessions- you can meet a bunch of people and have fun.

And I use a rice cooker- made in Japan- by Panasonic. “They” know about rice ya know.
And only ruin a great steak by frying it in a pan, it works when road tripping but I prefer charcoal grill.

Climb on

White rice is racist.

Guy Keeseewrote:

I don’t get the whole “we need diversity play”. From where I see it we already have a lot of diversity here in Southern California. At Stoney Point All are welcome- no matter what color your skin is, your language, how you XYZ or what you eat. Maybe in Colorado things are different, I don’t know, I don’t live there.

Think of the general argument for diversity as being similar to the concepts of "death by a thousand cuts" or "the crux of a big wall is not the hardest technical climbing move."

Many people from traditionally underserved or discriminated groups report that the various "-isms" more often manifest as constant "less visible" issues than they manifest as direct, big-ticket Hollywood-style discrimination. That is to say, instead of groups of armed climbers showing up at the crag and saying, "Y'all aren't welcome, and if you come back we'll lynch you," it's more often stuff like:

• Calls to police and similar harassment when vanlifing or camping in certain areas
• Shop employees keeping an unnecessarily close eye or following around the store
• Bros shouting beta constantly or hitting on them at the gym at all times
• The entire concept of a "YP" and the continued popularity of the term
• Less representation on athlete rosters, and accusations of "forced diversity, the climber isn't even that good" when representation does exist
• Most of the barely-literate, "lol it's edgy why would you snowflakes take offense" shit Frank chooses to post on here
• Outright slurs in route names passed off as jokes and then defended ad infinitum by keyboard warriors
• Yes, even things like coddling or saccharine over-enthusiasm from nominally inclusive people desperate to practice performative inclusivity in front of their friends

In the same way a top rope tough guy in a DC-area gym might be overheard saying, "Well, I can climb the crimpy 5.13 routes my setter puts up after just one or two tries, so I'm sure I'm ready to go out and free the Moonlight Buttress at 5.12c without much effort," the claim of "Well, I see a few people of color every weekend at my local crag and no one is chasing them away, so I'm sure we don't need any more of this affirmative action nonsense" falls pretty far short of the mark.

^^^^^

I hope to someday be as educated and enlightened as you, Pat. You are so evolved! May I use you as a role model? (why did you take a swipe at me? feeling hostile?)

I suspect that part of the problem is most of this seems pretty top-down; that is, Nick making a well-meaning effort to improve a problem and folks taking it as imposing what HE wants over what anyone else does. Take a look at this article: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/dobbin/files/an2018.pdf and others and you see that simple diversity trainings and similar initiatives don't improve or change folks' mindsets (and sometimes entrench them further in their beliefs!)

Dave K ..... Quality post.

Dave K wrote:

In other words, nuanced and unscientific concepts developed only recently by academics that build their careers around developing frameworks of social abstractions.

Who decided that "microaggressions" are a thing? Just because someone made up a word and it gained popularity in circles with a political agenda doesn't mean it represents a legitimate humanitarian issue.

Chester M. Pierce, a Black psychiatrist and Harvard academic. Many people of color and LGBT folks find the concept extremely relatable, myself included. While the term itself maybe tends to exaggerate the severity of what's going on, they are indeed a "thing."

Why is the standard now "traditionally" underserved instead of currently underserved. Who decides when the goalposts should move?

Many of those "traditionally" under served are in fact "still" under served. The goalposts aren't being moved.

Who decides how we determine the magnitude of these social problems or whether the problem should have priority over other concerns or issues? Is it the few people making the most noise, those expressing the most outrage, the college professor that needs the problem to exist to justify their tenure, the journalist that needs to sell a story? Why are some voices allowed to be heard yet others are dismissed outright? I know plenty of people in "traditionally underserved" groups that claim that these issues are vastly overstated. Should we ignore these people?

And many people in those groups do not find the problems overstated. Your assumption that these are purely academic problems, made up for profit/other gain, is pretty dismissive of very real concerns.

The problem with "having a conversation" about these topics is that many people don't really want a conversation. They want to lecture others so that they can demonstrate the extraordinary wisdom and virtues they developed after getting a B+ in their sophomore course on race relations or gender studies.

Again, dismissive. Trying to have these conversations is difficult when each party is working from a completely different set of facts/assumptions, many of which are fundamentally incompatible. Take, for instance, this forum lately: there's a group of people who think climbing is not very diverse and think that should change, and another group who argue against that. A little while ago the question of whether there should be subforums for people of color & queer climbers was met with a significant amount of pushback by some members of this site, who insisted it doesn't matter, or shouldn't matter. Funnily enough, I rarely see those who belong to those groups claiming that it doesn't matter being queer or a person of color or a woman in climbing. In my own experience, it patently does.

Guy Keeseewrote:

I don’t get the whole “we need diversity play”. From where I see it we already have a lot of diversity here in Southern California. At Stoney Point All are welcome- no matter what color your skin is, your language, how you XYZ or what you eat. Maybe in Colorado things are different, I don’t know, I don’t live there.

This may be because you're part of a group that's already pretty well included. Or it may be because you gravitate in circles that are already pretty inclusive. I would say the same thing where I stand - but if people with different background tell me it's not the case from where they stand, I would be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They know the smell of their own shoes better than I do....

If you're opposed to MP using free labor, there is a competing effort trying to launch that you can support.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/climbing-guidebook-app-discovery-funding?fbclid=IwAR1k7j3AyLOA_p5BULD8Dwenzt9KIzIRRdw7c69ZykqUI4h7GNSqdZTsUMc#/

Dave K, can you give a specific instance of each of these two people, and show how and why one was labeled a "demon" and the other a "hero" please?

Kap-   Sounds like a preacher looking for $$$$$$ So this is the same person who wanted Nick to pay her???
Wonderful
Now I understand more 

TJ Brannenwrote:

Dave K, can you give a specific instance of each of these two people, and show how and why one was labeled a "demon" and the other a "hero" please?

Obviously, I don't speak for Dave, but here's how I would describe the two groups:

Demon - won't agree that all white people are racist and have privilege. Welcoming and friendly to all, regardless of skin color.  Treats people as individuals, not members of a racial group. Chuckles at all this online nonsense. Villified if they don't buy into the narrative that there is systemic racism. Hey, I just described myself!

Hero - Broadcasts how racist others are or how others need to "do better" to be more inclusive. Makes online posts, sometimes sanctimoniously, that they will do good things for minorities. Rails against people they don't know. 

That's my take on the two groups.

I've hit my post limit so..have fun!

Dave K wrote:

A post that clearly and deliberately stated they would exclude someone based on their race, gender, and sexual preference got 30+ likes. Meanwhile a person that has offered support and positive energy for decades is challenged about their intentions.

It seems more than a few people in in the community are missing the point.

You are the one missing the point of the mentorship offer. If a climber is looking for a mentee, there are plenty of white folks who will jump in line. Reaching out to people who are not white hetero cis men is not about being exclusionary. It's about being deliberately expansive. The OP in that thread didn't say nobody should mentor white hetero cis men. They said they personally want to put some effort elsewhere...and then they get criticized for it, as you are doing. 

Guy Keeseewrote:

Kap-   Sounds like a preacher looking for $$$$$$ So this is the same person who wanted Nick to pay her???
Wonderful
Now I understand more

So this is the same person who wanted Nick to pay her??? Now I understand more 

You don't know, but then you say you understand more.