321–330 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "this is not work for white folks to lead", i.e. she doesn't want white allies Not wanting to be an ally unless you're allowed to be in charge is a pretty perfect illustration of why the slide exists.
It's a department at a company. You're not allowed to say that 'people of ethnicity X will never be given a leadership position'. That's blatant racism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if you even need to see the whole presentation. A few of the full sentences on that one slide are more than enough to project a strong us vs them attitude of hatred and victim versus oppressor, especially the following bullets: - "This is not work for white folks to lead" - "Some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women" - "we need solidarity with our Asian friends and colleagues" This is blat…
It's actually written into GitHub's Open Code of conduct. (The 'Open' Code has not accepted any changes for quite some time even though this particular issue was under discussion [1].) The Open Code expressly excuses discrimination against some races and genders, specifically by explicitly ignoring any critique which might fall under a 'reverse'-ism; 'reverse-racism' or 'reverse-sexism' [2]. This line in the Open Cod…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your use of "only" is undeservedly generous of the attitude reflected on that slide. Furthermore, the slide actually doesn't even really address gender as a reason to disqualify someone, just race. They aren't talking about having a diverse group of people, including white males and females, leading diversity. Instead that slide near as I can tell communicates a policy of excluding white people. Furthermore, I don't…
What about experience? If nothing else (and there is else), it's reasonable to think that someone from a group which has been discriminated against may have more insight about battling systemic discrimination and racism (i.e. diversity hiring) than someone from a more privileged background (privileged in the sense of being from a majority group which was not the subject of systemic discrimination). Note that, like fo…
An equally absurd corollary to "those that have experienced discrimination have unique insight into preventing discrimination" is "those that have experienced privilege have unique insight into privilege and how to dismantle it".
Just because you're on one side or the other doesn't make you more qualified by experience. We need people with understanding of both sides of the coin. In other words, we need diversity with respect to experiencing privilege and discrimination to understand what is happening and how to address it. When you don't have people on the other side of the coin, racist attitudes like the ones reflected in that slide proliferate.
Being white doesn't disqualify you from having experience being discriminated either. There are gay, lesbian and transgender white men, women and other gender identities. Head over to The Advocate and read some essays/blog posts from gay white males.
Furthermore, discriminating white people and men from this sphere of work (or any other) gives them some similar experiences and insight into discrimination.
Bring on the suits! While GH is busy distracting their world-class engineers with B.S. reverse-racism meetings, they will successfully free up their equity pool for more suit hires. That should suck the life out real quick... Goodbye revolutionary, forward-thinking work culture & hierarchy (meritocracy). You will be gravely missed. Good luck hiring sub-par engineers for the next 2 years and watching your data centers…
Well, what are the alternatives? Hosted: Bitbucket, GitLab Self-hosted: GitLab, Gogs None of these come close to GitHub in my experience.
Destroying company culture takes some time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but the publishing industry is 79% white and 78% female The US is 77.7% of the US population. I hardly think that a 2% imbalance is an issue to create divisiveness over. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_State...
"The US is 77.7% of the US population" I think you mean 77.7% white? It should be noted that the census counts North African and Middle Eastern as white, which is inaccurate. That number also drops to 62.6% when you take out Hispanics that describe themselves as white. So it's probably more like a 20 point difference than 2.
She certainly doesn't say "only white" and she explicitly excludes white women ("some of the biggest barriers to progress"). You can make convoluted excuses for her, but it's obvious that she sees white people (of whatever gender or socioeconomic status) as essentially enemies, and doesn't want them as allies (let alone is willing to accept some of them as people with different, but valid opinions). It's not acceptab…
Those conclusions exceed that evidence. This subthread went haywire as a result, so we detached it from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11049513 and marked it off-topic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually written into GitHub's Open Code of conduct. (The 'Open' Code has not accepted any changes for quite some time even though this particular issue was under discussion [1].) The Open Code expressly excuses discrimination against some races and genders, specifically by explicitly ignoring any critique which might fall under a 'reverse'-ism; 'reverse-racism' or 'reverse-sexism' [2]. This line in the Open Cod…
I wasn't aware of this history. One thing to note is the sentence that precedes 'reverse'-ism: >Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding: > ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’ Coded language for sanctioned discrimination.
Related reading:
Tact Filter: http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html
Ozark English: http://ozarque.livejournal.com/176349.html
When Nerds Collide: https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually written into GitHub's Open Code of conduct. (The 'Open' Code has not accepted any changes for quite some time even though this particular issue was under discussion [1].) The Open Code expressly excuses discrimination against some races and genders, specifically by explicitly ignoring any critique which might fall under a 'reverse'-ism; 'reverse-racism' or 'reverse-sexism' [2]. This line in the Open Cod…
Reverse racism is a myth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a young white male with no money, no job and bad health. Can I please have some of this mysterious magic power I am supposed to have?
You're setting up a straw man here. No one talking about white privilege says it means white people can't ever have a tough life. Just as being black doesn't mean you can't ever be successful. It's simply argued that if all other things were equal, chances are you'd have it harder as a minority. As an example: http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html > a white name yields as many more [job] callbacks as an additio…
harder as a minority.