Fish Racism!

[Sparko]

Calling Fish ‘Trash’ Is White Supremacy, According To California Academic Study

July 29, 2021 By Gabe Kaminsky

According to a new study out of the far-left University of California, Davis, calling fish “trash” or “rough” is a product of systemic racism.
The study, titled “Goodbye to ‘Rough Fish’: Paradigm Shift in the Conservation of Native Fishes,” was headed up by researchers at UC Davis and assisted by academics at the University of Oklahoma, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and University of Notre Dame. It laments how white people have supposedly “dominated fisheries science and management,” which has led to prejudice.


“Perspectives of white males have overwhelmingly dominated fisheries science and management in the USA,” the researchers argue. “This dynamic is exemplified by bias against ‘rough fish’ — a pejorative ascribing low-to-zero value for countless native fishes. One product of this bias is that biologists have ironically worked against conservation of diverse fishes for over a century, and these problems persist today.”

In qualifying this controversial position, UC Davis ecology professor Andrew Rypel, who was also the lead researcher, told the university’s newspaper, “Sometimes you have to look at that history honestly to figure out what to do.”
According to the study, the terms “rough fish,” “trash fish,” or “coarse fish” have been popularized due to racist white males who have led the conversation around the fishing industry for the past three centuries. Further, the researchers determine that biologists have not tried to conserve “diverse fishes” which is similar to “problems [that] persist today.”

In offering lifestyle alternatives — since the study insinuates fish are moral beings — there are six outlined ideas. This includes telling people to use the term “native fish,” to “correct misinformation” through education and outreach, and to “integrate Indigenous perspectives into fisheries management.”
UC Davis did not respond to a request for comment.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/29...cademic-study/

[rogue06]

I thought the from the thread title that this was going to be about the famous Little Mermaid statue in Copenhagen, Denmark that memorializes Hans Christen Anderson's fairy tale.

download (2).jpg
download (3).jpg

Just so many ways this is wrong.

[mossrose]

We must immediately lower the flags to half mast for the next decade.

[Sparko]

These college kids seem to have nothing better to do than create some imaginary offense to fight.

Also in other news:

Push to rename 'Asian carp' amid worries over racism


By John Flesher





TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) - Minnesota state Sen. Foung Hawj was never a fan of the "Asian carp" label commonly applied to four imported fish species that are wreaking havoc in the U.S. heartland, infesting numerous rivers and bearing down on the Great Lakes.
But the last straw came when an Asian business delegation arriving at the Minneapolis airport encountered a sign reading "Kill Asian Carp." It was a well-intentioned plea to prevent spread of the invasive fish. But the message was off-putting to the visitors.

Hawj and fellow Sen. John Hoffman in 2014 won approval of a measure requiring that Minnesota agencies refer to the fish as "invasive carp," despite backlash from the late radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, who ridiculed it as political correctness.
"I had more hate mail than you could shake a stick at," Hoffman said.

Now some other government agencies are taking the same step in the wake of anti-Asian hate crimes that surged during the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service quietly changed its designation to "invasive carp" in April.
"We wanted to move away from any terms that cast Asian culture and people in a negative light," said Charlie Wooley, director of its Great Lakes regional office.

https://www.fox29.com/news/push-to-r...es-over-racism

[rogue06]

We must immediately lower the flags to half mast for the next decade.

You're racist against catfish!!!1!

download (3).jpg

[rogue06]

These college kids seem to have nothing better to do than create some imaginary offense to fight.

Also in other news:

Push to rename 'Asian carp' amid worries over racism


By John Flesher





TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) - Minnesota state Sen. Foung Hawj was never a fan of the "Asian carp" label commonly applied to four imported fish species that are wreaking havoc in the U.S. heartland, infesting numerous rivers and bearing down on the Great Lakes.
But the last straw came when an Asian business delegation arriving at the Minneapolis airport encountered a sign reading "Kill Asian Carp." It was a well-intentioned plea to prevent spread of the invasive fish. But the message was off-putting to the visitors.

Hawj and fellow Sen. John Hoffman in 2014 won approval of a measure requiring that Minnesota agencies refer to the fish as "invasive carp," despite backlash from the late radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, who ridiculed it as political correctness.
"I had more hate mail than you could shake a stick at," Hoffman said.

Now some other government agencies are taking the same step in the wake of anti-Asian hate crimes that surged during the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service quietly changed its designation to "invasive carp" in April.
"We wanted to move away from any terms that cast Asian culture and people in a negative light," said Charlie Wooley, director of its Great Lakes regional office.

https://www.fox29.com/news/push-to-r...es-over-racism

If you say Asian carp you're a racist.

[mossrose]

You're racist against catfish!!!1!

download (3).jpg

Evil, nasty things.

[Sparko]

"Sushi" sounds too Asian. We should call it "raw fish meat" instead.

[rogue06]

"Sushi" sounds too Asian. We should call it "raw fish meat" instead.

Or translate the word into English -- but then again "sour tasting" probably won't sell well.

[Sparko]

Or translate the word into English -- but then again "sour tasting" probably won't sell well.

So lemons are sushI?

[Stoic]

Calling Fish ‘Trash’ Is White Supremacy, According To California Academic Study

July 29, 2021 By Gabe Kaminsky

According to a new study out of the far-left University of California, Davis, calling fish “trash” or “rough” is a product of systemic racism.
The study, titled “Goodbye to ‘Rough Fish’: Paradigm Shift in the Conservation of Native Fishes,” was headed up by researchers at UC Davis and assisted by academics at the University of Oklahoma, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and University of Notre Dame. It laments how white people have supposedly “dominated fisheries science and management,” which has led to prejudice.


“Perspectives of white males have overwhelmingly dominated fisheries science and management in the USA,” the researchers argue. “This dynamic is exemplified by bias against ‘rough fish’ — a pejorative ascribing low-to-zero value for countless native fishes. One product of this bias is that biologists have ironically worked against conservation of diverse fishes for over a century, and these problems persist today.”

In qualifying this controversial position, UC Davis ecology professor Andrew Rypel, who was also the lead researcher, told the university’s newspaper, “Sometimes you have to look at that history honestly to figure out what to do.”
According to the study, the terms “rough fish,” “trash fish,” or “coarse fish” have been popularized due to racist white males who have led the conversation around the fishing industry for the past three centuries. Further, the researchers determine that biologists have not tried to conserve “diverse fishes” which is similar to “problems [that] persist today.”

In offering lifestyle alternatives — since the study insinuates fish are moral beings — there are six outlined ideas. This includes telling people to use the term “native fish,” to “correct misinformation” through education and outreach, and to “integrate Indigenous perspectives into fisheries management.”
UC Davis did not respond to a request for comment.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/29...cademic-study/

Makes you wonder if the intern read the study, which didn't use the word "trash" or the word "coarse" or the word "racism" or the phrase "white supremacy", nor did it insinuate that fish are moral beings.

[Sparko]

Makes you wonder if the intern read the study, which didn't use the word "trash" or the word "coarse" or the word "racism" or the phrase "white supremacy", nor did it insinuate that fish are moral beings.

Well it tells me you didn't read it. From the introduction:


Introduction

White males have historically valued only a select group of species (e.g., Salmonidae and Micropterus
spp.) and have dominated management of freshwater fisheries in North America (Nielsen 1999; Arismendi and
Penaluna 2016; Penaluna et al. 2017; Murphy 2020a). And while attitudes and regulations on these species
have shifted substantially over the past 100 years (Rypel et al. 2016), policies for many native fishes have not.
Less-favored species always sustained fisheries as food fish, but typically for underrepresented groups, such as
Black and Indigenous Peoples of Color and immigrants (Floyd et al. 2006; Burger and Gochfeld 2011; Islam
and Berkes 2016). The term “rough fish” exemplifies this problem. It is a derogatory term that lumps together
diverse fishes and life-history strategies perceived as having low-to-zero value. Sadly, fishers and resource
management agencies continue to perpetuate its use (Rose and Moen 1953; Bulow et al. 1988; Love et al.
2019). Related pejoratives include “trash fish,” “dirt fish,” “other fish,” “coarse fish,” and “underused fish.”
However, rough fish remains the most ubiquitous term used today (Figure 1)

[Stoic]

Well it tells me you didn't read it. From the introduction:


Introduction

White males have historically valued only a select group of species (e.g., Salmonidae and Micropterus
spp.) and have dominated management of freshwater fisheries in North America (Nielsen 1999; Arismendi and
Penaluna 2016; Penaluna et al. 2017; Murphy 2020a). And while attitudes and regulations on these species
have shifted substantially over the past 100 years (Rypel et al. 2016), policies for many native fishes have not.
Less-favored species always sustained fisheries as food fish, but typically for underrepresented groups, such as
Black and Indigenous Peoples of Color and immigrants (Floyd et al. 2006; Burger and Gochfeld 2011; Islam
and Berkes 2016). The term “rough fish” exemplifies this problem. It is a derogatory term that lumps together
diverse fishes and life-history strategies perceived as having low-to-zero value. Sadly, fishers and resource
management agencies continue to perpetuate its use (Rose and Moen 1953; Bulow et al. 1988; Love et al.
2019). Related pejoratives include “trash fish,” “dirt fish,” “other fish,” “coarse fish,” and “underused fish.”
However, rough fish remains the most ubiquitous term used today (Figure 1)

Strange, I actually did a search for those terms, and nothing showed up. Now, "trash" and "coarse" show up.

I'm still not getting any "racism" or "supremacy" or "moral", though. How about you?

[Sparko]

Strange, I actually did a search for those terms, and nothing showed up. Now, "trash" and "coarse" show up.

I'm still not getting any "racism" or "supremacy" or "moral", though. How about you?

That is implied by her talking about "white males have historically valued..." and other such language. Why bring race into it?

[Stoic]

That is implied by her talking about "white males have historically valued..." and other such language. Why bring race into it?

You can't really ignore the effects of race if you want to understand why native fishes are not being properly managed, and how to fix the problem.