[spidermonkey09]

Thought this deserved its own thread, seperate from the general politics one, but feel free to amalgamate. Interested in what others have read.

Listened to this Gary Younge piece as a podcast the other day and thought it was utterly brilliant. A great riposte to those who respond to discussion of BLM by saying "at least its not as bad here as in the US."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/11/what-black-america-means-to-europe-protests-racism-george-floyd

[Bradders]

Thanks for starting this thread SM, I kept thinking of doing one and then backing off not sure quite what to say.

RE reading; I'm currently reading Bury the Chains by Adam Hochschild, about the movement to abolish slavery. I was drawn to it as a result of the focus on statues, as it seems to me we should have some of the people who stopped it, not those who did their best to perpetrate it, and I wanted to learn more about it from that perspective. I don't know about anyone else but I don't remember even touching on the subject in either GCSE or A level history, which feels like a particularly glaring omission.

[dunnyg]

I did it in history.

[andy popp]

I studied history at O and A level and wasn't once taught about slavery, including in an A level unit on early C19th British political history: plenty on the Great Reform Act (1832), nothing on abolition (1833). Admittedly this was a long time ago. For what it's worth, I studied O level history at school probably not more than a mile from where the Colston statue stood in central Bristol.

I did it in history.

Could you say more about this? Where did the emphasis primarily lie: largely on abolition, or more broadly on the nature the slave trade, the lived experience of enslavement, the importance of the slave economy to British economic history etc. etc.? Genuine questions; I'd be very interested to know more about how the topic, in it's broadest terms, has been taught in schools in recent years.

In my opinion, Britain has never really confronted the role slavery has played in the nation's history. Attempts to discuss the topic often provoke whataboutery ("But it was other Africans who sold slaves"), attempts to claim virtue ("But we led the way in abolition"), attempts at minimising ("Yes, it was awful, but it was a long time ago and without any consequence now"), to general defensiveness.

In this context, I view the toppling and sinking of the Colston statue in Bristol as a wonderful, joyous act of popular history writing.

[andy popp]

Thanks, spidermonkey, for starting the thread. Gary Younge is always worth reading and I had missed this article.

I want to quote to passages that highlight the consequences of the failure to confront history that I discussed in my post above:

"One of the central distinctions between the racial histories of Europe and the US is that, until relatively recently, the European repression and resistance took place primarily abroad. Our civil rights movement was in Jamaica, Ghana, India and so on. In the post-colonial era, this offshoring of responsibility has left significant room for denial, distortion, ignorance and sophistry when it comes to understanding that history."

"Their [Europeans] indignation all too often bears insufficient self-awareness to see what most of the rest of the world has seen. They wonder, in all sincerity, how the US could have arrived at such a brutal place – with no recognition or regret that they have travelled a similar path themselves. The level of understanding about race and racism among white Europeans, even those who would consider themselves sympathetic, cultured and informed, is woefully low."

[Wood FT]

I did it in history.

We were taught about it at School in Hull
due to the links with William Wilberforce. Part of the Hull Transport museum was a mock-up of a below-decks on a slave ship that you walked through. I’m not sure how I feel about it now, or whether it still exists, but it left a lasting and shocking impression on me.

[andy popp]

I did it in history.

We were taught about it at School in Hull
due to the links with William Wilberforce.

Again, I'd be really interested in knowing a bit more detail Guy. Was the emphasis primarily on abolition?

[Oldmanmatt]

Thanks, spidermonkey, for starting the thread. Gary Younge is always worth reading and I had missed this article.

I want to quote to passages that highlight the consequences of the failure to confront history that I discussed in my post above:

"One of the central distinctions between the racial histories of Europe and the US is that, until relatively recently, the European repression and resistance took place primarily abroad. Our civil rights movement was in Jamaica, Ghana, India and so on. In the post-colonial era, this offshoring of responsibility has left significant room for denial, distortion, ignorance and sophistry when it comes to understanding that history."

"Their [Europeans] indignation all too often bears insufficient self-awareness to see what most of the rest of the world has seen. They wonder, in all sincerity, how the US could have arrived at such a brutal place – with no recognition or regret that they have travelled a similar path themselves. The level of understanding about race and racism among white Europeans, even those who would consider themselves sympathetic, cultured and informed, is woefully low."

I want to challenge that, whilst not challenging it...

It is only part of the story. The indignation, for instance, is not a modern thing. It is largely what brought about the end of such practices in the first place.

I also think it a huge oversimplification to lump in the population of origin, with the colonial populations they sired. Very different value systems evolved within those respective populations, most often leading to divorce of colony from the originating system of governance.
Obviously, it would take a much greater, deeper, delve into this topic to even come close to a faint facsimile of reality.
Given the differences and delays in information transfer, reporting and ultimately the relative remoteness of colonies from their parent populations, it is wrong to view it with the eyes of an instantaneously connected 21st century human.
Some of these places must have seemed as remote and strange to a 19th century/early 20th ordinary citizen of a colonial power, as Mars does to us today. Months to get there, in risky, cramped conditions; even a quick visit being measured in months and years, etc.
Unlike Andy and some others, I dropped history in my third year, doing only the sciences, maths and technical O levels, Maths, Physics and Geology at A level; so I (truly) welcome a more informed opinion.

Especially on this:

I have often (you know, in the shower, bored on flights or sat in waiting rooms etc) wondered at the breakdown of the colonial era. I would posit, that the thought line I found myself on continues to be (to my view) true today.
As the speed of information transfer, the reliability and number of streams increased, so too did the revulsion of the parent populations at the actions of their colonial offspring. I think “ most” people “ at home” never supported, nor would have supported such things and when they truly became aware of it, they acted to stop it (Belgian Congo/Congo Free State springs to mind).
It certainly has taken a couple or four generations for change to come, but the process continues and the current protests are evidence of that.
In terms of human history, the blink of an eye.

Close? Seem reasonable?

Another question.

How many people do you know, who are “actually” of the opinion that “People of Colour” are inferior (in any way you care to choose) to “White” people? Or any other minority group you can find a way to parcel off?
For me, it’s a minority. Probably less than 20%, and mostly older relatives. I’m certain that would have been vastly higher for my Father, even (only) twenty years ago, when he was the age I am today.
More importantly, I think it will be lower again for my own children.

I don’t think the Alt Right have (or will) captured the youth, any more than the “Communists revolutionaries” and all those various (nominally) left wing (and even more violent and vociferous, than todays right wing movements) groups actually did in the ‘60s - early ‘80s. If you’d asked “ normal” people of our age group (aka, the Parents) of that era, they would have told you that “all” the kids were about to highjack an airliner or kidnap an heiress.

BLM seems the next logical step, amongst others. I think it enjoys majority support. Even the tutting at the statue thing, seems half hearted. The more obvious objectors and counter protestors, seem entirely predictable and almost comically small in number.
By historical standards, their terrorist reprisals against “Liberals”, whilst horrific and awful to see, are pathetic next to the actions of earlier “left wing” groups (bombings, kidnappings etc ) and I would posit that this is indicative of a lower level of support for their cause, globally. I actually think, barring a few waves of resurgence (each smaller than the last) it’s going to die out over the next (guessing) two generations.
In fifty years, the last two hundred, will seem like a brief historical blip, where we woke up to the stupidity of skin colour based divisions.
Well, I hope.

[andy popp]

To be honest Matt, I'm not sure I fully understand your post, especially the first two substantive paragraphs?

[dunnyg]

Hi Andy, it was more than a decade ago and I also went to a slavery museum in liverpool at a similar age (with my parents) so my recall of the sylabus is limited anf limely compromised.
I remember learning about the basic economics of the slave trade, the trading triangle, conditions on ships, grim pictures of manacles, chains and punishment items. We were also taught about the abolition, and my resounding memory being that the slave owners didnt really lose out  due to reparations, and many previous slaves continuing to work at the same places for very little and the owners recovering money though rent.
My sister is a history teacher amd pretty sure she teaches about the underground rail-road and slavery. Often with history education in the uk, the periods you learn about are somewhat a function of what the teachers want to teach.
I also did a module on modern america, which was from end of ww1 to the end of cold war, including civil rights movement, mccarthyism, jfk, cuban missile crisis, which gave young me an good starting understanding of the current state of the usa. On the other hand, until the last year or 2 I knew very little about the history of china, which seems pretty important for understanding geopolitics at the moment.
Hopee that helps!

[andy popp]

Thanks DG, very interesting; it sounds like the coverage of slavery was pretty comprehensive and well-rounded. Good point to that a lot it depends on the interests of individual teachers. Cool that your sister teaches the Underground Railroad.

Pretty certain my daughter did the same unit as you on America in the C20th. She enjoyed it.

Thanks again for answering.

[Rachel Rock Tots]

Thought this deserved its own thread, seperate from the general politics one, but feel free to amalgamate. Interested in what others have read.

Listened to this Gary Younge piece as a podcast the other day and thought it was utterly brilliant. A great riposte to those who respond to discussion of BLM by saying "at least its not as bad here as in the US."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/11/what-black-america-means-to-europe-protests-racism-george-floyd

Thank you 👏👏👏 for this post.
Always good to get recommendations on  this very important subject, especially given how many of us (clear from this thread it wasn’t just me) received shockingly poor history education.

I can recommend the series Roots, if you’ve not seen it. I would say it’s the best and most important series I’ve ever watched. We watch the newest version, I think there was another production in the 80’s that I’ve not seen.

Also recommended Why I’m No Longer  Talking to White People About Race.

What are people’s thoughts about the under representation of BAME communities in climbing. Thoughts on barriers in climbing and possible solution to those barriers?   

[Wood FT]

I did it in history.

We were taught about it at School in Hull
due to the links with William Wilberforce.

Again, I'd be really interested in knowing a bit more detail Guy. Was the emphasis primarily on abolition?

Hey Andy. Yes, it was very much based around Wilberforce and his involvement with the eventual abolition. I can’t say I remember any look into the stories of the black people kidnapped as slaves, but the museum has many pictures, chains and other gruesome artefacts. I can remember them now. I feel like a voyeur when I read that back now.

Hull has an annual arts/music event called Freedom Festival which is really nice, I don’t want to put it down, but feels a tad disconnected from the people who were who wanted said freedom (though there are workshops covering modern day slavery and human rights).

[andy popp]

Thanks Guy. The emphasis on abolition is probably not surprising given the Hull context, but still a little disappointing. Emphasising abolition has often been a way of negating what was being abolished.

[HarryBD]

I covered the slave trade in history. (I think in Yr 9 so age 13/14 10 yrs ago). I remember it being the trading triangle, how people were kidnapped by tribes on W Africa then sold to traders, life on plantations, what happened to runaways and a bit on Abolition (never did any American history so revolved around Wilberforce). Didn't cover it in GCSE.

[spidermonkey09]

I don't remember covering the slave trade at school. If I did it was in a very perfunctory manner. Maybe a few lessons on slave plantations but not on the reasons why these even existed.

Lack of BAME representation in climbing is an interesting one. I agree that it is overwhelmingly white and middle class, particularly outside. Indoors is perhaps slightly more diverse, in London especially maybe? Barriers might be, in no particular order: cost (climbing shoes are approaching £100 base price now, and if you intend on going outside the associated costs skyrocket very quickly). A lack of representation probably perpetuates itself; BAME people do not see BAME people at the wall and so don't think of it as 'a sport for me?'

OMM, I've read your post a few times and I'm not 100% sure I understand it completely, but a few things to pick up. You seem to suggest that as populations at home became more aware of colonial outrages abroad they invariably took steps to stop it. I am not convinced this is correct. Imperial masters and news sources may have expressed displeasure at violence committed overseas but I think concrete action to correct this was either non existent or wrongly focused. As an example, when the French imperial powers became aware of the violence on the Voulet-Chanoine mission the official line that followed was to blame the officers actions on madness caused by heat and their very presence in an environment seen as savage and dangerous. In todays parlance, a whitewash. There will be numerous other examples of this. I am obviously paraphrasing but you can read more in the second piece here: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/19198.

Also, I think that a focus on overt racist attitudes in people we might individually know missed the point. I would agree that overt racism is on the wane but that, as it seems to me, is not the problem. The problem is the ingrained racism in our societal structures that has seeped in over centuries. Our efforts to confront this, I think, are not helped by saying that overt racism has improved, because the effect of this is to minimise the importance of tackling the ingrained issues. I know that you aren't trying to do this, but thats the effect of the argument in the mainstream in my view. It falls into the same category mentioned in the Gary Younge piece; namely, responding to racist violence in the US by saying 'at least we aren't as bad here.'

[SA Chris]

I guess the "history" I was taught in South Africa was somewhat different to elsewhere in the world, and very different to the truth.

[andy popp]

You seem to suggest that as populations at home became more aware of colonial outrages abroad they invariably took steps to stop it. I am not convinced this is correct.

Except perhaps at the margins, pressure to decolonize the British empire came very largely from indigenous movements within colonised nations (though such anti-colonial movements did try and form coalitions with sections of British society, such as  when Gandhi visited Lancashire cotton textile workers). At "home" empire remained a broadly popular project well into the C20th. A recent (2020) survey revealed that a third of the British population still think that empire is something to be proud of.

[Rachel Rock Tots]

I don't remember covering the slave trade at school. If I did it was in a very perfunctory manner. Maybe a few lessons on slave plantations but not on the reasons why these even existed.

Lack of BAME representation in climbing is an interesting one. I agree that it is overwhelmingly white and middle class, particularly outside. Indoors is perhaps slightly more diverse, in London especially maybe? Barriers might be, in no particular order: cost (climbing shoes are approaching £100 base price now, and if you intend on going outside the associated costs skyrocket very quickly). A lack of representation probably perpetuates itself; BAME people do not see BAME people at the wall and so don't think of it as 'a sport for me?'

OMM, I've read your post a few times and I'm not 100% sure I understand it completely, but a few things to pick up. You seem to suggest that as populations at home became more aware of colonial outrages abroad they invariably took steps to stop it. I am not convinced this is correct. Imperial masters and news sources may have expressed displeasure at violence committed overseas but I think concrete action to correct this was either non existent or wrongly focused. As an example, when the French imperial powers became aware of the violence on the Voulet-Chanoine mission the official line that followed was to blame the officers actions on madness caused by heat and their very presence in an environment seen as savage and dangerous. In todays parlance, a whitewash. There will be numerous other examples of this. I am obviously paraphrasing but you can read more in the second piece here: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/19198.

Also, I think that a focus on overt racist attitudes in people we might individually know missed the point. I would agree that overt racism is on the wane but that, as it seems to me, is not the problem. The problem is the ingrained racism in our societal structures that has seeped in over centuries. Our efforts to confront this, I think, are not helped by saying that overt racism has improved, because the effect of this is to minimise the importance of tackling the ingrained issues. I know that you aren't trying to do this, but thats the effect of the argument in the mainstream in my view. It falls into the same category mentioned in the Gary Younge piece; namely, responding to racist violence in the US by saying 'at least we aren't as bad here.'

I certainly did not study slavery at school, I don’t even remember ever discussing racism as a topic, which is hard to believe thinking back.

Yes I think you have touched on two of the biggest barriers, although there are many more I’m sure. I went to an very interesting panel let discussion, at an ABC conference a couple of years back. The topic was diversity and inclusion in climbing (or lack of it). One of the speakers was from BOC Crew, who talked about making our climbing environments welcoming for all, by looking at things like music and images around our climbing centres, as well as Bame representation across the staff.

I think being a newbie in any environment can be very uncomfortable but add to that the ‘Only One’ syndrome, that discomfort can turn into something tantamount to trauma.

I think it’s going to take a lot of effort by our climbing community/ industry, to make much needed changes. This should be across the board, from grassroots business right up to systemic change within our large organisations.

In my opinion we should be using our time now to listen and then when things start opening up, we should be ready to start implementing some of these changes.

You seem to suggest that as populations at home became more aware of colonial outrages abroad they invariably took steps to stop it. I am not convinced this is correct.

Except perhaps at the margins, pressure to decolonize the British empire came very largely from indigenous movements within colonised nations (though such anti-colonial movements did try and form coalitions with sections of British society, such as  when Gandhi visited Lancashire cotton textile workers). At "home" empire remained a broadly popular project well into the C20th. A recent (2020) survey revealed that a third of the British population still think that empire is something to be proud of.

[Oldmanmatt]

I don't remember covering the slave trade at school. If I did it was in a very perfunctory manner. Maybe a few lessons on slave plantations but not on the reasons why these even existed.

Lack of BAME representation in climbing is an interesting one. I agree that it is overwhelmingly white and middle class, particularly outside. Indoors is perhaps slightly more diverse, in London especially maybe? Barriers might be, in no particular order: cost (climbing shoes are approaching £100 base price now, and if you intend on going outside the associated costs skyrocket very quickly). A lack of representation probably perpetuates itself; BAME people do not see BAME people at the wall and so don't think of it as 'a sport for me?'

OMM, I've read your post a few times and I'm not 100% sure I understand it completely, but a few things to pick up. You seem to suggest that as populations at home became more aware of colonial outrages abroad they invariably took steps to stop it. I am not convinced this is correct. Imperial masters and news sources may have expressed displeasure at violence committed overseas but I think concrete action to correct this was either non existent or wrongly focused. As an example, when the French imperial powers became aware of the violence on the Voulet-Chanoine mission the official line that followed was to blame the officers actions on madness caused by heat and their very presence in an environment seen as savage and dangerous. In todays parlance, a whitewash. There will be numerous other examples of this. I am obviously paraphrasing but you can read more in the second piece here: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/19198.

Also, I think that a focus on overt racist attitudes in people we might individually know missed the point. I would agree that overt racism is on the wane but that, as it seems to me, is not the problem. The problem is the ingrained racism in our societal structures that has seeped in over centuries. Our efforts to confront this, I think, are not helped by saying that overt racism has improved, because the effect of this is to minimise the importance of tackling the ingrained issues. I know that you aren't trying to do this, but thats the effect of the argument in the mainstream in my view. It falls into the same category mentioned in the Gary Younge piece; namely, responding to racist violence in the US by saying 'at least we aren't as bad here.'

Which is why I said “challenge, but not challenge”.

Nothing said by you or Andy is anything other than true, however (and as always, as far as I can see), you’ve lost your target “students” already, after only a couple of posts.

I did say I was making a broad strokes type statement. I agree I could have been more succinct.

The people who agree with, or even listen to, these types of arguments, already feel that way or would have done, if they’d been thinking about it.

I don’t believe you’re going to convince anybody to change their position, with this type of approach.

I think the language, often used by (sorry, can’t think of a better term) intellectuals, is accusatory. Joe Public hears “You should be ashamed” and “It’s your fault” and “You should make amends”.

Click.

They’ve switched off.

They know they didn’t do anything, so you must be talking about someone else and they go back to worrying about their own problems.

People (the citizenry of the Colonial powers) then and now, were and are, mostly, opposed to and even outraged by the excesses of those times and these.
 Taking the UK as an example, I suspect, if you could analyse such, the split of the populations in general, back then, would look pretty similar to the split of “progressive” to “ conservative” voters in the UK today: ~40% “progressive”, ~40% “conservative” and ~20% “middle ground”.
Because I see no reason to believe that human nature has changed dramatically in the intervening years.
So, I imagine the progressive personalities would have been always anti slavery (for instance), the middle ground probably didn’t think about it much and the right wingers were too busy thinking about themselves and writing anything “nasty” off as “just life” or “the way it is” ( or often, especially amongst the religious right, “they deserve it”).

Which is how most such issues, from women's rights, LGBT rights and Racism, play out today, on a day-to-day basis.

Then something happens. Some awful event, that outrages not only the sympathetic, but cracks begin to appear further right on the spectrum. Sometimes, quite a long way right. This is when things change.

But they don’t swing all the way the other way. It takes time and education to achieve this. Colonialism is still within (and the US slave era, only just outside) living memory. Take Andy’s “30%of the British population” that think “Empire” was a good thing. Even if you did absolutely nothing to further education on the matter, in five years, that % would drop (I’d bet in 10-15, it would be almost zero). Because that shocking statistic conflates people hankering for “the good old days of their youth” with people who genuinely believe in subjugation of vassal populations (ok, not zero, because you’ll find a few of the latter twunts, probably with a Swastika tattoo or ten).

Andy, colonialism didn’t end because of indigenous uprisings. Though they were the catalyst, in many cases. They almost certainly could have been put down (look at current occupations, such as Gaza, Tibet, Kashmir). Colonialism ended (where it did) because the populations of the colonial powers would not support the measures needed to preserve control.
I’m not saying they were “nice” but the increasing violence required to maintain control, lead to a diminishing support back home and governments elected that were increasingly unlikely to escalate the measures.
Ultimately a colonial ruler, could, put an entire population in chains, or simply wipe them out and replace them. Some powers did just that, at least regionally.
But that became much harder, when it became harder to control the message that reached the people back home, because “most” people really don’t like that kind of thing.

I think, the ballot box is way more powerful than the demonstration (with the proviso that I agree the later will influence the former).

So, I’m saying, I think the best way to make a change today, is not to force people to “confront” their nations past. I think getting a simple “Yup, Slavery sucked” is enough.
Then, start from the position that “most” people are “good” (the progressive 40%), some need a nudge (the 20% in the middle) and the 40% on the right, are actually just part of the spectrum and plenty will be able to move “left” on this matter.
You also have to accept that some are permanently beyond reach. There is zero point in even engaging with them.

Why do I think the waning of overt racism is important, even key?
Because the next generation are not learning to be racist.

Anyway, I’m not challenging the whole BLM movement or even most of the points, I’m challenging the notions put forward in the quote Andy chose.

One last stab at getting my point over. If a student does well in some aspects of an assignment, but not in others, or misses out a few critical points entirely, do you reprimand them and tell them that their efforts were useless? Confront them? Or perhaps compliment their progress, reinforce the importance of the bits they didn’t quite comprehend so well and rewrite your lesson plans for the bits they seem to have missed completely.

Gaah! Too hard to get this right.

I think sermonising turns off as many as it converts or possibly more?

[tomtom]

In the UK outdoor pursuits not just climbing have a disproportionately low take up amongst BAME -

I believe this was recently covered in a countryfile segment - that I’ve not watched - but the comments after this tweet publicising it give you an idea of - I’m not sure how to describe it - I’ll go with what a mess people’s beliefs and understandings are.
https://twitter.com/bbccountryfile/status/1277277327639154688?s=21

[spidermonkey09]

Thanks Matt, thats an interesting response, although I'm not sure whether you're referring to me/Andy specifically, or the BLM movement here?

Nothing said by you or Andy is anything other than true, however (and as always, as far as I can see), you’ve lost your target “students” already, after only a couple of posts.

More generally, I think I start from the standpoint that making people feel uncomfortable is going to be necessary and there is no point hiding away from the fact. Facing the reality of how our society works requires hard conversations to truly understand. For me, saying it feels accusatory is again missing the point. If we take feminism and feminist dialogue as an example, the equivalent is when men start sentences with 'Not All Men...' when conversation turns to everyday sexism or sex assault in Hollywood, or [insert topic here]. We all know Not All Men are sexists and assailants, but all men benefit from a society which has tolerated it, just as everyone white benefits from a society which tolerates ingrained racism. Only by accepting that and bearing it in mind in the future can we hope to improve things. If men were to simply say 'less people are sexist now then they were 50 years ago, so things are going in the right direction and women wanting things to move faster  is accusatory', they would correctly be told they are wrong. I don't see why racism is any different as an issue. Black communities don't want to wait for the rest of society to gradually realise they are wrong (if indeed they ever will) and tbh I don't blame them. Hopefully that doesn't come across as accusatory to you personally because it is not intended to, but to paraphrase, I don't think a simple 'slavery sucked' does suffice, because we are still seeing its effects today.

I agree with a lot in the latter part of your post but basically I think we need to combine the waning of racism (hopefully) through the passage of time and the next generation being less racist than the previous with a proactive campaign to challenge peoples perceptions here and now. The only way to do that is via tough conversations I think. 

Edit: With regard to this

If a student does well in some aspects of an assignment, but not in others, or misses out a few critical points entirely, do you reprimand them and tell them that their efforts were useless? Confront them? Or perhaps compliment their progress, reinforce the importance of the bits they didn’t quite comprehend so well and rewrite your lesson plans for the bits they seem to have missed completely.

Obviously you don't say peoples efforts are useless. But quite a lot of people are making little to no effort and thats where I think stimulating the conversation can and will bear fruit. Thats why demonstrations play such an important role because the issue moves front and centre.

[cheque]

What are people’s thoughts about the under representation of BAME communities in climbing. Thoughts on barriers in climbing and possible solution to those barriers?

As a climbing photographer and filmmaker I see myself as having an opportunity to play a positive role in this. I’ve always had a conscious “don’t just feature white blokes” policy and I think I have a fairly good record for that but I am going to make more proactive steps to get more pictures of people outside that category from now on. I often go out to crags and photograph whoever’s there but while that approach gets good shots of the status quo I don’t think saying “I only have a few pictures of BAME people climbing because you don’t see many people from those backgrounds out there” is good enough to be honest.

Climbing is in many ways a monoculture, particularly “outdoor climbing” and I notice that a lot less than I used to when I first started, partly because the situation has changed a bit but also, I’ve realised in the last month, because I’ve got used to mainly being around people from pretty much the same background as me.

[Will Hunt]

I am going to make more proactive steps to get more pictures of people outside that category from now on.

What does that involve in practice, Mike?

[cheque]

Well, I appeal for people to be in my films each time I make one and I have narrowed that down in the past (I didn’t shoot Prom Traverse for Stonnis until I’d found a couple who were up for it for example) just never based on ethnic background. I think like a lot of people who’ve always considered themselves anti-racist I now feel more emboldened to be like “I specifically want to feature someone who looks like you because I feel like that would be a good thing” than I have in the past. There are organisations dedicated to BAME involvement in the outdoors and I thought I’d get in touch with them too.