I’ve run across it a few times on talks I’ve watched on Youtube, latest one was from the Smithsonian. Basically the person says something like, “I’m a white woman with short brown hair wearing a gray sweater. There is background of trees.” So I gather that it’s for the benefit of blind people. Also, there are people complaining it is woke, and it’s all about the person stating their identity (for blind people?) because after all identity is everything.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
I just checked. This week I have 23 hours of Team’s meetings. That is probably about average. Not once has that happened. In fact, contrary to a lot of advice out there, rarely are the cameras turned on, mostly because someone is always sharing their screen. There is no purpose.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
I just checked. This week I have 23 hours of Team’s meetings. That is probably about average. Not once has that happened. In fact, contrary to a lot of advice out there, rarely are the cameras turned on, mostly because someone is always sharing their screen. There is no purpose.
I saw something recently that it’s apparently bad Zoom etiquette to not have your camera turned on, which I never do unless I’m directly interacting with someone.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah, and why it comes across as completely phony.
We rarely turn on cameras. As for describing yourself, we do no more than we typically would in an in -person meeting, introductions of who you are and what you do. I have never seen or heard anyone introduce themselves of what they are, if dome one did I’m pretty sure you would be able to hear the collect eye roll.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Whether acknowledging indigenous people in every day life (as opposed to a day set aside each year) is meaningless or meaningful depends upon your perspective, I suppose.
There was a great piece of writing by Leslie Fiedler published in 1949 in the Parisian Review which takes a hard look at the attitude of Montana whites with respect to indigenous people of the area.
From Fiedler: “On the side of the whites, there is, I think, a constantly nagging though unconfessed sense of guilt, perhaps the chief terror that struggles to be registered on the baffled Montana Face. It is a struggle much more diflicult for the Montana “liberal” to deal with than those other conflicts between the desired and the actual to which he turns almost with relief: the fight with the Power Company or the Anaconda Copper Mining Company for the instruments of communication and the possibilities of freedom. The latter struggles tend to pre-empt the liberal’s imagination, because on them he can take an unequivocal stand; but in respect to the Indian he is torn with inner feelings of guilt, the knowledge of his own complicity in perpetuating the stereotypes of prejudice and discrimination. In that relationship he cannot wholly dissociate himself from the oppressors; by his color, he is born into the camp of the Enemy. There is, of course, no easy solution to the Indian problem; but so long as the Montanan fails to come to terms with the Indian, despised and outcast in his open-air ghettos, just so long will he be incapable of coming to terms with his own real past, of making the adjustment between myth and reality upon which a successful culture depends. When he admits that the Noble Savage is a lie; when he has learned that his state is where the myth comes to die …, the Montanan may find the possibilities of tragedy and poetry for which so far he has searched his life in vain.
Humans and nature/ tragedy and poetry. Until we feel a sense that fairness/balance have been achieved, we will be uncomfortable. I think it’s a principle supported by scientific evidence.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah I don’t get this one. We’re going to flap our gums a bit but do nothing about the issue.
I just checked. This week I have 23 hours of Team’s meetings. That is probably about average. Not once has that happened. In fact, contrary to a lot of advice out there, rarely are the cameras turned on, mostly because someone is always sharing their screen. There is no purpose.
I saw something recently that it’s apparently bad Zoom etiquette to not have your camera turned on, which I never do unless I’m directly interacting with someone.
When my team meets, I always ask for them to turn on their cameras (at least my North American Team). We all know each other and it is a good way to make sure people are engaged and not multi tasking.
For my India team, they seem a lot more reluctant, but often times that is because they don’t have the privacy in their home so it makes sense.
For all meetings with other teams. If it is a large group, I keep my camera off. If it is 5 or less people, I always start with my camera on, “so I can look people in the eye”, but will turn off if no one else turns theirs on.
I’m not sure I’d call it bad etiquette, but I try to treat teams meetings or any video meeting as if we’re all at the office and it is not just a phone call.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah, and why it comes across as completely phony.
I assume this is supposedly for the benefit of blind meeting participants?
Why the fuck would they care what you or your background look like? It’s like describing your after shave scent to someone with no olfactory sense. “Don’t care, didn’t ask, isn’t helpful, can we get on with the meeting now?â€
I saw something recently that it’s apparently bad Zoom etiquette to not have your camera turned on, which I never do unless I’m directly interacting with someone.
In my old job, all meetings were on Zoom, and video was ON by the CFOs mandate
In my new job here, meetings are transitioning from Skype to Teams, and I haven’t used my video at all yet
Only occasionally will new people introduce themselves with “My pronouns are …” and they only do that the first time they’re on; certainly no one mentions ethnicity or whatnot
.
I also have never seen this on either my own calls or anything I’ve ever watched.
But on the issue of video on/off, one of the great efficiency benefits of modern telework is that you can now just turn off the video and continue to do real work while meetings are going on, and just provide input where needed. Vs. spending hours every week pretending to pay attention when you’re in person.
This doesn’t make sense. The majority of people don’t care about fairness at that level. Sure on a small scale maybe but not at the level that it makes people feel uncomfortable.
Sports, politics, business and so on are all built on trying to make the playing field unfair to gain an advantage. Evolution’s fundamental component is that genetic changes allow for improved fitness because of unfairness.
The whole pull yourself up by your bootstraps concept is based on people thinking that what they achieved was fair and you just need to work harder.
There are instances where people do want a sense of fairness but at a human level those are far out weighed by the number of situations where people are completely fine with it not being fair.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
I’ve only come across this in two places. The first time was in Stratford, Ontario before every performance there is a short message, I am assuming recorded. They’ve been doing that since at least 2018 or 19. I’d bet before that.
The other is at our local Shadowbox Theater (SNL type sketch comedy and music). During the pre-performance slide show they have a similar written blurb.
If it gets even a few people thinking I can’t see how it is a bad thing. They are referencing people whose culture was almost entirely erased from history. It might be good for people to take a minute or two and recognize that.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah I don’t get this one. We’re going to flap our gums a bit but do nothing about the issue.
I agree it’s a demonstration of values.
Virtue signaling is a derogatory term for demonstrating/ espousing a person’s convictions. Anyone who makes a statement of values can be accused of virtue signaling by anyone else who doesn’t respect either the person or the virtue or both. Priests and religious people virtue signal nonstop. I don’t think windy has ever accused his own church of virtue signaling, although the hypocrisy is as bad or worse.
A failure to act is something else.
I was thinking about DavHamm and his heartfelt post about gun violence. Dav wants to see change, and change isn’t happening.
At the end of the day, no one is truly accountable to you except yourself. If you find yourself lamenting that people won’t do something, maybe you should get off your ass and do something. Make yourself proud and satisfied in that future moment when you’re looking back at your accomplishments. Are you going to be satisfied that you spent your life crying, “people won’t change the bad things!†instead of actually doing something?
I know DavHamm works in elections, which is honorable work. I’m not accusing him of doing nothing.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah, and why it comes across as completely phony.
It has become huge in Oz. It’s at most big sporting or televised events. Pretty much any conference. Even smallish work meetings in my engineering industry.
I’m ok with it at big sporting events played outdoors where First Nations players have been stars. Even some big project inception meetings, given we will be building on lands once occupied by others.
Many feel it’s gone too far though and it starts to detract from the intent. People become disengaged.
The other thing I seen a few times, in similar contexts, is the person introducing the talk will say something like, “We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the XXXXX people”…followed by some platitudes. I’ve seen that in talks out of Australia and maybe Canada too.
Can we all agree that’s virtue signaling?
Yeah, and why it comes across as completely phony.
I assume this is supposedly for the benefit of blind meeting participants?
Why the fuck would they care what you or your background look like? It’s like describing your after shave scent to someone with no olfactory sense. “Don’t care, didn’t ask, isn’t helpful, can we get on with the meeting now?â€