Ugh this article is an astonishingly offensive take. Claiming that POC on social media are “rude,” and “attention-seeking,” that The alt-right trolls are the “monster they created,” and that ISXX board members are the real victims, etc. it’s tone-policing and victim blaming.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @erik_kaars @medievalhistory
Re: the question of using the term, I would center the needs of scholars of color here. Would retaining the term make them feel welcomed in the field? Would it contribute to anti-racism? Would using it potentially still draw white supremacists to the field?
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @erik_kaars
I definitely don’t agree with most of the article for all the reasons you point out. I support name change and am training myself not to use it. I’m just worried about outreach beyond the scholarly community regarding changing this entrenched terminology.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @medievalhistory @erik_kaars
But why? What could the name change do to affect outreach? I mean, there are plenty of terms we no longer use that are still used in pop history, but I can’t see Anglo-Saxon being one that is too entrenched with the study of the period, at least outside Britain.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @erik_kaars
I am worried about Britain, though! And it is more concerning to leave a term lying about that would be useful to fascists than something innocuous like feudalism
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @medievalhistory @erik_kaars
The term is already being used by fascists. It has been a word for white supremacy since the 19th c at least. The desperation from white scholars to hold onto this instead of acknowledging how it is harmful for BIPOC in the field in Britain and the rest of the world is a bad look
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @erik_kaars
I worry that in fact very few people are looking at us at all. There are millions of people, even history buffs, who have no idea this debate is going on at all, learning about Anglo-Saxons in class and googling it on the internet. That’s what I’m suggesting we take thought for.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @medievalhistory @erik_kaars
Which is why the field needs to change. The problem you have seems to be more with our inability and/or unwillingness to engage with the public, but that is often a problem for older white scholars who hold up the idea of history being the field of elites.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
This isn’t just about changing the name. It is a first step in trying to change the elitist, racist, sexist, ableist, queerohobic nature of history and academia in general. I want to engage with the public too. My field stopped using “celts” decades ago. Hasn’t stopped pop hist.
-
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip @erik_kaars
I also want all of that, very much. But I’d like to have more success with the pop use of the term on this occassion, if that’s possible. Celt can be used pretty awfully, but I feel is slightly less dangerous than Anglo-Saxon, especially in this historical moment we’re in.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.