”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.
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:
> 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!
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).
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."
"But it's also not racism because racism (or sexism) requires both power and privilege."
a) Not according to the dictionary or Wikipedia or common usage, it doesn't.
b) Even if you don't use the word "racism" to describe it, it's still creating a hostile and unwelcoming environment, which one would have thought was opposed to the goal of this Code of Conduct.
> "One view holds that racism is best understood as 'prejudice plus power' because without the support of political or economic power, prejudice would not be able to manifest as a pervasive cultural, institutional or social phenomenon."
The word you're looking for is discrimination, which is also what the link I added for more information calls it.
The point of that part of the CoC is that all environments do not have to be welcome to all, specifically that environments that are safe spaces for a marginalized group do not have to also be a safe space for the dominant group.
"The point of that part of the CoC is that all environments do not have to be welcome to all, specifically that environments that are safe spaces for a marginalized group do not have to also be a safe space for the dominant group."
Now we're getting somewhere. So you've explicitly stated that Github should not be a "safe space" for the "dominant group," presumably white, male, et cetera. At least we've got that out in the open for the next time someone insists that these codes of conduct are simply about having a friendly and welcoming environment and aren't going to enable discrimination or harassment.
I don't think that part of the CoC makes harassment OK.
Furthermore, there's this part:
> "We will not tolerate discrimination based on any of the protected characteristics above [which includes race], including participants with disabilities."
I don't know how that maps to participation on GitHub. I will say that as a cis white man I am absolutely OK if a marginalized group wants to exclude me for their own comfort or safety. This can already be done just by using private repositories, for example, and I don't think it's controversial.
For public repositories I'm not sure what discrimination looks like. Certainly before this CoC no one had the right to force someone else to accept a pull request, right? The CoC makes it explicit that if you complain that you're excluded because of reverse racism your complaint will not be acted upon, though, which I don't see an issue with. It's a way to protect marginalized groups from spurious complaints by a dominant group.
If anyone who feels unsafe if they can't exclude some group is able to make a private repository, today, and you can't even picture what discrimination looks like on Github other than that... then what specific problem is it that we're actually solving here with this CoC? Sounds like an incredibly safe space for everyone already.
> The point of that part of the CoC is that all environments do not have to be welcome to all
So if I have a store that says "Whites only", that's OK now then? How progressive.
I don't care if someone labels it as a safe space or pull out the "but minorities" card, if you deny someone because of the color of their skin, it's racist; if you deny someone because of their gender, it's sexist. And I don't even care that that happens either - it's the double standards and avoidance and doublespeak and whatnot that bugs me. At least admit that you're racist/sexist and stick with it. Say you're in favor of equality, or that you want to give minorities a leg-up - not the wishy-washy safe spaces thing that is basically a politically correct way to say 'no whites/men'.
I can't think of a public space like GitHub where trans people have more power/privilege than cis people, where women have more power/privilege than men, or where Black people have more power/privilege than White people.
I don't see a problem if complaint responses take into account the geographical context of the complainant if there are different power structures at work there (though you may be hard-pressed to find such a place).
"Your pull request has been denied / your opinion is invalid because you are white / male / cis / straight"
The CoC's part on "We will not act on complaints regarding" is basically stating that complaints about a statement like that - which is blatantly racist/sexist/etcist - will not be acted upon. Which is wrong.
Just to clarify, I didn't say that I couldn't think of examples of specific people with power/privilege, I said that I couldn't think of examples of public spaces similar to GitHub where current power structures are inverted.
I'm not assuming that it's impossible for women to have power. I am listening to women who say that they feel unsafe when contributing to open source because of the power imbalance that exists (which this CoC seeks to help rectify).
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.