In collaboration with outdoor adventure experience site 57Hours, a recent SNEWS survey asked readers just one question: Have you ever encountered a [climbing] route name that you consider to be racist, sexist, discriminatory, or otherwise offensive?
91 percent of the voters responded with “yes, several times.” Only 4 percent answered “no, and I wasn’t aware of the problem.”
57Hours, which works with mountain and climbing guides to organize adventures, put the same question to their guides, and 84 percent responded that they had, at least once, encountered an offensive climbing route name.
We’ll not republish some of the most offensive here, but suffice it to say, if you aren’t a climber and therefore unfamiliar with the, um, frat boy, or really, middle school level of vulgarity that many climbing route names us, there a plenty of route names that would make the most well-versed in curses squirm. Some because of their sexual crudeness, others because of racial epithets.
57Hours’ survey went a bit further and included mountain bike trail names too, with more probing questions.
43 percent of respondents said they feel that women and BIPOC climbers and bikers could be deterred from participating in outdoor activities because of offensive route names. 75 percent said those names should be changed.
To examine the survey results in greater detail, head to 57Hours.
Photo: Fionn Claydon
That’s a topic of much discussion this year on pretty much all the climbing forums.
The big questions, exactly who decides what routes need renamed, how do go about changing all the route names and what changes when the names are already in thousands of printed route descriptions and countless web sites with little ability, or means of addressing these issues.
Throw in people’s first amendment rights to freedom of speech and it’s pretty much chaos, strong emotions, anger and recriminations.
It sounds so innocent on first blush, but it’s a huge can of worms.
I don’t care what race, ethnicity or background you are or come from but if you are offended by names of routes, trails, waves, monuments, etc then you are the problem. Should we name stuff that is offensive, of course not, it would be better to not do so but it happens. We have a society problem that people are so butt-hurt over little things and they let that hold them back in life. Why waste time on it, move on. I’ve wasted more time typing this than it is worth. Yes, I am white, a cracker, white trash, whitey, the man, nerd, whatever. Call me what you will. Name a route “the oppressor” or “whitesrnazis” and guess what, if it is a good line I will climb it. Let’s face it, if you are black or not white today you have the most options available because society is holding the door for you right now. Please don’t waste your energy on stupid crap like this and use it to make a better life for you and yours.
Seems contradictory to defend free speech by telling others not to complain. Citizens voicing their dissatisfaction with offensive, demeaning, derogatory, misogynist, and bigoted names and terms is the essence of free speech, and telling others ‘you are the problem’ and ‘don’t waste your energy on stupid crap like this’ is an effort to restrict free speech that protects not only the terms, but the objectionable ideas behind them. Names and words have meaning; they’re symbols that normalize ideas and make them acceptable when used commonly. Changing ‘Negro Bill Canyon’ in Moab to ‘Grandstaff Canyon’ is important because it acknowledges that these highly racialized words are offensive, exclusionary, and bigoted, and removing them makes a statement that we reject these ideas. Also, recommending ‘toughening up’ to groups that have survived marginalization, subjugation, genocide, and slavery shows a fundamental lack of empathy for those experiences and the incredible effort that simply surviving systematic oppression requires.
Greg, I agree with you in principle, but I think your example is poorly chosen. The NAACP didn’t agree with changing Negro Bill Canyon to William Grandstaff Canyon either. Because the previous name told the story of Black settlers who came to the Moab area, and it *enhanced* their history. The name “William Grandstaff” has not erased that history (or at least downplayed it).
That said, the PREVIOUS name, “N****r Bill Canyon” did indeed need to be changed. There’s a difference between descriptive and offensive.
Still, I don’t mean to derail your point. To the point of the original article, I believe that we should rename routes based on WHAT MARGINALIZED PEOPLE actually feel. Not what we think they might feel.
Greg, I get it. I appreciate your input. I’m not saying don’t complain nor am I against free speech. I’m saying don’t waste time on it and be bigger. Words rarely hurt anyone, if ever. The actions behind the words do damage but words are just that. My point is I’d spend my time being better and not worrying over trivial matters like a name of a climbing route. I’ll go ahead and be the target to shoot at, but let’s get past the “…groups that have survived marginalization, subjugation, genocide, and slavery…” thing. Again, I get it but at the rate we are going, by continually bringing up nonsense like what a route is named, is what will keep perpetuating the marginalization, etc of the “groups” you are referring to. If we all just move on, eventually nobody will name a route an offensive name.
Exactly! Great point, especially the one how most folks are so butt-hurt over every little thing these days. And our society as a whole is crumbling to the ground, along with the entire history of the people who are supposedly the haters. I guarantee that not all of these so-called offensive, racist trail and climb names were given by folks intently to offend the culture of others. GrROW UP PEOPLE!!! Oh, and yeah I’m a honky from the north Georgia mountains, but that don’t mean I’m some bigot though!
K, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion. But let’s just imagine for a minute that your screen name, “K” is short for Kevin. And just for kicks, I’m giving you a last name of Kevinson. If there was a route called “Kevin Kevinson is a massive asshole,” you might think it’s funny. You seem like a thick-skinned guy. I get it.
But what if you have a son named “Kevin Kevinson.” Does that change your feelings about the route? What if the route was named after your mother? “Karol Kevinson is a bitch whore.” It starts to get a little dicey. You would probably avoid those routes. Then again, maybe you’re a tough guy and you climb it anyway, because it has a really great line. Whatever.
Now imagine that your best friend and climbing partner, a guy you’ve climbed with for a couple of years, he discovers that someone has just named a line after *his* mother. And so your buddy doesn’t really want to climb anymore.
Can you imagine the circumstance where you might say, “Hey, this is a pretty dumb name. It’s a cheap shot that hurt my/my friend’s feelings. Maybe we could change it to something less stupid?”
I’m a white guy, too. And it’s easy for me to think that others should just “get over it.” But then again, I’m a white guy. It takes some work for me to get over my entitlement — but this is what works for me.
JWW. It’s Ken, not Kevin. So let’s say Ken Kenson. You are 100% correct, I’d just deal with it and not give it a second thought. Here is where it gets sticky though. I’m a white guy but my real son, who is obviously adopted, is black. His name isn’t Ken but you see where this is going. His name is Trey. If a route was named “Trey Kenson is a black thug” then I’d handle it the same. We’d talk about the idiot who named it that, that it is meaningless and has zero bearing on his life outcome, and he would move forward with his life. So, yeah, I can comment from almost two perspectives here. We’ve had these conversations numerous times especially with recent events. I’m not sure why you feel entitled but it is your prerogative.
Perception is the reality we have to live in. Like it or not it, whether the intent was there or not, no matter how tough Ken’s white skin is, it comes across as intentional excluding certain groups of people.
Doesn’t matter if that was the intent, if people on the outside feel like they’re being intentional rejected why would they want to pick up the sport? If you’re ok with that, then you gotta ask yourself do you really love the sport?
Perception is totally unique to each individual.
There are as many “Realities” as there are people.
That is not a very good yardstick.
Mutually agreed upon words and terms that are generally regarded as xenophobic, misogynistic, or the sort. Something more concrete than merely perceived. Perceptions are too easily misinformed, uninformed, misunderstood, etc. Take for instance white people who don’t think racism is a problem in the US. That’s their perception of reality.
If a black guy wanted to climb and someone literally stood there and told them they aren’t welcome then we have a problem. If a black guy wants to climb and the name of the route is offensive and they decide not to climb, then they have a problem. Again, I don’t think naming things with offensive names is good or funny. My point is if your skin is so thin that this bothers you, and let’s face it, it usually bothers the upper crust, upper middle class white guy the most, then you are going to really have issues when real life problems come your way. These articles are the result of years of coddling and telling kids everything is going to be alright and here is your trophy for showing up.
You can rename my street, town, county, state, car, dog, breakfast cereal, snack, football team, bike race, mountain, river, trail, climb, ski hill, ski run………. I simply do not care. Rename it all if it’s offensive in some manner. I do not understand why people care so much about the original name. You will be dust in 75 years or less. Get a life.
This is a rat hole I certainly wouldn’t want to be involved in.
What’s offensive to an Alabama bible thumper is very different than what’s offensive to a pro hockey coach.
No thanks.
I know there are plenty of route names, especially in the South, that are purposely offensive to Christians. They are actually meant to exclude, to discourage a group of people from coming to the crag. I totally get the reasoning for that. I would venture to guess there are routes in Utah with names offensive to Mormons for the same reasons.
However, just guessing, those routes are not the ones that will be renamed in the current push.
lol @ commenters on here:
“I’m totally not a racist, and I definitely don’t support racist route names, AND I promise I don’t care at all, not even a little, tiny bit, what name a route has, BUT I definitely do think the racist route names should all stay.”
No one i saying they should stay, they are saying names are trivial.
“And everyone else but me needs to get over it”
You quoted that, who said that? Quit making up quotes to virtue signal. Not everyone but me, EVERYONE needs to get over it. Go read my comments and you can see I have a reason to be upset about the names, but I’m not.