
Open Code of Conduct - jp_sc
http://todogroup.org/opencodeofconduct#definitions
======
jp_sc
”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’”

I'm really afraid and disgusted of this ignorant and provincial view of the
world spreading over people I tought were rational.

Reverse racism does not exists. It is just racism.

~~~
beaugunderson
You're half right: reverse racism doesn't exist. But it's also not racism
because racism (or sexism) requires both power and privilege.

I think including this in the CoC is great because it means, for example, that
women using GitHub to build a website for women won't be subject to sanctions
if a man complains of reverse sexism because a pull request they made wasn't
merged.

For more information on why reverse racism doesn't exist try this:

[http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-
there-s...](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-there-s-no-
such-thing-as-Reverse-Racism)

~~~
tzs
> But it's also not racism because racism (or sexism) requires both power and
> privilege

There are plenty of people who are not black but lack power and/or privilege.
Are you saying it is not racism if one of those people hates black people?

Heck...by your definition, half the losers that post in /r/coontown are not
racist!

~~~
beaugunderson
Did you read the post I linked to? In the U.S. power and privilege are
institutionalized, meaning that White people don't have to be well-off to
enjoy some privilege (though sure, being both well-off and White provides more
privilege).

~~~
tzs
Yes, I read it. He's misusing the word racism as defined in several
dictionaries. See the Wikipedia article on "racism" for examples. (Yes, I saw
your comment in Wikipedia elsewhere, where you quoted a definition from
it...read farther in the Wikipedia article, as there are several other in that
same article that disagree with the one you cite, including ones from three
dictionaries).

The article in the post you linked seems to be wanting to use "racism" where
he means "institutional racism".

I also saw your other comment where you suggested "discrimination" is the word
another poster meant when they said "racism". That doesn't work because
according to the article you linked, discrimination requires action. Someone
just offering race based theories of superiority and inferiority or raced
based theories of behavior is not discriminating if they are not putting those
theories into practice to do things like make hiring decisions.

In the context of codes of conduct, individual racism is what's relevant.

Here's a good example of a black person writing racist material, according to
most definitions:

    
    
        That in the evolution of the species, in what some
        people call the Ontogenetic evolution of humankind,
        that in the evolution of the species the human
        family separated in a sense that one branch of the
        family stopped its evolutionary path and simply
        depended upon the central nervous system as the
        total machinery for understanding reality. Whereas,
        the root of the family continued its path and not
        only evolved a central nervous system but developed
        what I called at that time an essential melanic
        system. And that I even went so far as to try to
        develop a little formula and suggested that CNS +
        EMS = HB. CNS (Central Nervous System) + EMS
        (Essential Melanic System) = HB (Human Being). That
        the central nervous system combined with the
        essential melanic system is what makes you human.
        That, in fact, to be human is to be Black.
    
    

That's from Dr. Wade Nobles, Professor Emeritus of African American studies at
San Francisco State University, in his book "Seeking the Sakhu: Foundational
Writings for an African Psychology". He was a leader in the melanin movement,
a group of people who believe a pseudoscientific thing often called "Melanin
Theory" that attributes various amazing, sometimes magical, properties to
melanin. It's big in Black Supremacist circles. Here's a good look at it from
the Skeptical Inquirer [1].

Some of the awesomeness of melanin can be seen in this quote from Carol
Barnes' "Melanin: The Chemical Key to Black Greatness":

    
    
        Melanin is responsible for the existence of
        civilization, philosophy, religion, truth, justice,
        and righteousness. Individuals (whites) containing
        low levels of Melanin will behave in a barbaric
        manner.  Melanin gives humans the ability to FEEL
        because it is the absorber of all frequencies of
        energy. Since whites have the least amount of
        Melanin, this is why they are perceived by People of
        Color as generally being rigid, unfeeling
        (heartless), cold, calculating, mental, and
        "unspiritual."
    
    

[1]
[http://www.csicop.org/si/show/magic_melanin_spreading_scient...](http://www.csicop.org/si/show/magic_melanin_spreading_scientific_illiteracy_among_minorities/)

[2] [http://www.amazon.com/Melanin-Chemical-Black-Greatness-
Serie...](http://www.amazon.com/Melanin-Chemical-Black-Greatness-
Series/dp/1930097352)

------
wtbob
> Deliberate misgendering. This includes deadnaming or persistently using a
> pronoun that does not correctly reflect a person’s gender identity.

Ummm, wouldn't 'misgendering' be using a pronoun which disagrees with
someone's actual gender, as opposed to self-perceived gender?

Is it 'mistitling' to refer to someone who thinks that he's Napoleon Bonaparte
as 'him' rather than 'his Imperial and Royal Majesty'?

> 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’

So, the SCUM Manifesto would be welcome? Seems unwise to me.

~~~
rabbyte
The code of conduct seems to agree with the stance that all gender is self-
perceived. The idea can easily be reduced to: respect people enough to address
them the way they want to be addressed.

~~~
wtbob
> The code of conduct seems to agree with the stance that all gender is self-
> perceived.

A man who thinks he's a woman…is still a man; a woman who thinks she's a
man…is still a woman. One's gender is a fact of nature; it's an issue of
objective reality, not of subjective experience.

Why, just a bit ago there was an article here on HN noting that teenagers
suffering from gender dysphoria have hormone levels appropriate to their
actual, not perceived, sexes.

> The idea can easily be reduced to: respect people enough to address them the
> way they want to be addressed.

Oh sure, I'll address anyone as he wishes to be addressed. But the English,
German and French first-person pronouns are all ungendered, and it's simply
wrong to talk _about_ someone with the incorrect pronouns.

I'd probably address the man who thinks he's Napoleon 'your Imperial and Royal
Majesty,' in order to avoid causing further mental distress, but when speaking
to others about him I'd refer simply use 'him.' Words mean things, and if
one's neither Charles Marie Jérôme Victor Napoléon nor Jean Christophe Louis
Ferdinand Albéric Napoléon, one doesn't fulfil the requirements of the title
of the Bonapartist emperor.

I suppose one could argue that since online communication tends to be public,
and thus the subject of a conversation could happen upon it, it's better to
avoid further disturbing someone by continuing to humour him even in the third
person, but it seems pretty extreme to _require_ that.

~~~
rabbyte
I disagree but I understand. I have family that feels similar about me.

------
msoad
Honest question, what is reverse racism? If I act racist against the dominate
race? That's racism again, no? I'm minority myself so I could potentially do
that and in my own internal moral system it feels wrong.

~~~
vernie
I'd wager that the authors of this code of conduct subscribe to the "prejudice
plus power" definition of racism.

~~~
dragonwriter
Of course, there is an argument that, accepting the "prejudice plus power"
definition, operating in a context in which preference is given to the
concerns of a class that is less powerful in other contexts creates a context
in which that group is empowered over the group that is more powerful in other
context, converting -- by the "prejudice plus power" definition -- what would
be "reverse racism" in other context to simply "racism" in that context (and,
of course, _vice versa_.)

------
crusso
_Although this list cannot be exhaustive, we explicitly honor diversity in
age, gender, [...] and technical ability. We will not tolerate discrimination
based on any of the protected characteristics above, including participants
with disabilities._

What does not discriminating based upon technical ability look like? Random
assignment of tasks without regard to whether or not someone can do them or do
them well?

------
dudul
GitHub is trying really hard to get SJWs on their side (this CoC, the "retard"
case, etc). They have a terrible reputation in regards to sexism and lack of
diversity (see the Horvath scandal).

What's funny is that, this kind of PR never works. SJWs are very pissed off by
the Open Code of Conduct move, they've been working for years on designing CoC
(instead of, you know, writing actual code) and they see that as "culture
appropriation" or whatever buzzy word. So in the end, they're just gonna
alienate the ones that are fed up with this PC trend, while not convincing
anyone to come back.

------
snowpanda
Sounds like the "Two Wrongs Make a Right" Fallacy.

 _Person 1 did X(Racism) to person 2._

 _Therefore, Person 2 is justified to do X(Reversed Racism) to person 1._

And of course the blatant generalization, considering not everyone behaved
like person 1.

------
nickysielicki
What is 'reverse' sexism or racism? Isn't that just sexism and racism? Whether
you're oppressed or not has nothing to do with how the culture generally
treats you. If you're being oppressed you're being oppressed in a single
scenario/instance. There do exist general trends on who is oppressed and who
is oppressing, and those are worth talking about and being aware of, but I
wouldn't ever go as far to say that the existence of trends justifies marking
any complaint that doesn't follow those trends as invalid.

Am I taking crazy pills?

------
redml
Let's tell everyone how to think and how to act instead of actually
contributing something of actual use (like code) to the open source community.

This certainly won't backfire whatsoever.

------
dudul
"Physical contact and simulated physical contact (eg, textual descriptions
like “hug” or “backrub”) without consent or after a request to stop"

Hahaha. I mean, this is the world we live in now?

I've always been puzzled by the concept of "reverse racism". As far as I can
remember I've only heard this term in America (I've lived in 4 different
countries before). I've always found that it was a perfect illustration of
doublethink. I mean, people realize that "reverse racism" is actually racism
right?

~~~
Cthulhu_
There have been quite a few instances where that kind of behaviour has
occurred - although mostly in chat and such. There's instances it on Reddit's
/r/cringe and the like. It probably doesn't happen much on Github since that's
more business-like than a more colloquial environment like chat or dating
sites or comment threads, but still.

Also apparently not; if you see above, racism is explained not as 'judging by
race', but something involving privilege and whatnot. Which is... very hard to
judge.

------
otterley
This is the text of the Open Code of Conduct.

GitHub explains their adoption of it here:
[https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-
condu...](https://github.com/blog/2039-adopting-the-open-code-of-conduct)

~~~
veeti
You are missing the context: the document has been modified since to add new
policies for "reverse-isms".

------
jp_sc
[https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206](https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/8206)

------
jackweirdy
The general response to this is interesting in the context that American white
people, but not black people,

a) view racism as a zero-sum game

b) think anti-white bias is now more prevalent than anti-minority bias

[PDF]
[http://ase.tufts.edu/psychology/sommerslab/documents/raceint...](http://ase.tufts.edu/psychology/sommerslab/documents/raceinternortonsommers2011.pdf)

------
jay_kyburz
As rules for some community, fine, it's your community, whatever.

But in the workplace or the community at large, "Unwelcome comments"about the
abuse if your children or drug use are important.

It has to be ok to tell somebody something they don't want to hear.

------
cperciva
I'm not sure exactly what they mean by "reverse racism". The obvious opposite
of discriminating based on race is treating people equally without regard for
their race.

If by "reverse racism" they mean "discriminating against members of racial
groups which are usually not the victims of racism"... well, I really hope
they've talked to their lawyers about that. In Canada a company which
announced that they would protect or not protect their customers from racism
based on their race would be up against the human rights commission in an
instant.

~~~
onewaystreet
The policies on "reverse racism" and "reverse sexism" are mostly to stop
arguments that many consider to be trolling. Some people make the argument
that initiatives like
[http://www.blackgirlscode.com](http://www.blackgirlscode.com) and
[http://www.pyladies.com](http://www.pyladies.com) are racist and sexist
because they exclude whites/men. GitHub is not interested in having that
debate.

~~~
cperciva
Thanks for the background. In Canada the laws against discrimination exempt
"programs designed to ameliorate the conditions of disadvantaged individuals
or groups", so initiatives like those you mention would be perfectly
acceptable; but discrimination in other contexts (say, out of simple bigotry,
without having an ameliorative intent) is still covered.

------
alexqgb
Their reasoning seems pretty clear "Our open source community prioritizes
marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort."

It's worth noting that "privilege" comes from the Latin for "private law",
which is to say a law that established a code of conduct for one class that
was not applied to another. Typically, this took the form of exempting some
people from the laws that bound everyone else.

In other words, the life under conditions of privilege was far freer and and
more forgiving than it was for everyone else. The result was a set of
advantages that made it easy for those with privilege to maintain it, and
difficult for those without privilege to acquire it.

What's remarkable about this document is the way it illuminates the
extraordinary number and range of ways in which privilege - and its attendant
social ordering functions - can express itself. In other words, simply
countering it, to say nothing of dismantling it, is a non-trivial task.

Understanding privilege in this way also makes it easy to see why the very
concept of "reverse racism" is so ridiculous. In essence, it's based on a
profound misunderstanding of what racism is in the first place. It is not
simply a matter of treating different people differently. It is about
embedding race in a system of privilege, which is something you cannot do
unless you have privilege in the first place (obviously, allowing those
without privilege to define its benefits would defeat the whole purpose). In
other words, racism is about propagating a deeply established social hierarchy
of dominance and submission that is based on race. To the extent that "reverse
racism" seeks to limit the power of these structures, it's a good thing. In
any case, the problem is the continued existence of the unjust power
structure, and not the fact that people pay attention to who does and does not
receive its protection.

In Western countries, privilege has generally meant straight, white, men, from
well-off backgrounds making life much easier for each other while making it
much more difficult for everyone else. Sure, there are exceptions. But they're
few and far between, with their scarcity only serving to underscore the
general rule. And while plenty of individuals who are a part of this class may
find the structure distasteful, that's had limited effect on the structure
itself, which remains largely dominant to this day.

In any case, it's not going to dismantle itself, so it's up to the people who
do want to do something about it to actually _do_ something about it. Saying
"we're not going to defend it, and given a choice, we're going to rule against
it" is a good example.

That may be very unsettling for some people, but understand this: if you're
getting grief the problem is probably not that you're a straight, white guy.
More likely, the problem is that you're treating other people like garbage in
more ways than you can even imagine, and doing so habitually because your
privilege allows you to get away with it.

And yes, a place that explicitly says "your privilege is not respected here"
can be a tricky one for some people to navigate. If you're not much of a jerk
to begin with, it isn't a big deal. But if you're a deep-fried, hard-boiled
asshole who cannot even _imagine_ how to treat others with a suitable measure
of civility and respect, yes, you're going to suffer.

~~~
cperciva
_It 's worth noting that "privilege" comes from the Latin for "private law",
which is to say a law that established a code of conduct for one class that
was not applied to another. Typically, this took the form of exempting some
people from the laws that bound everyone else._

Sounds to me like "it's wrong for you to discriminate on the basis of race,
but it's fine when I do it" fits perfectly into the definition of privilege
here.

~~~
alexqgb
It's only wrong if you strip it of all context. In the real world, which is
defined by deep and ancient legacies, things are very different.

In in America circa 2015, where the status quo is inherently wrong and racist,
it's wrong to consider race when doing so propagates the status quo. At the
same time, it _is_ right to consider race when seeking to frustrate or
dismantle the status quo. Both judgements rest on the same principle, which is
that the status quo is inherently wrong and racist.

So you see? There's no double standard. Of course, if you can't already see
the injustice built into the status quo, then efforts to counter it are going
to appear baseless and suspect. But given all the evidence to the contrary,
that would take a pretty extraordinary act of willful blindness.

------
exstudent2
This is news because there have been recent changes to this document since
Github adopted it. Here's the commit that included them:
[https://archive.is/WndkY](https://archive.is/WndkY)

I find this introduces needless politics where they don't belong. I also don't
subscribe to the idea that sexism and racism can only happen if the victim is
of the correct gender or race. For those reasons, I've closed my private repos
and no longer financially support Github.

~~~
comrh
Don't forget to uninstall Python.

~~~
tzs
The stuff he objects to is not in the Python Community Code of Conduct.

------
x5n1
stupid for providers to get involved in this. this is job of the law, not the
corporations.

~~~
comrh
Have you ever been a part of a group and said "hey lets lay down some ground
rules" for people's conduct? Maybe you would want to even go further then the
law to help enable a friendly environment.

~~~
x5n1
Also it's not just "friendly". If you made some rules, now people can bring
those rules to bear upon other people and get them ridiculed and shunned for
not following them in addition to any steps the provider might actually take.
It's just more bullshit to worry about for no reason.

~~~
comrh
Ridiculed and shunned for not doing things like "Be considerate" and stopping
"Unwelcome sexual attention, including gratuitous or off-topic sexual images
or behaviour". The only thing you have to worry about is not being a jerk
though. Are you angry you can't do those things anymore?

~~~
x5n1
I feel that you're harassing me and I think I should report you to the mods as
well as write a post calling you out for your baseless ad-hominem attacks and
libel. You should immediately be banned from this site!

Open CoC fired!

