Terminology in ecology and evolutionary biology disproportionately harms marginalized groups

The discipline of ecology and evolutionary biology (EEB) has long grappled
with issues of inclusivity and representation, particularly for
individuals with systematically excluded and marginalized backgrounds or
identities. For example, significant representation disparities still
persist that disproportionately affect women and gender minorities; Black,
Indigenous, and People of Color; individuals with disabilities; and people
who are LGBTQIA+. Recent calls for action have urged the EEB community to
directly address issues of representation, inclusion, justice, and equity.
One aspect of this endeavor is to examine the use of EEB’s
discipline-specific language and terminology, which may have the potential
to perpetuate unjust systems and isolate marginalized groups. Through a
mixed-methods survey, we examined how members of the EEB community
perceive discipline-specific terminology, including how they believe it
can be harmful and which terms they identified as problematic. Of the 795
survey respondents, we found that almost half agreed that there are
harmful terms in EEB, and that many individuals from marginalized groups
responded that they have been harmed by such terminology. Most of the
terms identified as harmful relate to race, ethnicity, and immigration;
sex and gender; geopolitical hierarchies; and historical violence. Our
findings suggest there is an urgent need for EEB to confront and
critically reassess its discipline-specific terminology. By identifying
harmful terms and their impacts, our study represents a crucial first step
toward dismantling deeply rooted exclusionary structures in EEB. We
encourage individuals, communities, and institutions to use these findings
to reevaluate language used in disciplinary research, teaching and
mentoring, manuscripts, and professional societies. Rectifying current
harms in EEB will help promote a more just and inclusive discipline.