“Gatekeeping” isn’t always a bad thing. As others here have said, if someone calls themself an ornithologist because one time they photographed a sparrow in their backyard, it’s absolutely ok to challenge that, which would be a form of gatekeeping. The point is that some people here seem to have an overly strict definition of more casual terms like “birder” and “herper.” We don’t want to be the naturalist equivalent of the guy who goes up to a kid with a Pink Floyd shirt and tells them to name 20 songs and quote all their lyrics, or else they’re a fake fan
4 Likes
My sincere regards.
1 Like
In one way or another, I have worked with words all my life, so I’m particularly sensitive to definitions and to the myriad of ways vague and/or differing definitions can lead to ambiguity, misunderstanding or worse. For example, while all of us may think we’re talking about the same thing when we refer to a “birder”, the definitions out there on the web vary from someone enthusiastic about birds or who goes bird watching as a hobby, to someone who hunts, traps or even breeds birds. The fact is we generally have no watertight definitions for the various labels we choose for ourselves, or which others use to label us (sometimes without our consent). If we then add in the complexity of translations and cultural/national differences, the risk of misunderstanding increases dramatically. It is no accident that most international agreements and conventions begin with a rigorous and shared definition of the lexicon used. Maybe this is one reason why for some of us this discussion seems to have touched a raw nerve.
As to the question of villagers living in harmony with nature, without the need for labels… I have no personal experience of India, but perhaps it’s not so very different from the small mountain villages where I live in central Italy. With MASSIVE simplification, I would say that from my experience, the vast majority of those who have lived and worked in the mountains for generations engage with nature, not so much in harmony, as following criteria based largely on their survival down the centuries; maybe some of these will become particularly interested in birds and in their leisure time will start looking for them and photographing them as a hobby, and so they might label themselves as birders; of these, perhaps a very few will become so enthusiastic they will start seriously studying birds from a more scientific point of view, perhaps even on a professional level… and thus they could “earn” the label of ornithologist.
There are, of course, no rigid boundaries between the categories, the crucial thing (for me) is that each category, each label, not only knows what it knows, but is also sensitive to what it DOESN’T know.
4 Likes
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Unfortunately, I’ve received numerous labels during this discussion, which has led me to realize that this forum may not be the best fit for me. I’m just one humble Village born Indian, and my absence won’t impact the forum in any way. Thank you again, and I wish the community all the best.
This is not true and it saddens me that you might think it. One of the greatest aspects of iNaturalist is the diversity not just of wildlife and species but of its people experiencing the wildlife.
@AdamWargon posted an excellent topic not too long ago that started to sort us into neat little age brackets, but really, we are unsortable, because many of us noted we do not feel our age and some seem older and some younger and some of the old are less applied and some of the young are quite studious.
The same is true of of geography: some of us are in one country but our hearts reside in another, at least part-time, some of us started in one country but ended up in another, some of us have never left our country and never wish to, some of us yearn to travel endlessly.
But we need all of us.
That is why I think when it was perceived that perhaps you wished for some not to be considered as naturalists or birders or herpers or or or, the right to participate was defended so passionately, if perhaps not as kindly as it could have been.
But this topic made me think, and here I am still thinking about it, and that is a lovely thing to do, to contemplate. And I would miss that if you left. So please consider staying, if just to read, until you feel ready to post again.
Because you are not wrong: we need more participants from the lesser attended parts of the earth.
We need you.
3 Likes
Thank you @ItsMeLucy - you have eloquently said what I was also feeling.
I hope you @Birdraghu-youtube don’t leave. All of the posts in this thread made me think, and some gave me new perspectives that challenged me, or opened my eyes. I find these discussions both interesting, and also stressful. I love the chance to engage with others, especially on thought provoking topics. But I usually stay out of them because it so often doesn’t feel safe, to me. I stay for the connection, for the things I learn, and to try to expand my comfort zone. You are welcome here.
Hi
It is not agreement but engagement that shows that your opinion carries weight on this forum.
People think your posts are worth reading and arguing with.
The same simple words can carry different, sometimes negative connotations on different continents. It goes both ways.
3 Likes
Whenever I hear someone complain that they want to get more out of life, I suggest that they check out iNaturalist. That’s it. Literally and figuratively.
You want to see more life? Start looking.
2 Likes