UKC

Travel writer, adventurer and human rights barrister Faraz Shibli considers a recent Countryfile report on the fact that people from minority communities visit the countryside less – and asks what ethnic minorities in nature have in common with women's football.

Read more

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

A nicely written and argued piece. Thanks 

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Much ado about nothing just about fits the bill. 

if minority groups want to enjoy the national parks , in time they will make their way there without being bribed or led by the nose.

And  anyone who  spent anytime around the Dovestones area a month ago when it was thronged and the parking was lunatic would give no credence at all  to the 1% figure quoted in the article. 

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I disagree. It's not about bribing or leading by the nose, it's about making people aware of the outdoors and not feeling "unwelcome"when they visit.

I'm pretty sure if I went to an unfamiliar place where no one looked like me, and people were looking at me curiously, I wouldn't particularly feel like I belonged there.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Indeed, how dare these ethnic minorities write about their experience of being an ethnic minority.

Good job you’re here to tell them what their life is actually like.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

You are misrepresenting my post but I expected it sooner or later.

Would you care to tie in your comments with what I actually said or are you reading between the lines?

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Except this figure is consistent with National Park visitor surveys and yours is taken from a glance around the carpark. The surveys are a few years old so it could be changing.

On your other comment,you may be right that it will increase over time. I don't see that as a reason not to do things to reach out to different communities to make sure they feel welcome.

In reply to Ridge:

Of course people shouldn't be made unwelcome and of course people should be made aware of the beauty of our countryside . But do minorites need to be made more aware than the majority?  Does a working class Asian lad need more encouragement to visit the Lakes than a working class white lad? 

A walk down Keswick high street would suggest to me that less well off white people are also under-represented in the Lake District. It's not snobbish to say that a lot of poorer white people prefer the joys of Skegness and Benidorm. Should we be worried about that? Should we embark on a campaign to educate them about the joys of our national parks and hope that they will make more informed choices in the future about their holiday destinations? Or should we allow them to do their own thing and keep going to Skeggy and Benidorm?  

If people want to visit the Lakes, they will come. In the same way as if people fancy a walk around Dovestones reservoir, they will come. No-one encouraged them on that weekend a month ago, no-one tried especially hard to engage with minority groups to tell them what a great venue it was, the closest national park to Manchester.

But they came in droves and as I've said elsewhere  there were  visibly  significant numbers of minority groups among the hordes.  No I can't provide any numbers and yes it's anecdotal. It doesn't make it any less true.

In reply to Wil Treasure:

My experiemce  may well have been skewed by the proximity of this particular National Park gateway to a very maqjor conurbation  but if you had been there on the day I can absolutely gurantee that you would have conceded that my "glance around the car park " was more re presentative than a survey which reported a figure as low as that.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Plenty of Asians at Bolton Abbey and Burnsall in the Dales most fine weekends.

In reply to Ridge:

Isn't that just the nature of being a tourist?  If I visit another country for example it's often going to feel pretty unfamiliar and I might not blend in but it doesn't stop me wanting to go.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Well if so then that seems fitting given you misrepresenting the article. 

If you’ve managed to read that article and actually interpret it as a call for people to be bribed or forced into national parks then it feels pretty futile trying to have a sensible discussion with you about it.

If you want a serious response to your assertion that “they will make their way there“ if they wanted to, then I invite you to read the article in question. Given that the entire article is basically a response to the exact argument you are making I don’t see what me paraphrasing it would add.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

According to the author the cause of the low numbers of minorities  visiting our national parks is "lack of encouragement". I don't think that counts as misrepresentation.

My initial post was simply me expressing an opinion which I've expressed elsewhere on UKC very recently, prompted by the author' s use of the phrase "much ado about nothing" which i thought was fairly apposite even though he used it in a negative context.

It doesn't really matter to me who responds to my comments or whether they want to enter a discussion with me., serious or otherwise.  If my comments aren't worth the time of day,  my advice is to ignore them completely and don't engage further

In reply to Tom Valentine:

In my perspective, it's more about giving people opportunities rather than this bribery and hard selling which you seem to have latched on to. Research has found that if young people are exposed to a quality outdoor experience, then they are quite likely to develop a life-long enjoyment of the outdoors, with positive benefits for their own wellbeing but also for the outdoors because they then value it and become champions of it.

If you come from a group which currently doesn't get those opportunities for whatever reason, then I'm afraid the research suggests that you aren't suddenly going to start going to the outdoors off your own bat. So, if your parents or family don't go, for example, into the Peak District despite residing in Sheffiled (I worked with many kids there who hadn't even heard of the Peak District!) and there is never any opportunity arranged through school or other educational institution, then things are unlikely to change much through the generations.

In reply to danm:

Yes bribery was a stupid choice of word because it seems to have been taken literally. .

Your point about lack of opportunities hits the nail on the head but that doesn't make it a minority issue.

In reply to danm:

Indeed, the author seems to make clear the "the importance of family and friends introducing young people to the countryside", that he was inevitably keen on the outdoors because of his parents.  I expect most of us on here are similar?

Similarly agree on the importance of getting school groups in to the countryside staying in youth hostels or similar.  I worked in hostels for several years when I was younger and I'd like to believe some of the children visiting for the first time would be motivated to return when they're older.

Has anything else actually been found to work in terms of "encouraging" people from more diverse backgrounds?

In reply to beh:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/01/what-a-brief-moment-o...

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Well, obviously not. Even if you spent all week camped in Dovestones car park your experience would still only be representative of Dovestones car park.

In reply to beh:

Agree.....

I grew up in a poor city estate....nobody went to the countryside, we played football and hung out.

Geography fieldwork trip aged 14 transformed my life....a trip up Cader Idris and I knew immediately I would be doing it for the rest of my life....I would not have had the opportunity in my day to day life.

School trips make a massive difference to those who otherwise wouldn't get the opportunity!

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Yes, and charities like Urban Uprising aim to do just that, though they do not discriminate on skin colour.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I've often wondered why I see very few BME people doing outdoor activities. The point about migrants most often settling in cities and basing their families there is interesting. For me personally I owe my interest in the outdoors to my parents who used to take us walking or cycling somewhere most weekends. If someone's family background doesn't involve the outdoors, that could indeed be part of the explanation. 

In reply to Tom Valentine:

At this point I agree with you. There were a few assumptions made in the article, i.e only 6 or 7% of school kids go on organised trips to the country, therefore those 6 or 7% aren't from cities and are predominantly white and middle class.

The author does note that disadvantaged kids from all backgrounds are under represented in visitor numbers, and if numbers are small then:  "children from visible ethnic minorities visit National Parks 10% less than youths from deprived backgrounds in general" then might not evidence of any major statistical difference, and it's far more to do with deprivation than race.

In reply to beh:

I don't think you can equate feeling like that once or twice a year by choice with feeling like that every time you venture beyond your postcode.

The national parks shouldn't feel like another country to British citizens.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Well yes, in the same way that the survey quoted is only representative of the people featured in the survey.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

My anecdotal observations, as someone who lives in S7 and goes out in the Eastern Peak several times a week, all year round, climbing, running and biking etc: 

You see decent numbers of Asian folks out in the Peak, mostly on fine-weather days. When you do, they tend to be in family groups, having a picnic, or a walk at a 'beauty spot'. In terms of 'representation', that's not surprising - this side of Sheffield has a large Asian population and not that many 'other minorities'. The use of the Peak park seems to be as a nice place to get out and spend time as a family in a beautiful place. 

I've rarely seen Asians, or other minorities for that matter, in obvious outdoorsy kit, out for 'targeted outdoor recreational pursuits' like climbing, biking etc. That's not 'never', but if you're passing a peloton on the road, looking at a cluster of boulderers at the Plantation, seeing a group of mtbers at a trail head, seeing a few folks with rucksacks, stout walking boots and maps around their necks, etc, it's mostly white people. (As a side note, within those groups, I'd say there's pretty good representation of women for what it's worth).

So, my anecdotal observation would be that Asians at least, do visit the Peak, but for different reasons to the 'dedicated outdoorsy types.'  i.e. it's more about the views and the space, than the 'activity.' Obviously that's just my observation combined with some motive assumption, and contains no judgement about what they 'should' or 'shouldn't' be doing.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Sound advice. Thanks Tom!

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Think this was a good article, and much less divisive than the BBC announcement, which is to be applauded in these highly strung times. 

However I still fundamentally disagree with this approach of singling people out based on race. Of course the author's experiences were quite atypical for a British Asian, but they are also pretty atypical for a British white person. And while many BAME kids in inner city schools might have limited experience of the countryside, the same could be said of inner city white kids. Even I, as a white person from a middle class background probably wouldn't be into the outdoors if my parents weren't. 

Fair enough if people want to widen participation then that can be a good thing to do if it's done in the right way encouraging responsible behaviour etc, but why divide people by focusing on race, which is just one characteristic which you can correlate with recreational activities in the countryside? I just think it's a really unhelpful attitude which only deepens racial divides rather than healing then. 

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

I haven't lived in the UK for years (apart from a spell in London) and when people talk about 'Asians' I don't really know what they mean. Does it cover everyone from Beirut to Tokyo or are we supposed to understand 'people of Pakistani/Indian heritage'. I don't find the term 'Asians' super helpful personally.

Btw not trying to steer you towards being more more PC, just genuinely don't know what people contributing to this thread mean by 'Asians'.

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

Similar anecdotal observation here: in the last three years I can think of only one time I've been at a crag and bumped into a non-white climbing team (a couple of Asian lads who were, like me, up in Snowdonia for the weekend from London, with their climbing club). Given that I live in London, climb with people who live in London, and most days can expect to see members of pretty much every race that humanity exhibits whilst walking around London, the contrast with the very white world of climbing (and I think this would be true of most outdoor sports) is very noticeable.

I find it very unlikely that there is something inherent about e.g. Asian people that they might somehow enjoy rock climbing less than white people. So like the (very good, by the way) article says - the reasons for that are going to be historical and cultural. Insofar as I'd like as many people* to enjoy climbing as possible, that seems to me to be good reason for us to have a think about what the cultural factors are that lead to BAME people not taking up outdoor pursuits at the rate that whites do. And in turn, thinking about changing those cultural factors. Like the OP says, football managed to do it with women - so there's clear precedent for change being possible.

* as compatible with good access, not over-crowding and not getting the rocks polished

In reply to Big Bruva:

I find it a bit confusing too. In the USA I think when people talk about 'Asians' they're talking about Chinese, etc. In the UK I think it mostly means Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi. In terms of UK census figures it encompasses Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi/Chinese and 'other'. In the case of Sheffield it's most likely to mean Pakistani Muslim Asians from the census figures, but of course you can't necessarily assume that from 'just looking'. So, I just go with 'Asian'.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

A timely and well-written article - thanks.

As I said on a previous piece by Natalie, the open hostility of many on UKC to actually raising the issues of systemic racism and the underprepresentation of people of colour in the outdoors shows that, apart from anything else, the UKC community itself has a problem with racism.

The comments, though, also show a strong anti-racist counter-tendency - so there is hope, if we can keep the many Tom Vs etc. of this world from endlessly shaping the debate to their "all lives matter, I don't even know what you're going on about, I don't see barriers, racism is just liberal nonsense" agenda.

I read one important part of that need for representation and encouragement that Faraz argues for as precisely articles like this one. I hope this is just the start. Faraz also highlights the importance of those initiatives and organisations - from Scouts to DofE to school trips to the Woodland Trust - to giving young and deprived people, including many people of colour, opportunities to get their first taste of "outdoor adventure" activities.

On that note, I do think these organisations - Scouts and DofE in particular - have a heritage and tradition that I personally find uncomfortable; I wonder if it does or doesn't put off some people? The origins of the Scouts are in colonialism, and I believe they still make their scouts promise:

On my honour,
I promise that I will do my best
to do my duty to God and to The Queen,
to help other people
and to keep the Scout Law.

I mean... how anachronistic is that? Do I even have to explain how reactionary this promise is and how unfair it is that it should be a part of Scouting?

DofE, too, is named after Prince Philip - a notorious racist! And its whole approach is conservative, off-putting and problematic - from the enormous bags kids are made to carry to the sychophantic relation to authority.

The other big source of access to the outdoors is the cadets and - again - this is a very problematic organisation to have playing such a large role in what the outdoors means to young people. The way it uses adventure activities to encourage people into joining is deeply manipulative. The army as an institution is racist, with documented links to the far right; it also exploits working-class people and people of colour to fight imperialist wars, and is bound up in terms of the discourse counter-terrorism, with a deeply regressive and punative form a racialisation.

This is just a brief (and probably controversial) sketch, but I think the big target for BAME inclusion in the outdoors is the creation of organisations and initiatives that offer an alternative to the current reactionary offering.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

So your anecdote from one venue, one day in a frankly rather odd period of our history trumps a carefully conducted national survey, are you sure you want to stand by that because it sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

In answer to your earlier question about whether we should be actively introducing people from minority groups to the British countryside, it would appear the answer depends whether we want to see them there because they clearly are underrepresented currently. One of the things which could change that is people who already know the joy those environments can bring taking the time to share it with others. Introductions help.

jk

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

I thought Faraz's article was about simply wanting minorities to "engage with the countryside", not specifically take up  sports like climbing and  mountain biking. So the Asians who you mention visiting the Peak for a walk round Derwent or down the Burbage valley are doing exactly what he wants. 

As I said earlier, maybe the Peak is different from other Parks in this respect with large cities on either side and significant minority populations in those cities. Maybe the survey that produced the 1% figure shouild be re-done and broken down by region to give a more accurate picture.

In reply to danm:

I teach a bit south of Sheffield in NE Derbyshire, and despite the Peak park boundary not being particularly far away most kids have never been there and don't really seem to know its there.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

What about at the walls in London Paul? The Depot in Manchester is certainly more diverse than walls used to be 5/10 years ago. It probably doesn't quite represent the gender/ethnic mix i see on the streets around me but it's a long way from the white male spaces of my youth.

There is a potential "path" there from the walls to the outdoors.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I'd agree. There's no 'right way' to engage with the countryside (besides leaving it as you found it, or better etc obviously). So if it's just 'like a public park but prettier/wilder' then that's cool. I guess engaging with active pursuits is a separate issue.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I am always baffled by replies to articles like this that seem to not want to encourage people to appreciate our countryside, our hills, our coastline. They then seem to be the first to post about "city folk" not treating the countryside with respect.

By showing people the joys of time spent outdoors, in our countryside, we can encourage them to become stewards of the countryside and it will be easier to influence behaviour in order to maintain them. The more people engage with the outdoors and nature, the more inclined they might be to understand and engage with some of the changes we need to make for the sake of our environment.

This article/op-ed is taking about why "some" people don't engage with the outdoors. This doesn't mean we should only be showing BAME kids they joys of what the outdoors has to offer, we should be making sure those opportunities are available to all. However, having seen the social media comments on articles like this, maybe not all the kids will feel as welcome when they finally make it into the world of rock climbing/hill walking/etc. This is what we should be working towards eliminating.

In reply to Big Bruva:

Might well depend on where you are but yes, I guess normally in the UK "Asian" normally means "south Asian". People who's heritage is East Asian my get called "Chinese" (I'm sure super annoying if you are Japanese or Thai and maybe even if you are Chinese-Singaporean!) but "East Asian" does get heard.

Climbing mainly in the Peak District I definitely see climbers who are of both South and East Asian heritage out, normally younger and often in uni club groups - but it's still uncommon enough for me to notice. I've still seen very few black climbers though.

In reply to C Witter:

The UK has a problem with racism, it should hardly surprise us that UKC does too.  (Particularly given that minorities, by race, and the majority by gender are rather under represented on the forum here.)

Speaking of gender, I had a little 'laugh or you might cry' chuckle when I read:

"If Match of the Day ran a report next Saturday on girls' access to opportunities to play football, thankfully, very few people would bat an eyelid. But had it run the same piece back in 2000, you can be sure there would have been a similar backlash as there was to Dwayne's report on Countryfile – 'women don't like football', 'I'm cancelling my TV licence', 'stop pushing a feminist agenda'."

Judging by a lot of the posts in various threads about the Women's Trad Festival and the WCS, I think a fair cohort of UKC still has some way to go to reach 21st century 'Match of the Day' levels of enlightenment.

In reply to TobyA:

It's pretty much the same in West Cumbria. The Lake District NP is that place in the far distance that very few people seem to visit.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

The nub of the issue to me is the catch 22 of only feeling happy to visit a particular place once there are more people like us there. It's difficult and I don't really have an answer to that.

It's not at all comparable with going abroad on holiday. Regardless of one's definition of the word, if I drive to the NW for a weekend I don't feel like a 'tourist'. If I go abroad I definitely do. 

In reply to C Witter:

Has it really got to the stage on UKC where  simply demurring about the notion of under-representation of minorities in our National Parks  makes me a racist?

Where have I ever said that "racism is just liberal nonsense"? Where have I even implied it? 

Whereas you have quite clearly accused me of racism. I think you need to provide some real evidence of that, chapter and verse, or withdraw your snide insinuation.

In reply to TobyA:

Speaking to many people brought up in Leek over the last 20 years, I never cease to be surprised by how many tell me they've never been to the Roaches.  Interestingly, a few have told me in the last few weeks that they have just taken their kids up there for the first time because there was nothing else available. 

In reply to Dave Garnett:

It also rather feeds into the complex picture of outdoors neophytes visiting the Peak (and other NPs) since lockdown easing and bringing 'city attitudes' towards, for example, litter.... Completely unrelated to questions of race obviously, but it's not simply a case of: "let's encourage everyone out of the cities and into the NPs". We've seen the consequences of that in the last couple of months, and they're not all good.

In reply to C Witter:

The Scout movement has been making efforts to be inclusive. 

https://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/2454/the-promise?cat=25,283&...

https://members.scouts.org.uk/documents/AdultSupport/Promise/FS322016.pdf

In reply to galpinos:

'However, having seen the social media comments on articles like this, maybe not all the kids will feel as welcome when they finally make it into the world of rock climbing/hill walking/etc.'

Agree with your general sentiment, but not this bit.  I don't think those people spouting rubbish on social media would be doing stuff in the great outdoors.  I believe the vast majority of climbers/walkers etc. embrace diversity etc. 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

You weren't there admittedly, but I fell off The Bone at Shorn Cliff with Khalid (I am half-non-white)  

In reply to Blue Straggler:

A good start, definitely. But the the Queen can go do herself.

In reply to Ridge:

I was having a beer in the outdoor centre at Seatoller last summer, whole bunch of guys from Aspatria where enjoying a beer after a team building event and spoke about how this was their first time up Borrowdale !! (all in the mid 40's upwards).  They loved it and said they would be back, which was good to hear.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Maybe I should provide some evidence... but can't be fked tbh. Maybe you should provide some evidence, by not taking aim with your keyboard against an anti-racist article just because this one time you visited a car park and that apparently makes you an authority.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I wonder if this feeling is why I and possibly others don't really 'get' a lot of this, because I don't really experience that feeling in the same way. 

I don't really think there's anywhere where I feel like there are 'people like me' without getting to know them. I don't feel like I have any particular bond to people I see outdoors (of whatever race) other than presumably our shared enjoyment of the outdoors and happening to be in the same place. I don'tffeel particularly 'at home' whenever I encounter other people, regardless of what they look like.

I guess I subconsciously feel more nervous if I encounter someone like a farmer, as we don't even share the reason for being in a particular place, and if it's their farmland then it's literally their turf. 

I feel like a little bit of a tourist everywhere I go for a walk that's not within sight of my house to be honest, especially if it's somewhere rural as it's obvious I'm not a farmer, and although I feel like more of a tourist when I'm abroad that's more down to not understanding how things work, not speaking the language, not knowing how to get where I want to go etc rather than any feeling that the people are 'different' to me due to their race. I think the only time I've been conscious of my race was in China where everyone would stare at you even at close range when they were basically staring straight in my face without saying anything.

I wouldn't say I necessarily feel 'less at home' with people just because they are a different race for instance. For example at university there were a couple of things I did where most other people were East Asian, and I wouldn't say I felt less at home than with a group of mostly white people (I probably felt mildly 'not at home' in both instances). 

In reply to C Witter:

The origins of the Scouts are in colonialism, and I believe they still make their scouts promise:

Wrong.  The Scouts are more ahead of the times than you give them credit:

https://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/2454/the-promise?moduleID=10...

In reply to C Witter:

There is some sanity on here after all!

Thanks for expressing it. 

In reply to C Witter:

There you go again  ,misattjributing my comments." Apparently makes you an authority". Where did I imply this? I conceded from the start that my observation was anecdotal- hardly the language used by experts .

I will say again: calling someone a racist without providing evidence is something you shouldn't do lightly or just to score points in a discussion.  

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

In France, tens of thousands of inner city primary school kids get taken to the Alps or the Pyrenees each year in what are called 'Classe Neige' (winter) or 'Classe Montagne' (spring). This is a completely inclusive, perhaps even compulsory, part of schooling. Over a week the kids get introduced to hiking, climbing, skiing, snow-shoeing, nature hikes etc. Being France it's completely secular and everyone involved in accompanying/instructing the kids gets paid.

And it seems to me that seeing 'non-white' people in the French hills is not something you would even vaguely bat an eyelid over.

Sport-climbing in France is also becoming less exclusively peely-wally, due mainly I expect to urban kids being introduced to the sport through the school sports curriculum.

Alpinism holds out as a pretty non-diverse environment although last year for the first time a guy who grew up on a housing estate, and whose parents immigrated from Algeria, passed the guides' entrance exam. He literally got into mountaineering through contacting a random guide and asking if he could tag along for a few days. He later joined one of the 'French young alpinist teams' and was also mentored by one of the guys from the Chamonix PGHM. 

I'm not saying France is a perfect example of diversity, just giving a few pointers on how the French outdoor community might have become more inclusive than the UK's. Of course in France there is also a national policy of encouraging immigrants to integrate whereas in the UK people's freedom to choose their way of life is prioritised. I used to be very much 'pro-the British way' on this issue. Not so sure any more...

In reply to Ridge:

You do feel like a tourist visiting most places for the first time, I didn't immediately feel at one with my surroundings the first time I visited the Highlands for example.  Although I don't disagree, people from BAME backgrounds obviously have deeper reasons for feeling apprehensive.  How can we overcome that perception?  Some sort of glossy awareness campaign on Instagram?

If people don't feel comfortable venturing outside of their communities is the issue unique to national parks even?  Where do these people choose to holiday instead?

In reply to beh:

I am so entirely glad that it was you and not me who used the phrase "these people".

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Good grief. beh's use of the phrase "these people" refers to the earlier sentence's "people from BAME backgrounds" and there is nothing wrong with it in that context. 

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I prefix all of this with "in my opinion"

Everyone sits on a spectrum from absolutely perfect (probably no one) to sterotypical US prison white supremacists. Noone, is perfect, everyone needs to be aware that they have unconscious biases. 

However, the act of people responding defensively and immediately to articles  such as this does show some ignorance of their own place on the spectrum mentioned above. Noone is 'non-racist', including even BAME rights campaigners. 

What is most important is being aware of where you might sit on this spectrum and being aware that you are perhaps not getting it right even if you think you are. Being happy to realise that reflex defensiveness of your own behaviour might suggest an ingrained belief that the world is fair without quite understanding how it isn't. 

Anyway - I suggest that a habit of self-analysis has never done anybody any harm.

Tim


 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

What position is that?  

 Someone published an opinion piece about under-reperesentation of minorities and I expressed reservations about it. Does that constitute racism.

I've had an accusation of racism levelled against me.

Are you suggesting that I should just walk away from it? Would you?

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I deleted that bit of my post before your reply was posted, as I decided it was out of line. 

Nobody has explicitly accused you of racism. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

You beat me to it.  

Its easy for folk to have a go at some of these organisations, but i get bored hearing it as I believe these organisations are trying to be more inclusive than many folk like to think.

In reply to Big Bruva:

Yes, and this is exactly what we should be doing here. Schools are the obvious means to introduce young people of all social and ethnic backgrounds to the outdoors, so that they are then in a position to decide for themselves whether they want to get more involved in outdoors activities. When I was a head, one of my few principles was that every kid had to be introduced to as wide a range of extra-curricular activities as possible, so they could discover their individual passions and interests - which could be genuinely life-changing. A residential week-long visit should be an entitlement for each primary and secondary student - exactly the sort of thing the inspirational Tim Brighouse was doing when he was Director of Education for Birmingham. Sadly, at a national level we have enjoyed nothing like that sort of visionary leadership. Instead, we have been saddled with politicians who would prefer to fragment the system for ideological reasons despite no evidence whatsoever that it's even more cost-effective, let alone leads to an increase in academic standards or life-enhancing experiences for students. It's about time we funded education properly so that we can offer the nation's kids such opportunities.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Someone has said that I am promoting an agenda of "racism is just liberal nonsense".

Do you consider this fair comment? I do actually trust your judgement, in spite of our pretend squabbles.

In reply to AukWalk:

That's interesting. I may be on shaky ground here, but perhaps it's easier in Scotland to feel at home anywhere with there being fewer people in total and more friendly access legislation. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Ta, indeed.  Fair enough people can be wary of certain language taken out of context.

Where people choose to holiday instead would be an interesting insight.  Is cost an issue?  Getting to, and staying in, national parks can be expensive.  If you live in a city and don't own a car that's a significant barrier.  As said, I'm a fan of youth hostels for being suitably cheap but I understand they don't appeal to everyone (ditto camping).

In reply to C Witter:

So, as a British subject/citizen, to whom should you promise to do your duty?  Boris Johnson?   The State?  

You might be a republican, but you currently live in a Constitutional Monarchy and I think it's a bit unfair for you to expect the Scout Association to fix that for you.    

In reply to beh:

I understood perfectly that your use of the phrase was complately innocentand harmless. My point was that if I myself had used the phrase, given the insinuatons made upthread about me, it might have been construed as something more sinister than it actually was.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

They haven't EXACTLY said that.
" if we can keep the many Tom Vs etc. of this world from endlessly shaping the debate to their "all lives matter, I don't even know what you're going on about, I don't see barriers, racism is just liberal nonsense" agenda."

The "etc." counts for something here but I can appreciate that you'd be sensitive to seeing your username put in front of it. 

I think your posts have that air of "protesting too much" - squirming, even - which is often interpreted by many people as being a sign of "knowing you're in the wrong". That's why I previously suggested (in the bit of my post that I deleted) that you stop posting. 

From a neutral and respectful viewpoint, your posts on this thread are "bad" and you are making it "all about Tom". 

In reply to Ridge:

West Cumbria - an area I don't really know at all, has always struck me as so cut off from everywhere else, it's sort of even more surprising that people don't know the Lakes at all, as it seems like you have to go through them to get almost anywhere if you're not going by boat! 

In reply to galpinos:

Walls in London are more diverse than UK crags, but still not as diverse as the London population by some way - at least, so I think from a fairly regular eyeball (don't have actual stats). I used to climb regularly at Mile End, which is in a heavily British-Asian part of East London, but as soon as you got inside ME, there were a lot more white people than any other race. 

Though ME also deserve a shout-out for a lot of the charity out-reach work they do. I often used to train there in the day time and local schools were often using the facilities under organised supervision - which meant a lot of British Asian kids being introduced to the sport at a young age. Who knows how many will stick with it (climbing wall memberships aren't cheap, and lot of these kids will come from deprived backgrounds) but I always thought that as something ME did really well.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

It would be easier to debate the matter if we knew exactly what your reservations were. Your original post was just 3 sentences and since then you've been defending it rather than explaining it. 

"Much ado about nothing just about fits the bill."

Well, many feel it may be some ado about something.  

"if minority groups want to enjoy the national parks , in time they will make their way there without being... led by the nose."

You may of course be correct, but when? Shouldn't one analyse why there is a disparity and see if anything can be done to improve matters? The outdoors is good for people's mental health, and if some perceive there to be a barrier to their enjoyment of such, shouldn't one try to address the issue a bit deeper than just saying 'what are you afraid of'?  

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Funny isn't it. Was having a BBQ with Khalid on Saturday, and we were chatting about how incredibly white NLMC is. And then it dawned on both of us that he's our token ethnic minority. Which just goes to show how absurd in some ways the concept of race really is. I never thought of him as "BAME", just as "Khalid". Be nice if, as a society, we could one day get to the point where everybody is just who they are, and not their ethnicity. A long way off, I know, but that's got to be the goal. One way to get there: less siloing of people in their ethnic groups, and more people just being friends and acquaintances with people. One way to make friends and acquaintances...doing stuff outside with them.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Why would I post "knowing I'm in the wrong"?  Does that also apply to other posts where I'm often at variance with the UKC mindset?

Which posts are "bad"?

"All about me"  - is that referring to some anecdotal observations I made or my reaction to an unreasonable  assumption made about me

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I can think of at least one other member who might be saying "oi!"  

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I've answered you. If you don't like it, so be it. This is the end of my participation on this matter, it's a petty distraction from the article. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I didn't say i didn't like it. I asked for clarification.

Thanks for your input all the same.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

If you're thinking of who I am thinking of, he's not been around for quite some time - not sure why. There was somebody else, but she went back to living in America (actually, after a very unpleasant interaction in a pub in St David's where one of the locals proved that we have plenty of neanderthals still in our mix, sadly).

If you're talking about yourself - I had no idea you were mixed race. Probably because it never occurred to me to be something to pay much attention to. You're just "[redacted]"!

In reply to mick taylor:

Yes, someone already corrected me on that. Happy to concede the point. Nonetheless, this kind of Christian act of swearing in, and this nationalist swearing of duty to the Queen, is pretty off-putting for me. I honestly wouldn't want my kids to go. At the same time, I have volunteered with the scouts a few times, and I do know that they do things that really benefit a lot of kids. It's not a simple picture, for sure, and I should say, I wouldn't want to criticise anyone who gives up their time to help get kids out doing active things and enjoying themselves.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

How about letting kids enjoy themselves without having to promise anythign to Queen or country? I mean, it's not the 1950s...

In reply to mick taylor:

Ahead of the times indeed.  Having already been 'multi-faith' for many years they finally amended their oath to allow even atheists to join as early as [checks notes] 2013.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

OK Michael, thanks for taking the time to read my initial post. I will attempt to address each point.

1.) I reiterated the quotation "much ado about nothing", knowing that a lot thought there actually should be some "ado". I realised that from the outset but didn't see it as a reason not to express an opinion.  If the likes/dislikes are anything to go by on the first post it seems to have got fairly even numbers on either side.

2.)  You say "..if some perceive there to be a barrier".   The assumption seems to be that there must be a barrier otherwise they would  already be out there enjoying the hills. It ignores the possibility of there being other reasons.  As you say .."some perceive there to be a barrier"  and by implication that means some don't.

I don't see that not perceiving there to be a barrier is an indication of systemic racism on UKC   or individual racism on my part. 

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Good article. 

Why was the article given such an incendiary title??  

Incendiary:  "(of a device or attack) designed to cause fires."

Why wasn't the article called titled something like "The problem with a lack of encouragement and representation for ethnic minorities, irrespective of gender, and the impact that has on their use of the great Outdoors?"

The Author had to explain half way down the UKC article, "It might help to think of the problem as a lack of encouragement and representation rather than obstacles or barriers.", that the article wasn't actually making the case that there was any physical obstacles or barriers for ethnic minorities to accessing the Outdoors in the UK and instead was making the case for more encouragement and representation to help them level up.  (Am I right or I got that bit wrong?)   Having just watched the Country File segment ... and on the assumption that that too was the core message in that report ... is it possible that that is part of the reason why it received a hostile response online?

I assumed on seeing the UKC article headline, and reading the first half of the article, that it was making the case for why the country side is systemically racist and presumably sexist ...  but it appears that it was not making case for that.  (Am I right with that bit?)

For reference, the message I took from the Country File segment was that more must be done to encourage more ethnic minority groups, including black inner city groups, to experience and enjoy the Outdoors in their youth so that they grow up to feel welcome in this space and in turn pass that down onto their own children.  Did I get that right? (even a little bit right?)

Article title felt like goading and unnecessarily (gendered) to start an inevitable fight in the comments section when, what I understood it to be, the message in the article was pretty on point.  I think it detracted from the message.

Side note:  How does the article title affect page views?  Does it need to be incendiary to get people to read it?  

Keep writing Faraz.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

This is a well written and thoughtful piece, thank you. 

The great outdoors should be for everyone to enjoy, but the reality is that for many people there are barriers, both physical and perceived.  We need to recognise what these are, and work with marginalised groups to see how they can be overcome. This benefits individuals, and society, as people that are connected to nature are healthier, happier and more likely to care about the environment. Its a win-win for everyone as far as I can see. 

By identifying that ethnic minorities may be less likely to head to our national parks and wild spaces, we are not saying that other marginalised groups are less important, or that they don't face challenges.  Many projects that aim to improve participation for city dwellers and hard to reach groups, benefit individuals from a diverse range of backgrounds.  It is helpful though, to identfiy that some communties have specific barriers, and work to address these specifically.  There is a national conversation about systemic racism at the moment, and now is a good time to address how this may impact on particpation in outdoor pursuits.  

In reply to Ridge:

Have you never been to N. Wales? ( only joking), but when I was a kid living in a rough area of Stockport I could see the hills on the horizon, but couldn’t go because I had no money, but I developed a burning wish to get there. When old enough, we hitched everywhere, even the Alps and lived in the woods or bivvied in caves. I was never incentivised by anyone to go anywhere other than a personal desire. I wonder if Joe Brown living in a city centre deprived environment had to be told about the outdoors and shown how to visit?

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Obviously there is no physical barrier of any kind. As I think you may have alluded to upthread, something like access to transport would be more down to economic than social/cultural constraints. But surely, unless we accept the premise that there is a biological reason why a disproportionate number of whites than blacks visit rural areas, constraints there must be? 

But you haven't yet explained what your reservations are.

In reply to TobyA:

You're assuming people actually go somewhere...

Bit of a sweeping generalisation, but since moving here about 12 years ago we've been surprised at the number of otherwise normal people whose mental map of the county seems to consist of their home town surrounded by a blank expanse labelled 'Here be Monsters".

In reply to Philb1950:

It would be interesting to hear the equivalent story of a now-famous black British mountaineer about how he/she as a child saw snow covered hills in the distance and with zero knowledge, made the great step into the hills. Oh wait, there aren't any. Why? 

In reply to Lucy Wallace:

Of course there is inherent racism in our societies, and it must be addressed whereever society actively acts racist, e.g. in the differing attitudes during sentencing at court, racial profiling by the police, racist chanting at football matches....

The same applies if anyone tried to actively exclude minorities from enjoying the outdoors, e.g. if minority climbers were made unwelcome in a country pub because of their skin colour.

However, do we really need equality in our choice of hobbies, and should we therefore actively recruit minority climbers? Here in Germany certain other sports are very much dominated by minorities. From my own experience, e.g. Tae Kwon Do attracts lots of Turkish/German competitors, while Judo and wrestling seem to be much more appealing to immigrants from the former Soviet Union. And for a bizarre example, cricket: Yes my old uni had a team, but that was one Australian professor and 20 Indian and Pakistani postdocs and PhD students. Why should that be a problem?

I don't think equal representation in hobbies is a worthwhile aim at all, but that this choice falls squarely within the responsibility of individuals / parents*.

CB

* and I don't think that the money argument is valid either, or should I feel discriminated because yachting or polo never was an option for me?

In reply to Michael Gordon:

My only reservation is about the existence of any barrier, on which Faraz seems to agree with me. We only differ in the the remedy: I favour letting nature take its course and I get the impression that he would like some intervention to actively redress the balance.

In reply to cb294:

It's more about wider access to the countryside rather than specific hobbies.

We certainly shouldn't be forcing people to do jobs they don't want to do, or sports they hate, just to get the numbers up, but that really wasn't my interpretation of the article.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Just for the record, some anecdotal evidence of the countryside not being a welcoming place for ethnic minority people.

Two summers ago some friends and I were relaxing at a pub in St David's after climbing in north Pembroke. Man sidles over to our table, clearly a bit pissed. Stares at one of our party, who is Asian-American (i.e. her parents were from East Asia, she was born and raised in America). Man says to her: where are you from? Before she can answer, he replies "CHINA?" Then laughs, and sidles off. 

Now I felt disgusted by having to watch this. But can you imagine being on the receiving end of something like that? And if you were of, say, Indian, Caribbean, Chinese etc. descent, after experiencing something like that, might you not worry that every time you walked around a rural village the local whites, or at least some of them, were clocking you in the same kind of way, even if they kept it to themselves? Might you not, in turn, just feel more comfortable not travelling to those areas? Might you not feel like that even if you hadn't personally been racially taunted in a pub - but as the only non-white person in there, might have felt you could be? 

I think it's easy to say "only a few idiots are racist" if you're a white middle aged bloke. I think putting yourself in the shoes of somebody who isn't automatically accepted in e.g. a pub with no heads turning, makes it look rather different.

In reply to Ridge:

But what blocks access to the countryside? Britain is such a narrow island, you are nowhere more than about 100 km away from the seaside or a national park (I lived in Cambridge, probably the worst place for any kind of outdoor activity), there are buses and trains, almost anywhere has some area for outdoor activities in cycling distance, absolutely nothing stops people from going except their own lack of interest and motivation.

Why should these attitudes be our responsibility? How would either we as outdoor enthusiasts, or society overall, benefit from increased participation in outdoor activities? Any arguments about race aside, I doubt that we should encourage even larger crowds outdoors *.

Now, opening up shooting estates, establishing a right to roam, etc, are all extremely important issues. Walking on footpaths around Cambridge always had this concentration camp feeling, with  sections of path lined by barbed wire on either side. However, this is a much wider issue about which rights property ownership entails, the same that also makes renting in the UK much less attractive than in countries that benefited from the Code Napoleon, and is therefore unlikely to be resolved soon.

CB

* I am aware of the argument that outdoor activities supposedly increase the value we attach to nature, and that therefore increased outdoor activity leads to better protection of nature, but I don't buy that this would compensate for the increased damage by increased use. Back here in Germany the main issue is the expansion of ski resorts, which is in part driven by increased numbers of skiers, which is of course what the tourism business wants but directly endangers conservation efforts. We also experience massively increased conflicts of interest this summer already, e.g. between conservationists and mountain bikers, that can be directly attributed to increased domestic tourism due to CV19.

In reply to Lucy Wallace:

Agreed.  And whilst some (probably most) of these barriers are about economic disadvantage, the complicated impacts of poverty and the perception that the outdoors are for the white middle classes, which in turn may well be linked to racism etc., there are barriers linked with cultural attitudes *, religion ** etc.  And a problem with this debate and many others is that there can be a tendency to ignore some of this stuff for fear of being viewed as racist.

* & **  for example, strict dress codes which make some activities hard, oppression of women and sexism in certain communities/cultures.  So part of increasing diversity in the outdoors needs to include, for example, educating parents of BME young people to the advantages of outdoor stuff.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Global warming?

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I don't know why, but here's some idle musings:  The outdoors being used for recreation etc. is a recent thing (in historical terms).  People didn't even go to The Lakes until opium fuelled poets made it trendy. Rock climbing is relatively new, mountain biking even newer.  So things take time.  Also, and with very little evidence for saying this, my guess is that in the countries where many BME communities originate from, participation in outdoor stuff is very low.  Poverty will be a key factor, but not the only factor.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

On a completely unrelated note to the main jist of the thread, I'm going to log off for the day and go for a nice walk to Dovestones, which I'm lucky enough to live about three miles from.  I'm going to see how much the rain has affected the water levels, in particular through that tunnel that runs from Yeomans Hey to the main reservoir itself.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Possibly actually - I suppose personally I'm more likely to feel comfortable when there's absolutely no one around and there are a lot more places in Scotland where that happens. Access legislation does probably feed in subconsciously too, as you feel like you have a more certain right to go where you like, whereas there are more restrictions in England you have to keep in mind.

Wonder if that makes any difference to levels of participation... 

In reply to ThunderCat:

Out of  sheer nosiness, could you give me a hint about where you live by naming the nearest pub?

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Not quite the same, but maybe Dwayne Fields is now that figure? Probably a lot more famous amongst the general population than Joe Brown (who I hadn't heard of before this post!).

On his website he mentions how he missed nature adter moving to London, and set out to change that, which he has! http://www.dwayne-fields.com/dwaynes-story

In reply to AukWalk:

I suppose this day had to arrive......      

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I've just picked myself off the floor 😀

I'm with you on all this, let people discover the outdoors for themselves. Don't really agree with all this promotion, they're too busy as it is.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Hah just a bit before my time really, and I suppose while I dabble I haven't read too much mountaineering literature yet. Having googled him now it's nice to know there's a reason Joe Brown shops have their name! 

Walter Parry Haskett-Smith was before my time ...

In reply to AukWalk:

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I remember Rehan Siddiqui, ex BMC president being called a little black bastard, to which he replied “ you missed out rich little black bastard”. Touché. Another time going through customs in Geneva with Rehan, immigration pulled him and let me go unhindered. He never dwells on it though and continues on with his successful life.

In reply to AukWalk:

Good example! If you'd asked me who's more famous he's not the one I'd have picked given that I'd never heard of him and well, the other is Joe Brown...

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Thank you for articulating this point well, which I wouldn't have been able to do. It's amazing to me that many don't seem to be able to understand how there could be a problem with going into an area where you look different to everyone else. 

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I think a key factor is the people you describe may well have been to an area where they are a ‘minority’ and feel OK about it and therefore don’t see what the fuss is - because understanding the concept of power in terms of race is difficult for many to grasp.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Thanks. Here’s basically the same point but from personal experience. 

In 2008, I travelled on my own round the USA, which took me to Detroit. I there decided to take a bus from downtown to midtown to visit the Detroit Institute of Art. I realised as I got on the bus that I was literally the only white person (Detroit suffered one of the worst cases of white flight when the car industry collapsed; still suffers from some of the most severe poverty in America.) I felt incredibly self conscious - people were staring at me, after all, because seeing a white person on that bus was *weird* (white people drive to the DIA, from the suburbs, in their cars). Now I did not feel threatened (I felt perfectly safe). But I felt a powerful sense of being an object of curiosity *who did not belong there*. And it was not a nice feeling  

as a white Briton, this was of course an entirely new experience. But if BAME people in the UK feel anything like how I felt on that bus when they visit sleepy English villages - well I’m not surprised if they’re not hugely keen on the experience.  

In reply to Michael Gordon:I

Wales is problematical, to put it mildly. Apart from one incident in Paris it's the only place I've been abused and assaulted for being English.

Though I am surprised at the incident in St David's where the nationalism has always seemed to be lower key.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Another good example. In many US cities there are parts which have effectively become no go areas for whites. I imagine you'll find a similar thing in e.g. Chinatowns. 

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Assaulted for being English? Bloody hell...

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Interesting in a few ways:  you felt safe (because your probably were) and you felt like an object of curiosity - which you probably were not (they probably didn’t give two hoots). How we feel is very important though.  I remember over thirty years ago, catching buses in Brixton and feeling very much like the odd one out.  Some of these feelings we have is as much about how we perceive (often incorrectly) how people are viewing us.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

English people were very unpopular with a substantial faction of the North Wales community in the early seventies. Getting a kicking at a gathering  or having stones rained down on you at the crag  was actually pretty minor at the side of having your property firebombed.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

That night that we were " invited to leave" in the Padarn was early nineties wasn't it?

In reply to mick taylor:

Yep, exactly right. I’m sure most people on that bus had far more important things to worry about than some English kid stood at the front. But like you say, how one feels one is perceived is very important to how comfortable one is in a situation. And I’m sure a lot of BAME people feel uncomfortable in “white” areas just as I felt uncomfortable in the “black” part of Detroit. 

In reply to Michael Gordon:

A friend of mine who lives in the greater Miami conurbation reckons the existence of no-go areas in US cities is largely rubbish, and regularly takes the train and bus through a poor black area with his small daughter in tow. Personally I’d still take care but then I find America a bit sketchy generally. As for Chinatowns being no go areas, really? You sure? I’ve never felt that in the slightest myself.

In reply to seankenny:

OK I admit that may be a misapprehension based more on myth than reality.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Every Chinatown I've been to seems to be based on getting as many tourists in to the restaurants as possible. Generally they seem to be popular parts of cities for younger folk to head for reasonably priced tasty food and with some beers!

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Why are UKC supporters identified with a racist Black Power fist?

In reply to cragtyke:

 Kind of took the edge off the best day's climbing I'd ever had in Wales.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Royal George... 

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

For anyone interested in this topic, the Alpinist podcast episode 'The Adventure Gap: James Edward Mills' is worth a listen. It's available on their website and on iTunes.

In reply to Taylor's Landlord:

But how often does this actually happen? Climbing autobiographies are full of adventurous parents and dedicated teachers who made all the difference to the authors in opening the door that led to the mountains and crags. The climber I find doubly inspirational is the great Jack Longland, a passionate advocate and pioneer of outdoor education. Why shouldn't his vision be made a reality, and all kids be given the opportunity to experience the outdoors on residential trips? You don't have to look very far to see the pernicious effects of successive generations not placing any great value on the natural environment.

In reply to Andy Clarke:

^ This

With me it was the Scouts, (running dog lackies of racist fascist imperialism, apparently). I think the number of people who developed an interest in the outdoors purely by themselves and just head off to the hills on their own must be fairly small.

On an intellectual level I know you're right that we need to engage with young people and encourage an interest in the outdoors. On a personal level I can't help thinking it'll plant the seeds of "Hey, I can come back here with my mates and trash the place and no one can stop us, it'll be great!"

In reply to Ridge:

Ray Mears Used to do a bit on Country Tracks on BBC2 - He did some birch bark tricks once, and a wood I used to work on the edge of Worksop looked like it had been stripped naked by the next weekend! 

In reply to C Witter:

I understand your concerns regarding some aspects of the scouting tradition but, coming from a semi-rural community, having been a cub-scout, then a scout, then an army cadet (all during the 70's and early 80's) in my opinion these concerns represent a very small part of the reality of these movements. For the majority of people, involvement in these organisations has been and will continue to be a positive experience. They provide an opportunity to discover and participate in things that parents and schools would be unable to do and in so doing you get to appreciate the wider world. Maybe its time to update the scout promise  - 'to do my duty to society and planet Earth' perhaps? By the way, 3 of my friends (one black, 2 Asian) were also cub-scouts/scouts - It was never acknowledged or given any thought that we were in any way different - we were just kids having fun rock climbing, abseiling, canoeing, camping,etc.., and learning to understand, respect and appreciate the world around us.

In reply to JasonM:

Yes, I agree that they do a lot of good work; I'm sure there are variable experiences across different groups, too, with some really good activities happening in some groups. When I was a cub, as a kid, we certainly got in some good camping trips, amidst all the pseudo-army like drills and uniform checks. But, even then I was put off by the mixed "army" and "Churchy" feel of the whole thing. I think they're quite explicitly doing the ideological work of creating "good citizens" - i.e. encouraging kids to buy into the status quo. I do feel like the political right has colonised the space of outdoor education. Even bloody Bear Grylls is an ex-commando or somesuch. And we wonder why men looking like body building experiments gone wrong accost you on the PYG track asking: "Which way is the hardest way up Snowdon?"

In reply to Ridge:

I did try to articulate something a bit more nuanced. But, this is Baden Powell (himself a colonial solider) writing in his diary in 1939: "Lay up all day. Read Mein Kampf. A wonderful book, with good ideas on education, health, propaganda, organisation etc. – and ideals which Hitler does not practice himself."

The Scouts heritage website doesn't even acknowledge this, even though it still shapes their approach to youth education today.

In reply to C Witter:

I think if you read up on Baden Powell he clearly had that peculiar upper class mindset of the time, (physical exercise to prevent masturbation, boys should always wear shorts etc), and was quite probably a racist by modern standards, as were most of the population back then.

However, as other posters with more recent experience of scouting have noted, the organisation has evolved far beyond the attitudes of its founder. I'm not sure ever based it's ethos on Mein Kampf though.

I can see the issue with the promise still referring to the head of state, but I can see it moving away from that in the future, just has it has done by removing the requirement to have a religious faith (which no-one really bothered about anyway, even in the 1970s when I was a scout, or maybe that was just our local organisation).

By all means feel free to found your own ideologically pure youth organisation. There might be a gap in the market.

In reply to Ridge:

Then again, there might not.

https://woodcraft.org.uk/history

In reply to deepsoup:

“ Just after the First World War one of the leading figures in the Scouting movement broke away from what he considered to be its militaristic approach and formed the Kindred of the Kibbo Kift”

The KKK???

”The term 'Woodcraft' was used by the influential writer and naturalist Ernest Thompson Seton at the turn of the twentieth century when setting up the American proto-scouting organisation Woodcraft Indians..”

Cultural appropriation from Native Americans???

I daren't read any further!

In reply to Tom Valentine:

It's always interesting to see someone claim that another person's lived experiences are phoney. 

As a man of colour I feel it's important to represent the UK's diverse communities in outdoor spaces. You can't be what you can't see, and until we start having these conversations it will be difficult to get new faces outdoors.

Let's not forget, these areas are funded by the tax payer. If the tax payer (black and brown included) aren't using them, that money will need to be reviewed.

In reply to Removed UserPhilskills:

I'm not sure what you're saying. 

Did I make that claim?

Or did someone else claim that one of my personal observations/ lived experiences was phony/ unrepresentative?

In reply to Removed UserPhilskills:

That's not how taxation works...

In reply to Everyone:

We all have different types of unconcious privilege due to ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

It can be hard for us to appreciate how other people feel in situations that don't bother us and not notice where society is working in our favour.

I expect all of us harbour implicit, or unconcious, racism. That can be a troubling term, although it might be logically correct, as for most white people the idea of racism,  or being racist, conjures up ideas of actively and deliberately descriminating against and harming people. It makes people think of putting shit through letterboxes, hateful grafitti and National Front marches. We can, however, descriminate against other people without even noticing we've done it. They will probably notice it though.

'Whataboutism'. The article is about people from ethnic minorities visiting the countryside. What about white working class people? That is mentioned in the article but it isn't what the article is about. What about diesel cars in city centres? What about using bowlines at climbing walls? The article isn't about those things either, important issues as they may be to some.

I have some personal experience of feeling unwelcome in a National Park. For me, that's down to a personal decision to look a bit 'alternative' rather than to skin colour so it's on a different level of experience that I can step out of should I wish to, but it demonstrated to me the narrow mindedness that can exist. I clearly remember the look of plain hostility on the face of the woman who sold me a postcard in a newsagent/touristy stuff shop in Keswick. I was clearly on holiday. I was buying a postcard in a shop aimed at tourists (not walkers or climbers but the people who view Keswick as a sort of inland seaside town) in a town that runs on tourism and she hated me.

I was in the cubs, scouts and venture scouts. I clearly remember thinking that I was promising to do 'my' duty to God and the Queen and with no definition of what my duty was I decided it was whatever I felt it was. Be a republican and make her life easier by relieving her of her responsibilities and ridiculous state benefits?

By the way, here's what I just found when I googled the scout promise:

https://www.scout.org/promiseandlaw

The Scout Promise

On my honour I promise that I will do my best
To do my duty to God and the King (or to God and my Country)
To help other people at all times;
To obey the Scout Law.

Did she die when I wasn't looking?

Now I'm a Woodcraft Folk leader coz I couldn't send my kids off to make promises with their fingers crossed to gods and institutions I didn't believe in. Woodcraft Folk is cultural appropriation gone wild. I'm surprised we're not expected to wear eagle feathers and do that woo woo woo thing with our hands over our mouths but I question it and just don't do anything I don't approve of and don't get the kids to do it. Woodcraft Folk's facebook groups do have discussions about ditching bastardised Native American culture so I have some hope it will change. If it doesn't I think I'll change how I spend my Thursday evenings.

UKC Become a Supporter logo: Will that RP hold? 'Keep the Faith'

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles: OPINION: No Country for Brown (Wo)Men?
There is nothing stopping anyone from getting on a bus, train or in their car and coming to the Peak District, where I've had the pleasure of living for the last thirty-three years. 
Yep! There definitely are fewer black and Asian visitors, less than a handful of Chinese, but no mention of that ethnic minority. What is so obviously not stated is that there are probably equal numbers of white, inner-city, social housing residents. I ran a pub at Edale for about six years, and the same demographic, from all parts of the country appear. We had ethnic groups, we had stag groups, but mostly middle aged, middle class, professionals, and retired people. With the exception of a few folk from Manchester and Sheffield for whom we are but a cheap, single train ride away. I spoke to some black students a couple of years ago, studying at Derby University's Buxton Campus and they pointed out it is far friendlier than the cities they come from.
Also, there are now far more ethnic minorities than when I ran my pub, we have loads visit Buxton, so many, that no-one takes any notice of them, but they are not uncommon, they do tend to be middle-class, car owning professionals, because those are the people that can afford the kit to go walking for a day in changeable weather. 

Therefore, I would suggest it is not a problem of racism, latent racism, white privilege, or any other divisive Marxist buzz word, but one of economy. I have far more in common with a service worker of any race, colour, gender, sex etc. than I do with doctor, dentist, solicitor, lecturer ad infinitum.
Ethnic minority visitors will grow steadily in number through a process of evolution as their adventurous friends tell them about it than being dragged out because some 'woke' white statistician says there 'should be 10%' to fit the narrative.
There are thousands just a forty five minute bus ride from Sheffield, a thirty or so minute train ride and about an hour from Manchester.
Here's a plan. Stop charging for car parks, reduce public transport fares, drop beer prices and remove the exorbitant VAT from pubs and cafés and voila! Covid 19 woe will largely diminish. Community pubs and shops will flourish and the poorer end of society, will flock to enjoy the countryside without having to save up for six weeks to feed and transport a family of five.
For a one night stay train from Manchester to Edale £41.65 (Assuming all are under 15 years or adult fares apply). One night at the Rambler Inn £120 (for a double plus single bed room) and £100 for a twin room, with breakfasts. Assuming they take sandwiches on the first day, stop for coffee and cake (about £25) Evening meals between £50 and £75 depending on the ages of the children and what they eat. Coffee and cake on the Sunday £25 train fare home £42.70 That comes to £429.35 (Assuming evening meals and drinks are £75) There lies the problem of why inner city visitors, black/white or Asian are few and far between. (It's still £209.35 if you don't stay over) And that's if you just drag them around the hills all day, and don't pay £49 to visit a hole in the ground (Blue John Cavern prices.) or £66 to visit Chatsworth House and gardens.
If you spend your week slogging away on minimum pay, with kids on swimming lessons, scout or similar subs or a martial arts class, children that demand wearing shoes and clothes, rent/mortgage etc. most simply cannot afford it.

Also, if you plan ahead, there is a very good chance you will get cold and wet, so add to the day travel costs, all the waterproofs, warm clothing, boots, maps, compass, water bottles etc. and probably double or treble the café/pub costs. (If you have children, you will understand why.)

So stop playing leftist politics and get on a bus, then tell your friends, and those that come will tell their friends and soon all those that want to come will come. It is not a race issue.

In reply to OrangeBob: Maybe you just assume the lady hated you, because that is what you expect of rural small business owners. I bet all she saw was a small spender, you should have bought more, she would have liked you more. She's there to take your money, a 50p post card isn't going to pay her business rates. It will have little to do with your look no matter how 'alternative' you think it is. No one cares any more, I'm sixty, and there is an assumption of how I, as an old, white male will react to certain situations. But remember, were were the end of the the mods and rockers, hippies, glam rock, punk rock, new romantics, heavy metal, soul we've seen it all in all colours along with lots of other fringe groups. We've heard the National Front spout their crap and the Socialist Worker Party spout their crap. They outliers of today are insignificant to us. We don't tend to notice you, or anyone else. Tourist traps just want your money, nothing else.

In reply to OrangeBob:

I do wish folk would stop using the word 'privileged' as though we should feel bad about being in a majority group. I'm trying to think of a less loaded term. Relatively fortunate, perhaps.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Baseline

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Thank you for this thought-provoking and factual article. I recall a few years ago encouraging a friend to come out to the countryside, but she sadly told me of being ignored when attempting to get served in shops and restaurants. I'd hoped times had changed.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

There is no need to feel bad about 'privilege' at all, only to be aware that it exists.  'White privilege' is only one specific type of privilege, the trouble with saying "fortunate" is that it's a general term.

As the people on here who keep misunderstanding what 'white privilege' means (or pretending to reason of their own) keep pointing out, you may live in the UK, have 'white privilege' and yet be much less "relatively fortunate" than a black person.  Perhaps because they have, and you lack, 'wealthy-parent privilege', 'went-to-a-good-school' privilege, whatever.

Also, "fortunate" suggests a process of dumb luck.  Again there's no need to feel guilty, it was well before we were born, but 'white privilege' did not arise out of sheer luck, it was made that way.

In reply to Ronwild:

"Based on what I'm imagining right now, I think you will find your memory of your own lived experience is actually wrong."  Jesus.  And you say OrangeBob is making assumptions!

In reply to Ronwild:

Lots of fair points but essentially a Marxist analysis, so maybe don't use "Marxist" as a buzz word if you don't know what Marx actually wrote!

In reply to deepsoup:

Well I don't feel privileged to be white in a mainly white society, but I do sometimes feel fortunate. Privilege should be something applied to the few, not the majority.

In reply to deepsoup:

I would suggest that where, when, what colour and gender we are born as etc, is pure luck. We cannot engineer it, we just have to accept it.  

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Indeed.  What has been engineered, historically, is that how, when, what colour and gender we are born etc. makes a difference.

In reply to deepsoup:

That's more imagination then. Not a valid argument by any means.

In reply to TobyA: Wanting fair prices and fair wages is hardly a Marxist outlook. 
It would appear that one has to be Far Left or Far Right these days. How about just centre ground fairness?

In reply to TobyA:

 Stuff like “Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others” wasn't it?

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I was out today around edale and i was pleasantly surprised by the high number of bame walkers on the edges. I think things are changing slowly and perhaps there has been a lockdown effect.

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

So attempting to address issues of racial inequality makes someone a Marxist playing leftist politics but suggesting ways to alleviate the economic difficulties the low paid working classes have in enjoying the same leisure persuits as the bourgeoisie is just centre ground fairness...

​​​​

In reply to Ronwild:

Sorry, no, if you're anything from leftish democratic socialist to moderate/sane conservative these days you're a 'Centrist' and must be shunned/condemned/burnt at the stake. 🙁

In reply to Bob Kemp:

Or worse, ignored.

In reply to Ronwild:

AK's podcast is worth a listen: https://twitter.com/psychovertical/status/1281850219987075073

he seems to be on the same page as you (i think...