I was actually a presenter at one of these before. They used App Inventor http://appinventor.mit.edu/explore/ It's actually a good experience for the girls if you plan for it in advance and have at least some knowledge of app-Inventor (I assume they almost always use that).
"Black Girls CODE is an international non-profit organization with local chapters in San Francisco, Memphis, Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, and New York. They teach girls of color (ages 7-17) to become the masters of their technological futures by teaching them classes in game design, web development, robotics and more!"
Why not teach all girls or call it, 'Impoverished Girls Code?'
How is calling this racism a dilution of the word. The name clearly suggests that it is treating black people differently from non-black people. The fact that the word "racism" has been stigmatized to the point where an activity must be both racist-proper and harmful to a recognized marginalized group is irrelevant. We can argue about wheather or not the racism in this group is significant or even negative, but that is irrelevant to the fact that, at least the name, is racist.
>The name clearly suggests that it is treating black people differently from non-black people.
That's not what racism is. And don't bother digging up the 4th definition in some random online dictionary as your "proof". Dictionaries chronicle common usage, they are not the arbiters of meaning. One can understand the meaning of a word by comprehending its usage in culture and literature over the span of many decades. Once you do that you won't be able to claim that racism is "treating races differently".
Love this argument: um, I looked up the word 'racism' in the dictionary and it says to exclude based on race, so that's what this event is: racist!
To that, I say, how convenient it is that you've just turned off the critical reasoning process in your brain for just this issue. Thanks for completely ignoring the history of racial subjugation and discrimination in this country and in the world.
Your right, the problem is in how you define rasism. I personally have a problem with including in the definition of most words "and is bad", as that inherently complicates the issue. I much prefer to answer the question "is this racist" without involving the question "is this bad". I cannot think of any reasonable definition of racism that satisfies this, and does not include "Black Girls Code" as an example. Now, can we talk about the "is this bad" question?
You are absolutely right; the question of whether this is racist is a red herring. The question is really: "is this bad". You seem to think it is. How about you begin the discussion by stating how this is bad.
Well, please, lets. Is it bad? No, it is not. It's meant to expose and encourage some kids who, statistically, are otherwise unlikely to be exposed to computer programming in the same way that other kids have been by providing a comfortable environment filled with others like them.
I suspect, however, since there's more comments than upvotes here, that a significant amount of Hacker News readers have a problem with that. I read comments like, 'oh, they should allow kids of all colors and sexes in there', and I think to myself, are you really so blind to the reality that the kids in this highly underrepresented demographic would be crowded out by other kids who already have the privilege of and exposure to computer programming.
No one is trying to prevent anyone from being programmers with Black Girls Code. They're just trying to create some comfortable space for these kids so that they can grow their computer skills as they grow up and become tech-literate adults in our ever-increasing information economy and culture that can compete on a fair playing field. That so many people here have a problem with that is highly concerning.
I didn't turn off critical reasoning for this. It's still racism, by definition. Now, if we want to discuss if this racism is good or bad, then it's another subject. The definition of racism is not "bad racism", it's racism.
I am afraid this is a lost cause already. Too many are already trained to stop thinking and react in knee-jerky-white-knighty way to any mention of race or gender.
This is sad, bet the worst is that it stops people from rally digging into problems and solving them.
Because -- and I say this as someone who has been hurt repeatedly by various kinds of segregated space -- it doesn't work as a pitch, and no, I don't know why.
Consider:
Black girls code (cool!)
People from challenging backgrounds code (ok)
People from challenging backgrounds do impressive things (...)
Eventually you get out to the 'thin' ethical properties and you end up just running a campaign to promote The Good.
Because then you can also call it "Girls Code" and then you can also call it "People Code".
You always have limited resources, so it's better to pick out a tight vertical to start out from, where your resources, experience and skill have a much bigger impact.
>You always have limited resources, so it's better to pick out a tight vertical to start out from, where your resources, experience and skill have a much bigger impact.
Why does picking a "tight vertical" have a much bigger impact?
I'd be seriously troubled if it were the only program in the world teaching anyone to code, yeah.
However, it's not. I don't mind if there's some specific "help children of fallen 9/11 firefighters" program, or "black girls code", or whatever, because there are plenty of other programs for other people.
I donated $10, which thanks to the magic of Alexis, is $20. It took less time than to write this comment.
That is kind of fucked up. It might just be that the other events don't do any promotion? I'd assume there would be at least some general events, ideally revolving around better languages (... :) ), in a country the size of Finland.
I'm saying I haven't heard about them. (Note, I'm talking about events where people are taught to code). I've seen some "make a game over the weekend", but they're for experienced developers. There was also an event for young children (but that's not an event where adults can learn as far as I know).
There are ~0 explicitly marketed as "help white men code", both because ~no one running an event would actually want to exclude the 0.5 female and 0.05 black attendees who might show up at a 50 person coding event, and because it would cause a political shitstorm.
There are plenty of "teach people to code" programs -- ranging from language-specific events to things at hackerspaces to companies pitching their APIs, at least in the Bay Area and Seattle and NY. I don't know about other places. Some have nominal attendance fees, but most organizers will waive them if you volunteer or are poor (and especially if you're a poor young person).
> Where're the free events to help white men code?
Groups focussing on improving accessibility of a field to underrepresented groups are typically working from the premise that the status quo, superficially neutral, system already serves certain groups very well, but other groups poorly.
That absence of the overtly-labelled events of the type you ask about could be an indicator that few people think that the status quo system underserves white men compared to other groups in this area.
There is a difference between being seriously troubled by something, and thinking that something is wrong but not that significant. This case falls into a third category of wrong, not that significant, and wants my money.
No. Because black, like it or not, people stereotype themselves and others by race and color. People put themselves and get put in boxes based on the expectation implied by these characteristics. Black girls don't have role models or encouragement to peruse coding the way white men or even white women do. Programs like this open the door to new groups and welcome them. A general purpose program would by default, perhaps unintentionally, set a high barrier for black girls to join.
It's a sort of "affirmative action," which I'm often opposed to, but in this case I am not because the opportunity is focused in a massive deficit.
On a side note, it's interesting that your outrage applies to race but not gender separations.
Your theory doesn't really accord with the evidence you posted.
Your theory is that anything positive about Black people is pounced on by trolls. To me, evidence of this would be a story about an individual Black programmer, for example, or (as you say) programmers in Oakland.
But this is a story specifically about a program for Black girls learning to code. Race is not incidental, it is central to the story. So for you to claim some kind of hidden agenda because people with differing views on race post in these stories, is ridiculous.
What I am more troubled by is that of a 100 or so comments there are about 2 or 3 saying "this is cool how can I help." The rest are arguing the validity and political correctness of inviting black girls to code.
That would suggest that this community (or at least a vocal minority of this community) has a problem with this charity. I much prefer a community that voices concerns over charities rather than blindly donating to whoever asks for money.
Presumably, the particular problem that the founders perceive and want to deal with is that coding isn't accessible to black girls.
Poverty may be a component of the problem they are seeking to address, but it may not be the only component. Whether or not it should be the case, different demographics -- whether divided by race or gender -- are socialized differently and its not unreasonable to think that they may be best reached by different means, and that part of the reason certain groups are underrepresented is that existing routes into the field serve some groups better than others, and that equalizing access means, in part, finding better ways to serve those groups that are currently underrepresented.
I snort derisively at white kids saying 'reverse racism' like it's a thing. HOWEVER.
1. Why is there a white dude in the driver's seat on the donation page? That's a bit dances-with-wolves, and most of the (admittedly triggery) activist communities I orbit wouldn't stand for that sort of thing. If this isn't astroturf, where is the leadership from the community? (Which isn't to say they're not involved, I just want to see more presence so I know this is really for them.)
2. Usually the stated justification for a progressive segregated space (if there is such a thing -- not going to wade into that one) is to protect folks with PTSD oppression-related triggers. E.g. at many universities men aren't allowed in a lot of on-campus women's spaces for this reason. But it isn't clear if that's the case here, and if not, why is the space segregated? It would help me feel comfortable if they'd explain their reasoning.
I don't have references on hand, but I've seen a study that showed girls are much more vocal and active in a classroom (specifically science/technology related) when its an all-girls setting. That in itself is a good reason to create introductory environments where girls can engage in the material without whatever social pressures keep them from doing so otherwise. As far as "black" goes, that's probably a function of the fact that its in brooklyn and to ensure that black girls realize this is for them.
The organization itself was founded a female african-american EE. I agree that that stuff should probably be on the donation page... but the flip side is they clearly picked Alexis because a) he's internet famous and b) he lives in Brooklyn,
For the second, if the goal is to try to get black girls into programming, then there's very little reason for them to spend the resources on other people. Why limit to black? Because the founder felt culturally isolated while going through EE, and wanted to minimize that from happening in the future. Why limit to girls? Because the founder felt culturally isolated while going through EE, and wanted to minimize that from happening in the future.
Gotta love US and its inverse racism. "White girls code" would be persecuted like KKK is back in business, but "Black girls code" is all good. That's not right.
Also in general poor neighborhoods are fairly segregated by race, in the US, so just by picking specific cities you're accomplishing much of the racial discrimination. I don't think it's a big deal in this case, but in general poor people in Detroit are black; poor people in inland empire are white/hispanic.
I think if some demographics are heavily underrepresented in a field, it makes some sense to target programs specifically to them.
This does happen with regards to men as well, if that's the worry—in areas where men are underrepresented. For example there is a professional association specifically to support men in nursing and recruit more men into the profession: http://aamn.org/
> I think that's because black people have historically been "unluckier" than white people in the US.
"Have historically been unluckier than", "are systematically objectified socially and repressed economically by"--I understand your typo, though, the keys are so close to each other on the keyboard.
(The tenses are important, too. It isn't new, but it isn't dead.)
I tend to give sexist language a pass because of how gendered English is (although not as gendered as many other languages). However, in this case "Kids code" seems like a viable option, so on thinking about it, the gendered nature of the title also annoys me, although my habbit of ignoring gendered language makes this a largely intellectual annoyance.
Also, the "black" in the title has the added problem of being superfluous feeling. "Code" does not convey what the group does. "Girls Code" conveys pretty well the this is a group of (female) children programmers. "Black Girls Code" conveys no additional information other than the fact that is is aimed at black girls specifically.
You are demonstrating unfamiliarity with the difference between de jure and de facto. When people of other demographics feel uncomfortable being there because the audience is predominantly white and predominantly male, it is effectively exclusionary even if there isn't a single word to the contrary.
That doesn't make it your fault. It does mean it's something you have to make a real effort to understand and accept in light of the privilege you have.
>When people of other demographics feel uncomfortable being there because the audience is predominantly white and predominantly male, it is effectively exclusionary even if there isn't a single word to the contrary.
Do black people feel uncomfortable being with white people? That sounds racist and segregatory. We shouldn't turn all events into equal distributions, we should instead make people feel comfortable with being with all kinds of other people.
Many black people feel uncomfortable in environments dominated by white people because of the cultural and social domination by white people, both historically and in the current day. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to understand.
That's incorrect. Just because the audience is mostly white men does not mean that others aren't welcome or that they feel unwelcome. It just means that more white guys showed up that non-white guys.
Reply to child:
Now you're essentially calling white males racist, but the comments in this thread have nothing to do with how white men feel about other genders and races.
I have never been to an event wherein I've seen anything but positive vibes towards all people attending.
Cry me a river. It's nobody job to hold your hand and to make you feel welcome. If the default is "white guys hating on everyone else", that would indeed be bad for the environment. But, if the default is "I am here to code, and I really couldn't care why you're here," then it's nobody job but your own to make the environment into what you want it to be.
Response to child: No, by bringing more black girlfriends to a hackathon they would make an environment friendly. By creating a segregated event, they are pretty much saying they can't deal with mixed events, and have to kick everyone else out in order to create an enjoyable environment.
Yes, and a white one at that, but I sit next to and chat with men and women of all races, and I watch the same occur in chairs/tables next to me. I've never seen anything that indicates white men are making others feel unwelcome.
Perception does not indicate reality. If you feel unwelcome and don't participate because of that, there's not much I can do to help you.
I am. You're saying that because we're white, we can't see it. I could make the same argument about God or elves or unicorns.
The fact is that just because someone feels unwelcome does not mean they are unwelcome. But that's neither a problem with the event nor the people in it.
No, we're saying that because you're socially oblivious and ignorant of historical and contemporary context you can't see it. Privilege is a contributing factor, but there are plenty of white men who are capable of seeing when they're being exclusionary.
I'll answer your question: whiteness is exclusionary by definition.
You're not going to "allow" the comment to go "unnoticed and unchecked"? Please. What are you going to do? White-men-in-general are going to be talked about in a negative way. I welcome it. Hatred is warranted when it's hating the oppressors; it's called "punching up."
And it doesn't even matter if you scoff at that language, which is the great part, because people are quickly realizing that, for example, for all the celebrity surrounding the non-violent Nelson Mandela, he was ultimately a utilitarian when push came to shove...
That is a bloody lie! Every other even is perhaps "men code" because indeed there are not many women who come out, but still, some do. I don't know what events you go to, but I always see a good mix of guys of all races and colors.
Well looking at the industry overall, I'd be surprised if the conferences met national averages in terms of overall diversity. But why do that when we have a "good mix" according to the dominant group.
Our president is black. Are you saying that he is therefor not a role model for any white men in the country? Are you saying Barack Obama could only be the role model for black people? That's insane, right? Much the same way it's insane to imply that a white/chinese/indian .... woman cannot be a role model for black girls.
And when other agents use appearance to form judgements about one another. Part of white/male privilege is having role models that look like you. It makes you feel and be treated as more of an "in-group" member. This shouldn't really be controversial, it's human nature. The response (Black Girls Code) is rational and I think it's sorely needed.
1) There have been a few white male presidents before Barack Obama, in case you didn't know.
2) Many people voted for Obama at least in part because he was black, including myself, because they felt it was time to demonstrate we could and should elect a non-white-male president.
3) The president is a very special singular office, whereas there can be an almost unlimited number of coders. Affirmative action for the role of president or elected political office doesn't make a lot of sense (unless it's done by choice of the electorate.)
4) Indeed Barack Obama is a role model for black men. He showed that a black man (and a non-white-man) CAN be president, something hardly anyone thought was possible in our lifetime prior to his rise to prominence.
5) While a white man could be a role model for a black girl in some sense, people identify with those who share a cultural and racial heritage.
While on a certain theoretical level, what you say makes sense, it is not true in the actual world in which we exist.
There are "girls code" events which are dominated by white females. There's no need to have one specifically for white females, except to exclude other races, There is a need for Black Girls Code as an effort to bring them into the fold. Once they are overrepresented as coders, I'd expect to see these events disappear.
Is this really so complicated for hackers to understand?
I am a member of Geekdom in San Francisco and they just hosted an event there recently. It appeared to be an alive and vibrant organization from what I saw. Great turnout too. Prior to that event I had no idea Black Girls Code existed. Thanks for bringing this to Hacker News for people to see.
Only a handful of comments and this is already looking like your typical reddit thread regarding anything geared towards and underrepresented minority: "what about us white men???".
I expect better from you guys. Perhaps that's my mistake.
Oh look, an appeal to identity politics from the person whose one contribution to the site is "The Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Politics" on Wikipedia.
The overall number of posts creates the basis for a ratio that demonstrates interests amongst divergent topics. In this case, yours have been placed under suspicion for defending a libertarian viewpoint and separately, one that maintains white privilege. I believe the frequent intersection between these views was the basis for his comment. I'm sure you disagree though.
>The overall number of posts creates the basis for a ratio that demonstrates interests amongst divergent topics.
I can't parse this sentence.
>In this case, yours have been placed under suspicion for defending a libertarian viewpoint and separately, one that maintains white privilege. I believe the frequent intersection between these views was the basis for his comment. I'm sure you disagree though.
The post you are replying to wasn't me. Also, I have never defended a libertarian viewpoint, and my one submission was also not libertarian (perhaps you should read it to confirm).
Anyway I find this character attack tiresome, and against the spirit of public debate. If I had said something in one post that clearly contradicted something I said in another, I would be happy to explain it. But it seems like the poster was just having a go at me for posting right wing stuff. I am a right winger. Other posters will just have to deal with it.
EDIT: edited to remove some assumptions about your views.
Good job asking a loaded question in what was I guess your attempt at appearing rational. (In case you don't see it, its analogous to a reporter asking someone: "why did you murder and rape that girl behind the shed")
Racial discrimination isn't inherently bad. Doctors "racially discriminate" regarding certain treatments such as heart disease, hypertension, etc because of their disparate prevalence among minorities. So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished. "Discriminating" against whites and men (fucking laughable) in an attempt to create a safe and welcoming environment for a severely underrepresented group is a positive use of discrimination.
A loaded question is when you try to misrepresent someone's point of view. Am I missing something, or did you not agree with the basic premise (Racial discrimination isn't inherently bad)?
I would argue your doctor analogy is flawed in that doctors don't racially discriminate, but biologically discriminate. I guess I can see why you would think that.
> So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished.
I agree, but I still haven't seen a good argument for racial discrimination. Can you cite examples of where racism was good for society? I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, but I think in the long run, segregating ourselves is not the right way forward. Maybe this is too disney, but I'd like to live in a world where we can disregard race and reach out to whoever needs it.
> This entire thread is about "discrimination" for the purposes of introducing black girls to programming. Is that not a positive for society?
Are you justifying racism via economic output? I've seen this line of reasoning go horribly wrong before..
Obviously teaching people how to be productive is good. But what about teaching people to discriminate against others? If we were to argue from principle, I would agree that racism is not a virtue. That said, I don't adhere to principled reasoning 100% of the time and would be happy to help "black girls" code.
Quit trying to intellectualize your racist approach to moral righteousness. It's coming across as desperate. If you have a principled argument to make, now would be a good time. If all you have is more false analogies then I think I've had enough.
A non-black girl/boy comes along and says that they want to participate, too. The black girls/their instructors tell them to piss off because they are not black and a girl to boot? If this is not racist, I don't know what is.
How about a program for any children under a certain age - be they black or not? If they wanted to include more of the under-represented minorities in the program, they could promote it more heavily in the areas where the minorities tend to live/congregate. Such approach would achieve a similar goal without being racist.
My dad is a doctor (who felt it necessary to go over every trial he has helped run). They do discriminate explicitly on race (as well as other factors). Saying that this racial discrimination is biological is equivalent to saying that their are significant biological differences between the races. Although this is true in some cases (mostly genetic diseases), more often race is relevant as a proxy for social and cultural positioning. In practice, I suspect that if racism was stamped out of society at general, then there would be no medical benefit to racism in medical desisions.
It's virtuous because it acknowledges reality, and the reality is that society does not treat all groups equally, and that there are still systemic barriers in place. It also acknowledges that targeted campaigns working on relatively homogeneous groups are probably the most effective.
The point of the whole civil rights movement wasn't just to extend all political and economic rights on paper to the black population and then just leave it at that. The point was to extend justice and fairness to all Americans. Anyone who takes a look at the last 40 years of American History can understand that that has not happened.
Unfortunately, since the systemic barriers are both externally enforced AND to a degree internally self inflicted, any attempt to address some of the self-inflicted barriers will be "discriminatory".
You mean how about we dignify "arguments" like your "Where're the free events to help white men code? Maybe they exist, but I haven't heard about them."
Your "argument" is puerile, privileged bellyaching in response to someone donating his own money towards helping an organization teach kids how to code.
Are you intentionally misrepresenting people's concerns of promoting racial discrimination as a virtue? I think it's concerning that we want to segregate and advance certain racial groups instead of addressing (what I see as) the core issue -- why are we so segregated (racist?)? Why are we uncomfortable around people who look/act/dress a little different than us? Many of us are multi-racial immigrants with backgrounds that cant be identified by by the color of a crayon.
That said, I think teaching anyone to code is better than not teaching them to code. If you choose who you teach based on the color of their skin, I don't see how that isn't racism.
Since you seem to be very connected to the a generic literal meaning of things, try taking one more step and imagine how this "racism" would manifest itself, what the negative repercussions could be. Would whites and males be kicked out or jailed for trying to attend?
You're ignoring the cultural context in favor of whatever correct perspective you have. Unfortunately, natural language doesn't respond well to simple analysis like yours.
> Since you seem to be very connected to the a generic literal meaning of things
Quite the opposite. I'm arguing in principle, and if you would like to redefine these words, I have no problem with that.
> try taking one more step and imagine how this "racism" would manifest itself
I fear that people continue to only associate with those in their small bubble of what makes them comfortable instead of reaching out and forging relationships that span sex/color/religion. Maybe they feel that they need a "black" version of education, and feel less confident in their ability to thrive in a multi-cultural society. Instead of opening up to new cultures we cement ourselves in one that we can identify with based on superficial factors like skin color and clothes.
I'm actually arguing from a position deeper than "white men should be able to join too!". Please, don't take it that way. I think humans tend to be afraid of people who are different than themselves, and that's the core issue. When we turn our skin color into an identity, we segregate ourselves from so many people. I think something like sports/teambuilding would be more effective at breaking down the barriers we're witnessing in our society.
These are all mostly separate issues than teaching black girls to code. Why do you think they must be conflated and tackled at the same time? There is a benefit to tailoring solutions to different problems. There is nothing contradictory about being for all the things you mentioned while also encouraging specifically black girls to experiment with coding.
> There is a benefit to tailoring solutions to different problems.
There is, but I don't think that being inclusive to black girls requires being exclusive to everyone else. Not only that, they're cutting themselves off from potential peers who can help them grow their passion for programming.
Maybe I'm being naive, but I think it's possible for a brand to appeal to people of multiple races. In my mind I see other minority kids feeling left out and unappreciated. This kind of hits close to home, so I'm not just speaking out my ass. But just to reiterate, I don't think reaching out to people of a specific demographic is inherently wrong. I just wish it could be done without being exclusionary.
This is not a plain level field. Many are still suffering from institutional discrimination based on race, generations later, just as some are still enjoying the fruits of it. The bubbles exist. Obvious point made because this ties into culture, which is what programs like this help with. You're trying to deal with social issues at a universal human level which is orders of magnitude harder, if not impossible in practice. If I'm understanding you correctly.
My point was, however: you're taking an absolute view of discrimination based on race being racism. It's not the case.
You can write as many paragraphs about the technical definition of "racism" as you'd like. You are criticizing a private effort someone is taking to commit private resources to helping an underserved demographic get access to programming expertise. Your choice of controversy speaks louder than any particular argument you might make. The point of these arguments, whether you realize and accept it or not, is to diminish the claim people have to being underserved in the first place. I find that notion contemptible.
Most free software engineering events are by default "help white men code events" because the environment is almost always extremely comfortable for white men because most of the participants are white men.
The goal of this program is to create a sanctuary where black women are able to feel more comfortable because they are going to be among peers they can relate to. Participating in an activity with your peers can be very helpful in fostering interest, comfort and confidence in someone.
That being said, I would prefer if this program was focused on women who are minorities (black, latino, eastern european, asian, etc.). You don't need to see people of just your own race to feel like you are among your peers. Furthermore, although the focus would be open to women who are minorities, they should footnote that they are open to the participation of men who are underrepresented in technology or caucasian women, who are also under-represented in technology. You can have a focus without being exclusionary.
I'm among those who think this organization isn't doing it right, but I'm a 'colored' developer. Does that make my opinion any more valid than the white men's ?
To me this is as beneficial as a 'white girls rap' bootcamp, but hey, whatever helps.
If you expect better, you really haven't been on this site enough. Every post/article/etc that even tangentially touches on feminism/gender issues turns into a big old MRA circlejerk.
Perhaps your mistake is thinking about this as something specific to Reddit in the first place. I know there are some fairly prominent groups with axes to grind who act as though racism, sexism and the patriarchy sprung into existence fully formed with the creation of Reddit, but it's always been a reflection of wider society, nothing more.
I kicked in during summer of code, and I'm just not doing well enough right now to help them out again. It's good to see it on HN, but the comments are probably going to take a dive soon.
I'm Black and used to being on the Internet. I just hope it doesn't discourage any young women or minorities from going into a STEM field. I wish I could tell them it gets better but it really doesn't.
In Europe this would be inappropriate... (The "Black" in the title of the program, not the teaching girls, obviously.)
I don't think any European here would disagree. The fact that you categorise someone as "black" is just awful. How black exactly do they have to be? Are you going to measure it? Are southern Italians black? What about Turks? ... See the problem?
Edit: Just want to point out that I'm not talking about the specific word "black". Use whatever word you want. Just to put this into context: here, in Belgium, it's actually illegal to register someone's "race" (except for medical reasons).
I read somewhere that using african american is also bad since there are many black people that don't identify as african and don't even have african heritage. I think black is much more inclusive.
African-American also has the problem that not all black people identify themselves as American. Although it does lead to an interesting conversation about American imperialism when one expresses concern over how much of African governments are run by African-Americans.
I don't know how things are in europe, but blacks categorize themselves. They were called "colored" by whites, and they fought to be called negros. Black was offensive back then (60's). Then Negro suddenly became offensive and they called themselves Black which used to be offensive but no longer was. Some called themselves afro-american, and today it's predominately african american.
These days, and for decades past, it's about what they want to call themselves. Who "they" refers exactly to is mostly lost on me.
I think your understanding of sociolinguistics has room to grow. Ponder how it was that those words like "colored" and "Negro" were 'suddenly' decided to be offensive.
While I can see why 'colored' may be considered offensive, why Negro? It's just spanish/portuguese word for black.
My own hunch is that the word just has too much baggage (ie rights of blacks at the time they were referred to by this word were curtailed - hence the need to move on to a new word without the connotations).
Correct. And the sneering voice that can turn any word into a slur, until we try again next generation and hope that the next word doesn't get slurred.
The About section of the Black Girls Code site says that its goal is to provide girls of color the opportunity to learn about technology and computer science. It doesn't say anything about level of wealth. So it is unclear to me how the name "Poor Kids Code" would be better
Judk has spoken! Change your mandate to get poor people to code and not focus on any unpleasantly ethnic segments. Since all black girls are naturally born poor, they will completely fit in with all the other poor kids. Embrace judk's non-discriminating rainbow of poverty!
Indeed. I am european, and upon seeing the title, this video immediately came to my mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsVMr7NWuCU
Why would anyone even arrange anything by that name? Is it supposed to be a pun? Just imagine a different title: White Girls Code, and feel the privilege it implies.
Also, since a lot of people of color refer to themselves as black even in Europe, I don't see how it would be inappropriate. Unless of course the word in another language is also a racial slur.
French here. I see this as inappropriate because it makes a difference between black people and non-black people, that's it. When I saw the title, I first wondered "Why not just "Girls Code"?" and then "Why not just "Kids Code"?".
I think "black" here doesn't literally refer to black people but to foreigners in general, but I still don't get why they would limit this to "black" people and to girls only. In France in general, this would be poorly looked upon and referred as racist and sexist.
I don't think it is inappropriate. I think it is stupid and inefficient to euphemize ANYTHING!
Say it like how it is.
Black girls are black girls!
Have SEX on the registration form, we don't need to change to GENDER.
I also think no joke is inappropriate given the right context. However, as a human race (one who has developed advance language as a tool) we need to education our young on becoming aware of our own interpretation of the meaning of words. Mainly, we are responsible for making up the meaning of the word we hear/read, not the person who is saying the words. And it should human-being's number one priority to listen to what others are saying.
Just listen.
People who take offense to any verbal/written communication are just NOT emotionally matured, and they may want to take offense, and that is ok. It is certainly their rights and choice to do so.
Verbal abuse doesn't exist, it is just a figment of imagination.
>Verbal abuse doesn't exist, it is just a figment of imagination.
Tell that to psychologically damaged children who grew up with narcissistic parents. This is one of the most ignorant things I've seen around here. I expect this kind of stuff on reddit, but not here.
Paper_ziggurat, I get your concerns about children. When I say "Verbal abuse" I am referring to it in the context of matured adults, which sometimes can be hard to find due to the idiosyncratic nature how all of human are raised. We are often matured in one area like professional life or career, and significantly immature in another like sex and personal/relationship.
Sometimes truth said to us in those "armatured" area of our may occurs as Verbl abuse.
I think any one who has had a good acting course will know this.
The simple point may be best explain by this proverb:
"sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."
> I don't think any European here would disagree. The fact that you categorise someone as "black" is just awful.
I'm from the UK, and I'm mystified as to why you think that.
> Are southern Italians black? What about Turks? ... See the problem?
I see what the problem would be if the programme organizers were seeking to police the gender / ethnicity of attendees, but my guess is it's probably open to anybody who identifies as a black girl.
Irrelevant grammatical aside: Why is somebody who attends something an attendee, not an attender?
I tend too agree, there again I'd disagree on any form of descrimination, sex included and let us not touch upon the implied age factor as well. Fact is there are many EU `groups` that have black in the title and not deemed racist by law - good example would be the Black Police association http://www.nbpa.co.uk/ . Now there might not be a White Police association and with that again is another product of dealing with descrimination and yet at the same time sets a bad example without intent.
One way to look at this is would people be equaly or less offended if it said "White" instead of Black and with that why not stop there and have "Yellow", "Brown", see when you do that it starts to stand out as more offencive than having "Black" and that is perhaps a whole avenue of psycology than I'm up for.
In short I personaly think it and any descrimination that you have no control over is wrong, you can't pick your skin colour or gender and with that any form of descrimination be it positive or negative is setting a bad example in society when it is only trying to restore balance albiet in a way that creates inbalance in a form it is trying to prevent.
Still for every rule there is an exception, least programming teaches this.
In these times you can find at least somebody offended by anything in some way or another. No idea what NAACP stands for but suspect it is not a European thing.
Not true. In the UK the "NUS Black Students’ campaign represents the largest constituency of Black students in Europe and students of African, Asian, Arab and Caribbean descent, at a local and national level on all issues affecting Black students."
I realize that it's difficult to understand another culture, especially one so very different and - honestly - so much more complex and sophisticated than one's own, as the United States is in comparison with Belgium. I realize that this is hard.
Nevertheless let's try.
We can do better, HN. We can do better than "this wouldn't fly in Belgium" as the top-rated comment.
Why is being categorized as Black an inherently negative thing? You should really read up on how we historically used to be classified and categorized.
> Are southern Italians black? What about Turks?
No. Black typically refers to people who are indigenous members of the African diaspora. As it's been used in the west, it's not typically resting solely on complexion (e.g they had another set of nasty names for darker people from Europe and Asia).
I understand this is highly contextual, and that there may be native categorizations that are similar to specific regions, but I hope this clarifies how it applies.
> Just to put this into context: here, in Belgium, it's actually illegal to register someone's "race" (except for medical reasons).
I'm still curious why this is considered progress. As I've seen it in other countries, it doesn't do much to address racial issues in a society. The elimination of a box on state forms doesn't mean that it's somehow removed or diminished in that society.
Of all the "quirks" in this world you find this one worthy of snark?
What I find more quirky is that using the word "black" is perfectly ok in all other domains of life "black neighborhood", "black music", "black hair", "black person"... But as soon as this word invades a professional domain tyically occupied by white males, with the goal of hopefully attracting some black girls who previously would have never seen programming as an option, it becomes a "quirk". Or as some other vigilant posters in this thread have indicated, out right DISCRIMINATION. Supposedly against blacks themselves, or maybe just human life in general. But who are we kidding, it's discrimination targeted at the world's most endangered creature -the rare and precious north american white male.
>Of all the "quirks" in this world you find this one worthy of snark?
Because it's here on the front page and I was listening to the "Dead Milkmen".
I'm sorry if I may have offended you.
The quirk I was referring to is the fact that equality is only championed for trendy jobs perceived as desirable. There are no "Black Girls Construction" events for example.
As a white guy I take no personal offence. Just pointing out life's little quirks.
Desirable generally doesn't equal trendy.. Desirable just means "doesn't have to work two additional jobs in order to make ends meet". Construction is probably a bad example of undesirable.. Where I'm from it is rather desirable as you can make a lot of money and have a great degree of independence. I bet there are one or two "black girls in construction" groups around here in Canada at least.
fair enough, my point still stands though. I don't see people clammoring over the gender disparity in janitorial positions for example. I simply think events like this are odd. I don't think they should be gendered or racially restricted. When I was in high-school I had to teach myself programming. There were no resources for me to take advantage of like this I would have loved to attend something like it. There were also huge negative stigmas associated with (nerds) who played computer games at the time which is how most of us got into games.
The best way to get any kid interested in tech is video games. They will be interested in a career there if they look up to role models in that industry. Kids need to respect and look up to scientists and engineers rather than pop culture and sports stars. I myself was guilty of this when I was younger, Then I played quake and it blew me away. Afterward I looked up to John Carmack and started learning about computers.
There are many events that are not catered to specific genders or racial backgrounds. This one just happens to be not one of those.
I guess I can see how an event like this might seem odd to a non-black male.. But America is an odd country where cultural trends are completely deformed (its not just america but let's focus on her for now). This event would just be the first step to show an alternative norm to a girl who has all her life been exposed to completely negative examples of what she can become. This is her Quake.
When the day comes and somebody creates an event called Black Girls Code, and other people: men, women, white and black, completely honestly ask that person "why", that's the day when we can truly call ourselves an equal opportunity and just society. Unfortunately I think this is still quite a ways away.
Well, partly it's that sanitation work like that is very much a blue-collar job, and very few feminists really care about the working class women who are most affected by gender discrimination in it. It's a known problem with feminism, basically.
African-American women are severely underrepresented in IT, so this charity is addressing that problem. They are teaching children a skill. If that really bothers you, take a minute to reflect on yourself.
This is the argument that always baffles me. There are many reasons for that imbalance, just as there are many reasons for imbalance in other industries (sometimes in the opposite direction).
I coach youth sports, and many times the kids on my teams come from poor families. When I talk to them about their interests, not once have they mentioned or indicated that they would be prevented from pursuing that interest.
Growing up in the United States, I was often told that there were certain things that I could not do because I would face a glass ceiling due to my skin color. Reading history books it was clear that this was true for the people who came before me. Looking at the people who were in the positions I wanted to attain, it was clear that something was preventing people who look like me from succeeding in those fields. And listening to the comments I received from my peers, it was clear that I was not perceived in the same way as others.
I can't speak for anyone other than myself. But, from my experience, it is helpful to know that people who look like you can succeed in this world.
Who told you these things? Obviously, that's where the problem starts, and though I've never experienced that (nor has anyone I know), I can't deny that it exists.
Older members of my family. They simply related to me their experiences living in the United States. Unfortunately the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not that long ago and the world didn't change overnight with its passage. And they received similar teachings from their parents who dealt with even greater injustices before that.
Depends on the age, I grew up with lots of poor kids that thought they'd be able to live their dreams, then had reality harshly shoved in their faces.
My family was temporarily poor, we had resources that few of my friends had. Both of my parents had advanced educations and my parents received inheritances that helped them start a small business.
My childhood friends had nothing to fall back on, of the ones that survived into adulthood, most of them ended up poorer than their parents.
>They are teaching children a skill. If that really bothers you, take a minute to reflect on yourself.
It's not the teaching of the skill in itself that is problematic, or even (in my opinion) the attempt to make up for various sources of disadvantage.
What I object to is the idea that it is of great importance to eliminate racial and gender disparities, or that our society is incredibly bad because these disparities exist. This idea is what drives articles like this to the front page of HN.
Racial and gender disparities exist for a number of reasons, not simply the oppression of one group by another. Different groups have different cultures, interests and possibly innate abilities. I don't think anyone here would want to instantly eliminate the cultural differences between Black and White people.
The claim that the differences between groups are solely attributable to disadvantage and oppression is simply a claim. It is backed up by nothing but moralizing and posturing (note the number of posts here disparaging White "kids").
I also don't think that it is possible to entirely eliminate the disadvantage that minority groups often suffer, simply because people by nature tend to favor people who are similar to themselves, by any measure. I certainly wouldn't consider it wise to go to a random country, say Israel, and mandate that all cultures and viewpoints were to have equal status in that country, and that the majority would have to give up on all aspects of their culture that were not sufficiently inclusive or friendly to minorities.
Ah, the classic appeal to "innate abilities" and "culture" to explain why an oppressed group is disadvantaged. I guess you're asking an epistemogical question of how we can ever really "know" if oppression (slavery, sexual violence, genocide, idk how much history you've read) would explain inequality upon those lines. I don't know the answer, but I'm probably gonna go with occams razer on this one.
As you imply, it is a very difficult question to answer. But isn't cultural variation often used to explain the advantageous social and economic position of Jews and East Asians in American society? And if cultural variation can explain this, is there some in principal reason why it cannot also explain disadvantage?
Again, I am not saying it explains all disadvantage that Blacks experience, just that I do not think oppression explains all of this disadvantage either.
Cultural variation is often circumstance driven; and centuries of de jure oppression is a pretty significant contributor to black culture in America. So throwing out "cultural variation" doesn't necessarily provide an alternative to oppression as an explanation so much as an explanation for one of the mechanisms by which oppression explains disadvantage.
I don't think anyone is up in arms. Those questioning the charity are simply wondering why it's OK to have a black girls code charity and not OK for a white girls code one.
Still, put us all in a room and I'm sure we'd get along fine.
I don't think it's your right to tell anyone whether or not they belong in a conversation. The post was made on a forum in which I'm a user. That gives me every right.
You can try to marginalize the opinions of those that disagree with you, but that's not a rational argument against them.
Despite what your teachers and your parents may have told you, your opinion is not inherently valid. You have shown yourself to be ignorant of too many things to provide a meaningful contribution to this discussion.
Some of you understand the value of dividing and conquering, which is precisely what Black Girls Code is doing - breaking a problem into a sub-problems until eventually each solution helps solve the bigger problem.
The beauty in Black Girls Code is who it chooses to focus on (call it niche market) - Americans who historically have been downtrodden by lack of humanity attention especially in software arena.
The "digital divide" is factual and real. Why its important to address can only be understood by those who have insight or live it.
As a side note to kn0thing: you should put an e-mail address or some other contact info in your HN profile; I want to send a note about how most nonprofits get funded in the U.S., but there's no contact info available for you.
There is a bit of a chicken-or-the-egg issue with these sorts of programs that has always bothered me. I've had some experience with attempts to address diversity in subcultures, and while I agree with the goal, the methods have always rubbed me raw.
The problem is, they tend to always be ran by the majority group to try to "give a helping hand" to the minority group. It's kind of a patronizing position. I didn't need a "helping hand" to become a programmer, and women are smart enough that they don't need a "helping hand" either. And they won't want it.
Think of it this way. There is an extremely similar situation in teaching, where there aren't a lot of young males going into the field. I have had some interest in becoming a certified teacher, having done some semi-formal class programs of various types, but I know for myself I would never go to a "Get Men to Teach" type of program. I wouldn't want to be treated special. I would just want to go through the normal program and be treated no more differently, either positively or negatively, than anyone else. In addition, a lot of people don't like to be told by outsiders that they're doing something "wrong", or that they should do something differently. Someone coming to a programmer conference and espousing how great it would be if more of us got into teaching is terribly unlikely to be convincing. I think most people are probably like this, and I think that's probably why, after two solid decades of "get more X to Y", we haven't really seen an increase in Xs Ying.
And while there is a lot of blame to be placed at the feet of the in-crowd treating the out-crowd poorly, and thus driving them away, I came to a greater realization that the problem was more that the in-crowd just never socializes with the out-crowd, period. I have very few friends who are teachers, but of the few that I have, I know most of their friends are teachers. I have a lot of programmer friends. It goes all the way back to college. I didn't know any teaching students, even though I went to one of the biggest teaching universities in the country, and we tended to have a very dull view of the few we even came into contact with. They tended to have a very dull view of us. The business students were the same. The art students were the same. Hell, even the physics students were the same. We were all compartmentalized from each other in our respective departments.
Then you go to work and the programmers are in one cube farm over here, and the accountants are in another, and the designers are separate. We've managed to create a culture that sees the segregation of people by skillset as a natural thing, and never question it.
And then you get companies saying "we can't hire qualified female programmers. They just don't apply!". Frankly, I don't think open-application is any sort of reliable way to find a decent employee. The only employees that I've known to stick around for a long time were ones that came with recommendations from current employees. You see it all the time, "the importance of networking". "But we haven't done anything to keep them away!" And that is mostly true (though it is important to recognize that there are several instances where active prejudice is still a problem, I think this is a much bigger problem). But employees are people, and trying to "hire more of <adjective>" is treating them like checkboxes, not people. Well, no wonder you don't see more female programmers, because most existing programmers are already male and they don't socialize with many women, period, say nothing about ones that would be interested in programming.
Anyway, my point is, I don't think these sort of "Xs working to get not-Xs to do more Y" are ever going to work, so long as the Xs mostly socialize with Xs. You want to find more black designers? Make more friends of black pe...
>The problem is, they tend to always be ran by the majority group to try to "give a helping hand" to the minority group. It's kind of a patronizing position. I didn't need a "helping hand" to become a programmer, and women are smart enough that they don't need a "helping hand" either. And they won't want it.
I'm a white guy from Brooklyn who's been successful in tech -- I'm not running this organization, I'm just doing a crowdtilt fundraiser for it.
Yeah, I realize that is the case here. My intention was more to head-off the sort of comments that one tends to find in these sorts of threads that try to deny that any problem exists just because the speaker doesn't have an active hand in the problem.
But, at the same time, there is a significant problem with the way that people have been trying to address the issue of diversity in general, because it doesn't seem like any progress is being made.
There is a lot of prejudice in the world, and it can be overt as in the case of someone specifically ignoring resumes from people not matching their sex or race. And it can be subversive, such as people subconsciously paying more attention to people more like themselves than people less like themselves.
I personally believe it's this latter form that is the reason that lack of diversity continues to be an issue. There is not a single aspect of our American culture in which we do not compartmentalize people. We still have sitcoms built on the tropes of housework-inept dads and shopaholic moms. We still have separate boys' and girls' happy meal toys. And because of that, I don't think it's surprising that tackling diversity in one of the leaf-node areas has largely failed.
I don't need White Boys Code. I'm a white male who learned to code when I was about 12 years old, at an NYIT summer program that my parents paid for. My high school had enough coding classes (including AP) that I could take one every year. My parents could afford to buy me a computer and they and others didn't stigmatize me for spending hours on it. I don't need White Boys Code and neither do white-boys-in-general.
I guess this is a lot of stuffy white dude HNers' first interaction with a little thing called identity politics. Surely no white bystander questioned why the Black Panthers weren't called the People Panthers (and they did provide a plethora of community services, they weren't just a militia group[0]); we're at a time where, after black radical politics was systematically destroyed by the US government and police , white-people-in-general sort of exude this attitude of "you seem to have won [read: lost], stop rioting [i.e. Trayvon] and trying to organize around identity because we live in a post-racial society now and any mention of race, or exclusion of whiteness, is Racism."
But actually: “Just as the capitalist system is not a capitalist plot, so racial oppression is not the work of “racists.” It is maintained by the principal institutions of society, including the schools (which define “excellence”), the labor market (which defines “employment”), the legal system (which defines “crime”), the welfare system (which defines “poverty”), the medical industry (which defines “health”), and the family (which defines “kinship”). Many of these institutions are administered by people who would be offended if accused of complicity with racial oppression.” (that's Noel Ignatiev).
So, the ultimate solution for those who recognize race as a force of institutional violence and marginalization (rather than an outdated idea, because hey explicitly racist speech and laws are impolite now!) would be to dismantle those exact systems and rebuild without any idea of whiteness at all -- "white skin would have as little social importance as big feet." But if you try to do that, at best you're lonely, and at worst you're killed (Obama can assassinate terrorists on US soil, remember).
So Black Girls Code is doing what can be done right now to help a severely marginalized, invisible group (you have to remember the experience of young girls in the US [1][2][3]) get into a field that is basically guaranteed employment if they develop interest and go with it long enough.
If you're white, especially a white guy, no one cares about your Very Reasonable And Logical opinion or how this makes you Very Uncomfortable on the Internet.
The one fact we can all agree on is that Black people, and women, are both underrepresented among programmers, and Black people in general economically disadvantaged.
My understanding is that this program should be seen in the context of a political movement that sees this under-representation as an example of systematic oppression by a society that privileges White males. This oppression comes in the form of discrimination in employment, unequal access to education, and stereotypes that guide White males towards higher paid careers. The movement sees eliminating this oppression as a very high priority.
There are two points where I disagree with this movement. First, there may be explanations of this underrepresentation that are unrelated to oppression. These include lack of interest in programming (due to cultural differences in values), cultural differences in how education is valued, and genetic differences in personality and intelligence.
Second, I think that it is natural and inevitable that the majority culture be dominant, and this has social and economic implications. For example, Israel is fundamentally a Jewish nation, and this implies that Jewish values, culture etc. are dominant in that society. While many Israelis explain economic and social inequality in Israel as a result of the backwardness of Muslims, I think the truth is that really this is just another instance of the inevitable trend in societies. So I would like to curb the worst excesses of inequality that result from different races/cultures living together but I do not see inequality as a something terrible that must be eliminated entirely.
It is not helpful to blanket condemn the HN community. Yes, the vast majority are white men. Yes, a significant portion hold political positions on minority peoples that do not take into account the history and structural disadvantages of being both not-white and not-male. But that position is a meaningful way to survive in a system that for hundreds of years would have punished or killed even white men for acknowledging the humanity and difficulties of those peoples.
So, while I disagree with them, telling them that they're all assholes is useless.
Building equality is not a zero-sum game between those who-have and those who don't. It is the elevation of our collective humanity through empathy.
Although you have to realize that there are people who see 'equality' as mythological, based on analyses of gender and race that see them as inherently hierarchical through their social construction (basic reasoning reveals that race isn't just skin color and gender is not sex organs and characteristics). Unfortunately these people are few in number, and they're mostly women and non-white people, so no-one listens to them anyway.
If we sympathize with those folks, HN comment threads become even more futile.
I understand that it seems like it will magnify the futility, but the way you are describing is the way that has been tried forever. It has resulted in slow change, usually only being realized when society as a whole has been influenced enough to forget the old perspective.
There's a lot of power into both taking the full fears of another into consideration while simultaneously trying to present the full fears of their Other to them.
And, perhaps predictably, a noble post falls off the front page as the discussion devolves into a cartoonish dust ball of chest-beating, setting off the flame-war detectors. The girls lose, but thank god the opinionated "experts" on US racial politics have had their moment.
My 2 cents (not that anybody asked). I teach computer science at an predominantly black all-girls school in Brooklyn - my students are exactly the demographic that this organization is targeting. And I think its great - the more opportunities we can provide for these girls, the better, and Black Girls Code looks like an organization that has done a lot of good - I'm looking forward to seeing them come to Brooklyn.
But the name does bother me a bit, too. Not because 'racism!', but because while it accomplishes the goal of making it clear that this is a safe space for black girls, it raises the question "am I welcome here?" for anyone who isn't black. And a handful of my students aren't black (they're Hispanic) - afaik, they are welcome there too - from the website it looks like Black Girls Code is looking to provide opportunities for all girls of color - but as a teacher, I'd like to be able to just say to my class, "hey, you should all check out this awesome event/opportunity" without it turning into a discussion about race. Plus, I have no idea whether I, as a white woman, would be welcome there as a volunteer? I'm used to being the only white person in a classroom full of students of color - that's not something that's ever been an issue at school - but at a place called Black Girls Code, I'd have to wonder whether my help might not be wanted.
242 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 374 ms ] threadPassing the links/events/fundraisers around doesn't hurt either, imho.
"Black Girls CODE is an international non-profit organization with local chapters in San Francisco, Memphis, Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, and New York. They teach girls of color (ages 7-17) to become the masters of their technological futures by teaching them classes in game design, web development, robotics and more!"
Why not teach all girls or call it, 'Impoverished Girls Code?'
That's not what racism is. And don't bother digging up the 4th definition in some random online dictionary as your "proof". Dictionaries chronicle common usage, they are not the arbiters of meaning. One can understand the meaning of a word by comprehending its usage in culture and literature over the span of many decades. Once you do that you won't be able to claim that racism is "treating races differently".
To that, I say, how convenient it is that you've just turned off the critical reasoning process in your brain for just this issue. Thanks for completely ignoring the history of racial subjugation and discrimination in this country and in the world.
I suspect, however, since there's more comments than upvotes here, that a significant amount of Hacker News readers have a problem with that. I read comments like, 'oh, they should allow kids of all colors and sexes in there', and I think to myself, are you really so blind to the reality that the kids in this highly underrepresented demographic would be crowded out by other kids who already have the privilege of and exposure to computer programming.
No one is trying to prevent anyone from being programmers with Black Girls Code. They're just trying to create some comfortable space for these kids so that they can grow their computer skills as they grow up and become tech-literate adults in our ever-increasing information economy and culture that can compete on a fair playing field. That so many people here have a problem with that is highly concerning.
Why not teach black people of all genders?
Why not teach everyone?
(I am not saying I believe anything implied by any of these questions)
Consider:
Black girls code (cool!) People from challenging backgrounds code (ok) People from challenging backgrounds do impressive things (...)
Eventually you get out to the 'thin' ethical properties and you end up just running a campaign to promote The Good.
You always have limited resources, so it's better to pick out a tight vertical to start out from, where your resources, experience and skill have a much bigger impact.
Why does picking a "tight vertical" have a much bigger impact?
However, it's not. I don't mind if there's some specific "help children of fallen 9/11 firefighters" program, or "black girls code", or whatever, because there are plenty of other programs for other people.
I donated $10, which thanks to the magic of Alexis, is $20. It took less time than to write this comment.
There are plenty of "teach people to code" programs -- ranging from language-specific events to things at hackerspaces to companies pitching their APIs, at least in the Bay Area and Seattle and NY. I don't know about other places. Some have nominal attendance fees, but most organizers will waive them if you volunteer or are poor (and especially if you're a poor young person).
Groups focussing on improving accessibility of a field to underrepresented groups are typically working from the premise that the status quo, superficially neutral, system already serves certain groups very well, but other groups poorly.
That absence of the overtly-labelled events of the type you ask about could be an indicator that few people think that the status quo system underserves white men compared to other groups in this area.
It's a sort of "affirmative action," which I'm often opposed to, but in this case I am not because the opportunity is focused in a massive deficit.
On a side note, it's interesting that your outrage applies to race but not gender separations.
And I think I used the term 'troubled' and not 'outraged.'
Theory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6441795
Potential examples:
I'm going to just keep on collecting these links and post the list on every instance I see. This will be added as the 8th link.Your theory is that anything positive about Black people is pounced on by trolls. To me, evidence of this would be a story about an individual Black programmer, for example, or (as you say) programmers in Oakland.
But this is a story specifically about a program for Black girls learning to code. Race is not incidental, it is central to the story. So for you to claim some kind of hidden agenda because people with differing views on race post in these stories, is ridiculous.
Poverty may be a component of the problem they are seeking to address, but it may not be the only component. Whether or not it should be the case, different demographics -- whether divided by race or gender -- are socialized differently and its not unreasonable to think that they may be best reached by different means, and that part of the reason certain groups are underrepresented is that existing routes into the field serve some groups better than others, and that equalizing access means, in part, finding better ways to serve those groups that are currently underrepresented.
There are groups whose focus is gender but not race, e.g., http://www.girlswhocode.com/
1. Why is there a white dude in the driver's seat on the donation page? That's a bit dances-with-wolves, and most of the (admittedly triggery) activist communities I orbit wouldn't stand for that sort of thing. If this isn't astroturf, where is the leadership from the community? (Which isn't to say they're not involved, I just want to see more presence so I know this is really for them.)
2. Usually the stated justification for a progressive segregated space (if there is such a thing -- not going to wade into that one) is to protect folks with PTSD oppression-related triggers. E.g. at many universities men aren't allowed in a lot of on-campus women's spaces for this reason. But it isn't clear if that's the case here, and if not, why is the space segregated? It would help me feel comfortable if they'd explain their reasoning.
In general, though, like I said: stoked.
For the second, if the goal is to try to get black girls into programming, then there's very little reason for them to spend the resources on other people. Why limit to black? Because the founder felt culturally isolated while going through EE, and wanted to minimize that from happening in the future. Why limit to girls? Because the founder felt culturally isolated while going through EE, and wanted to minimize that from happening in the future.
But seriously, the donation page should link to the charity's website: http://www.blackgirlscode.com/
Do you feel the same way about the sexist component of this? Should I be annoyed that "Boys code" would be persecuted but "Girls code" is all good?
(I'm not saying there are any correct answers to my questions)
This does happen with regards to men as well, if that's the worry—in areas where men are underrepresented. For example there is a professional association specifically to support men in nursing and recruit more men into the profession: http://aamn.org/
"Have historically been unluckier than", "are systematically objectified socially and repressed economically by"--I understand your typo, though, the keys are so close to each other on the keyboard.
(The tenses are important, too. It isn't new, but it isn't dead.)
I tend to think most of HN hasn't even the slightest idea, which makes me a bit sad.
Also, the "black" in the title has the added problem of being superfluous feeling. "Code" does not convey what the group does. "Girls Code" conveys pretty well the this is a group of (female) children programmers. "Black Girls Code" conveys no additional information other than the fact that is is aimed at black girls specifically.
I expect better from Hacker News.
That doesn't make it your fault. It does mean it's something you have to make a real effort to understand and accept in light of the privilege you have.
Do black people feel uncomfortable being with white people? That sounds racist and segregatory. We shouldn't turn all events into equal distributions, we should instead make people feel comfortable with being with all kinds of other people.
Reply to child:
Now you're essentially calling white males racist, but the comments in this thread have nothing to do with how white men feel about other genders and races.
I have never been to an event wherein I've seen anything but positive vibes towards all people attending.
Response to child: No, by bringing more black girlfriends to a hackathon they would make an environment friendly. By creating a segregated event, they are pretty much saying they can't deal with mixed events, and have to kick everyone else out in order to create an enjoyable environment.
Isn't that what they're doing by creating an environment for black girls?
You're a man, aren't you
Perception does not indicate reality. If you feel unwelcome and don't participate because of that, there's not much I can do to help you.
The fact is that just because someone feels unwelcome does not mean they are unwelcome. But that's neither a problem with the event nor the people in it.
Please name one behavior by the average 'privileged white man' that is inherently exclusionary. I bet you can't.
You're not going to "allow" the comment to go "unnoticed and unchecked"? Please. What are you going to do? White-men-in-general are going to be talked about in a negative way. I welcome it. Hatred is warranted when it's hating the oppressors; it's called "punching up."
And it doesn't even matter if you scoff at that language, which is the great part, because people are quickly realizing that, for example, for all the celebrity surrounding the non-violent Nelson Mandela, he was ultimately a utilitarian when push came to shove...
There is a sufficient deficit such that there are almost no role models and this sort affirmative action makes sense.
2) Many people voted for Obama at least in part because he was black, including myself, because they felt it was time to demonstrate we could and should elect a non-white-male president.
3) The president is a very special singular office, whereas there can be an almost unlimited number of coders. Affirmative action for the role of president or elected political office doesn't make a lot of sense (unless it's done by choice of the electorate.)
4) Indeed Barack Obama is a role model for black men. He showed that a black man (and a non-white-man) CAN be president, something hardly anyone thought was possible in our lifetime prior to his rise to prominence.
5) While a white man could be a role model for a black girl in some sense, people identify with those who share a cultural and racial heritage.
While on a certain theoretical level, what you say makes sense, it is not true in the actual world in which we exist.
Is this really so complicated for hackers to understand?
Here is a video of Rackspace S.F. showing their support: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Kv1Q2noU4
I expect better from you guys. Perhaps that's my mistake.
Downvotes and shaming are all these privileged white boys deserve.
You've truly turned into a elitist fuckwit. All them internet points must have gone to your head.
I can't parse this sentence.
>In this case, yours have been placed under suspicion for defending a libertarian viewpoint and separately, one that maintains white privilege. I believe the frequent intersection between these views was the basis for his comment. I'm sure you disagree though.
The post you are replying to wasn't me. Also, I have never defended a libertarian viewpoint, and my one submission was also not libertarian (perhaps you should read it to confirm).
Anyway I find this character attack tiresome, and against the spirit of public debate. If I had said something in one post that clearly contradicted something I said in another, I would be happy to explain it. But it seems like the poster was just having a go at me for posting right wing stuff. I am a right winger. Other posters will just have to deal with it.
EDIT: edited to remove some assumptions about your views.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Racial discrimination isn't inherently bad. Doctors "racially discriminate" regarding certain treatments such as heart disease, hypertension, etc because of their disparate prevalence among minorities. So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished. "Discriminating" against whites and men (fucking laughable) in an attempt to create a safe and welcoming environment for a severely underrepresented group is a positive use of discrimination.
I would argue your doctor analogy is flawed in that doctors don't racially discriminate, but biologically discriminate. I guess I can see why you would think that.
> So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished.
I agree, but I still haven't seen a good argument for racial discrimination. Can you cite examples of where racism was good for society? I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, but I think in the long run, segregating ourselves is not the right way forward. Maybe this is too disney, but I'd like to live in a world where we can disregard race and reach out to whoever needs it.
Are you justifying racism via economic output? I've seen this line of reasoning go horribly wrong before..
Obviously teaching people how to be productive is good. But what about teaching people to discriminate against others? If we were to argue from principle, I would agree that racism is not a virtue. That said, I don't adhere to principled reasoning 100% of the time and would be happy to help "black girls" code.
And just because I know this is coming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6976062
A non-black girl/boy comes along and says that they want to participate, too. The black girls/their instructors tell them to piss off because they are not black and a girl to boot? If this is not racist, I don't know what is.
How about a program for any children under a certain age - be they black or not? If they wanted to include more of the under-represented minorities in the program, they could promote it more heavily in the areas where the minorities tend to live/congregate. Such approach would achieve a similar goal without being racist.
The point of the whole civil rights movement wasn't just to extend all political and economic rights on paper to the black population and then just leave it at that. The point was to extend justice and fairness to all Americans. Anyone who takes a look at the last 40 years of American History can understand that that has not happened.
Unfortunately, since the systemic barriers are both externally enforced AND to a degree internally self inflicted, any attempt to address some of the self-inflicted barriers will be "discriminatory".
Your "argument" is puerile, privileged bellyaching in response to someone donating his own money towards helping an organization teach kids how to code.
That said, I think teaching anyone to code is better than not teaching them to code. If you choose who you teach based on the color of their skin, I don't see how that isn't racism.
You're ignoring the cultural context in favor of whatever correct perspective you have. Unfortunately, natural language doesn't respond well to simple analysis like yours.
Quite the opposite. I'm arguing in principle, and if you would like to redefine these words, I have no problem with that.
> try taking one more step and imagine how this "racism" would manifest itself
I fear that people continue to only associate with those in their small bubble of what makes them comfortable instead of reaching out and forging relationships that span sex/color/religion. Maybe they feel that they need a "black" version of education, and feel less confident in their ability to thrive in a multi-cultural society. Instead of opening up to new cultures we cement ourselves in one that we can identify with based on superficial factors like skin color and clothes.
I'm actually arguing from a position deeper than "white men should be able to join too!". Please, don't take it that way. I think humans tend to be afraid of people who are different than themselves, and that's the core issue. When we turn our skin color into an identity, we segregate ourselves from so many people. I think something like sports/teambuilding would be more effective at breaking down the barriers we're witnessing in our society.
There is, but I don't think that being inclusive to black girls requires being exclusive to everyone else. Not only that, they're cutting themselves off from potential peers who can help them grow their passion for programming.
Maybe I'm being naive, but I think it's possible for a brand to appeal to people of multiple races. In my mind I see other minority kids feeling left out and unappreciated. This kind of hits close to home, so I'm not just speaking out my ass. But just to reiterate, I don't think reaching out to people of a specific demographic is inherently wrong. I just wish it could be done without being exclusionary.
My point was, however: you're taking an absolute view of discrimination based on race being racism. It's not the case.
The goal of this program is to create a sanctuary where black women are able to feel more comfortable because they are going to be among peers they can relate to. Participating in an activity with your peers can be very helpful in fostering interest, comfort and confidence in someone.
That being said, I would prefer if this program was focused on women who are minorities (black, latino, eastern european, asian, etc.). You don't need to see people of just your own race to feel like you are among your peers. Furthermore, although the focus would be open to women who are minorities, they should footnote that they are open to the participation of men who are underrepresented in technology or caucasian women, who are also under-represented in technology. You can have a focus without being exclusionary.
To me this is as beneficial as a 'white girls rap' bootcamp, but hey, whatever helps.
Along with "Diaspora Developer" which hits class+immigration issues from a different angle.
What got you into coding by the way?
...and there are people who think the tech-community doesn't have a problem with race....
I don't think any European here would disagree. The fact that you categorise someone as "black" is just awful. How black exactly do they have to be? Are you going to measure it? Are southern Italians black? What about Turks? ... See the problem?
Edit: Just want to point out that I'm not talking about the specific word "black". Use whatever word you want. Just to put this into context: here, in Belgium, it's actually illegal to register someone's "race" (except for medical reasons).
Words have cultural connotations. I don't think one can make the claim that a word is "awful" by how its understood in a completely different culture.
These days, and for decades past, it's about what they want to call themselves. Who "they" refers exactly to is mostly lost on me.
My own hunch is that the word just has too much baggage (ie rights of blacks at the time they were referred to by this word were curtailed - hence the need to move on to a new word without the connotations).
Edit: parent comment was deleted, said that calling it Poor Kids Code would be better.
Or just "Any Kids Code" and run the class in a poor neighborhood where rich parents don't want to go.
Also, since a lot of people of color refer to themselves as black even in Europe, I don't see how it would be inappropriate. Unless of course the word in another language is also a racial slur.
Say it like how it is.
Black girls are black girls!
Have SEX on the registration form, we don't need to change to GENDER.
I also think no joke is inappropriate given the right context. However, as a human race (one who has developed advance language as a tool) we need to education our young on becoming aware of our own interpretation of the meaning of words. Mainly, we are responsible for making up the meaning of the word we hear/read, not the person who is saying the words. And it should human-being's number one priority to listen to what others are saying.
Just listen.
People who take offense to any verbal/written communication are just NOT emotionally matured, and they may want to take offense, and that is ok. It is certainly their rights and choice to do so.
Verbal abuse doesn't exist, it is just a figment of imagination.
Tell that to psychologically damaged children who grew up with narcissistic parents. This is one of the most ignorant things I've seen around here. I expect this kind of stuff on reddit, but not here.
Sometimes truth said to us in those "armatured" area of our may occurs as Verbl abuse.
I think any one who has had a good acting course will know this.
The simple point may be best explain by this proverb:
"sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."
Oh and I don't read reddit.
then also include, Transsexuals. Before/after operation.
It would be good to have sex to be a slider meter, or between scale of 1 to 10. M ---> F.
I'm from the UK, and I'm mystified as to why you think that.
> Are southern Italians black? What about Turks? ... See the problem?
I see what the problem would be if the programme organizers were seeking to police the gender / ethnicity of attendees, but my guess is it's probably open to anybody who identifies as a black girl.
Irrelevant grammatical aside: Why is somebody who attends something an attendee, not an attender?
One way to look at this is would people be equaly or less offended if it said "White" instead of Black and with that why not stop there and have "Yellow", "Brown", see when you do that it starts to stand out as more offencive than having "Black" and that is perhaps a whole avenue of psycology than I'm up for.
In short I personaly think it and any descrimination that you have no control over is wrong, you can't pick your skin colour or gender and with that any form of descrimination be it positive or negative is setting a bad example in society when it is only trying to restore balance albiet in a way that creates inbalance in a form it is trying to prevent.
Still for every rule there is an exception, least programming teaches this.
http://www.nus.org.uk/en/who-we-are/how-we-work/black-studen...
Nevertheless let's try.
We can do better, HN. We can do better than "this wouldn't fly in Belgium" as the top-rated comment.
BTW: Belgium? Not historically a model for even-handed tolerance with respect to black people: https://www.google.com/search?q=king+leopold&safe=off&rlz=1C...
AKA Black Pete. Yes, people in Belgium and The Netherlands still dress up in blackface during the Christmas season.
> Are southern Italians black? What about Turks?
No. Black typically refers to people who are indigenous members of the African diaspora. As it's been used in the west, it's not typically resting solely on complexion (e.g they had another set of nasty names for darker people from Europe and Asia).
I understand this is highly contextual, and that there may be native categorizations that are similar to specific regions, but I hope this clarifies how it applies.
> Just to put this into context: here, in Belgium, it's actually illegal to register someone's "race" (except for medical reasons).
I'm still curious why this is considered progress. As I've seen it in other countries, it doesn't do much to address racial issues in a society. The elimination of a box on state forms doesn't mean that it's somehow removed or diminished in that society.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB9DSWxtsgU
Now consider that to most intelligent people that comment was the most useless thing they read all day.
For example why aren't we as concerned about the male domination of the sanitation industry?[1]
[1]http://jobstat.net/jobs/sanitation-worker/
What I find more quirky is that using the word "black" is perfectly ok in all other domains of life "black neighborhood", "black music", "black hair", "black person"... But as soon as this word invades a professional domain tyically occupied by white males, with the goal of hopefully attracting some black girls who previously would have never seen programming as an option, it becomes a "quirk". Or as some other vigilant posters in this thread have indicated, out right DISCRIMINATION. Supposedly against blacks themselves, or maybe just human life in general. But who are we kidding, it's discrimination targeted at the world's most endangered creature -the rare and precious north american white male.
Because it's here on the front page and I was listening to the "Dead Milkmen".
I'm sorry if I may have offended you.
The quirk I was referring to is the fact that equality is only championed for trendy jobs perceived as desirable. There are no "Black Girls Construction" events for example.
Desirable generally doesn't equal trendy.. Desirable just means "doesn't have to work two additional jobs in order to make ends meet". Construction is probably a bad example of undesirable.. Where I'm from it is rather desirable as you can make a lot of money and have a great degree of independence. I bet there are one or two "black girls in construction" groups around here in Canada at least.
The best way to get any kid interested in tech is video games. They will be interested in a career there if they look up to role models in that industry. Kids need to respect and look up to scientists and engineers rather than pop culture and sports stars. I myself was guilty of this when I was younger, Then I played quake and it blew me away. Afterward I looked up to John Carmack and started learning about computers.
I guess I can see how an event like this might seem odd to a non-black male.. But America is an odd country where cultural trends are completely deformed (its not just america but let's focus on her for now). This event would just be the first step to show an alternative norm to a girl who has all her life been exposed to completely negative examples of what she can become. This is her Quake.
When the day comes and somebody creates an event called Black Girls Code, and other people: men, women, white and black, completely honestly ask that person "why", that's the day when we can truly call ourselves an equal opportunity and just society. Unfortunately I think this is still quite a ways away.
I coach youth sports, and many times the kids on my teams come from poor families. When I talk to them about their interests, not once have they mentioned or indicated that they would be prevented from pursuing that interest.
I can't speak for anyone other than myself. But, from my experience, it is helpful to know that people who look like you can succeed in this world.
My family was temporarily poor, we had resources that few of my friends had. Both of my parents had advanced educations and my parents received inheritances that helped them start a small business.
My childhood friends had nothing to fall back on, of the ones that survived into adulthood, most of them ended up poorer than their parents.
It's not the teaching of the skill in itself that is problematic, or even (in my opinion) the attempt to make up for various sources of disadvantage.
What I object to is the idea that it is of great importance to eliminate racial and gender disparities, or that our society is incredibly bad because these disparities exist. This idea is what drives articles like this to the front page of HN.
Racial and gender disparities exist for a number of reasons, not simply the oppression of one group by another. Different groups have different cultures, interests and possibly innate abilities. I don't think anyone here would want to instantly eliminate the cultural differences between Black and White people.
The claim that the differences between groups are solely attributable to disadvantage and oppression is simply a claim. It is backed up by nothing but moralizing and posturing (note the number of posts here disparaging White "kids").
I also don't think that it is possible to entirely eliminate the disadvantage that minority groups often suffer, simply because people by nature tend to favor people who are similar to themselves, by any measure. I certainly wouldn't consider it wise to go to a random country, say Israel, and mandate that all cultures and viewpoints were to have equal status in that country, and that the majority would have to give up on all aspects of their culture that were not sufficiently inclusive or friendly to minorities.
Again, I am not saying it explains all disadvantage that Blacks experience, just that I do not think oppression explains all of this disadvantage either.
Still, put us all in a room and I'm sure we'd get along fine.
If you have any comprehension of the racial history in the US and have to ask that then you really don't belong in this conversation.
You can try to marginalize the opinions of those that disagree with you, but that's not a rational argument against them.
The only people I see here are criticizing the existence of this charity for black girls, who are an already marginalized group. That's racism.
The beauty in Black Girls Code is who it chooses to focus on (call it niche market) - Americans who historically have been downtrodden by lack of humanity attention especially in software arena.
The "digital divide" is factual and real. Why its important to address can only be understood by those who have insight or live it.
I'm just trying to understand the racial words connotation in USA, just to not make faux pas in the future.
The problem is, they tend to always be ran by the majority group to try to "give a helping hand" to the minority group. It's kind of a patronizing position. I didn't need a "helping hand" to become a programmer, and women are smart enough that they don't need a "helping hand" either. And they won't want it.
Think of it this way. There is an extremely similar situation in teaching, where there aren't a lot of young males going into the field. I have had some interest in becoming a certified teacher, having done some semi-formal class programs of various types, but I know for myself I would never go to a "Get Men to Teach" type of program. I wouldn't want to be treated special. I would just want to go through the normal program and be treated no more differently, either positively or negatively, than anyone else. In addition, a lot of people don't like to be told by outsiders that they're doing something "wrong", or that they should do something differently. Someone coming to a programmer conference and espousing how great it would be if more of us got into teaching is terribly unlikely to be convincing. I think most people are probably like this, and I think that's probably why, after two solid decades of "get more X to Y", we haven't really seen an increase in Xs Ying.
And while there is a lot of blame to be placed at the feet of the in-crowd treating the out-crowd poorly, and thus driving them away, I came to a greater realization that the problem was more that the in-crowd just never socializes with the out-crowd, period. I have very few friends who are teachers, but of the few that I have, I know most of their friends are teachers. I have a lot of programmer friends. It goes all the way back to college. I didn't know any teaching students, even though I went to one of the biggest teaching universities in the country, and we tended to have a very dull view of the few we even came into contact with. They tended to have a very dull view of us. The business students were the same. The art students were the same. Hell, even the physics students were the same. We were all compartmentalized from each other in our respective departments.
Then you go to work and the programmers are in one cube farm over here, and the accountants are in another, and the designers are separate. We've managed to create a culture that sees the segregation of people by skillset as a natural thing, and never question it.
And then you get companies saying "we can't hire qualified female programmers. They just don't apply!". Frankly, I don't think open-application is any sort of reliable way to find a decent employee. The only employees that I've known to stick around for a long time were ones that came with recommendations from current employees. You see it all the time, "the importance of networking". "But we haven't done anything to keep them away!" And that is mostly true (though it is important to recognize that there are several instances where active prejudice is still a problem, I think this is a much bigger problem). But employees are people, and trying to "hire more of <adjective>" is treating them like checkboxes, not people. Well, no wonder you don't see more female programmers, because most existing programmers are already male and they don't socialize with many women, period, say nothing about ones that would be interested in programming.
Anyway, my point is, I don't think these sort of "Xs working to get not-Xs to do more Y" are ever going to work, so long as the Xs mostly socialize with Xs. You want to find more black designers? Make more friends of black pe...
I'm a white guy from Brooklyn who's been successful in tech -- I'm not running this organization, I'm just doing a crowdtilt fundraiser for it.
http://www.blackgirlscode.com/about-bgc.html
But, at the same time, there is a significant problem with the way that people have been trying to address the issue of diversity in general, because it doesn't seem like any progress is being made.
There is a lot of prejudice in the world, and it can be overt as in the case of someone specifically ignoring resumes from people not matching their sex or race. And it can be subversive, such as people subconsciously paying more attention to people more like themselves than people less like themselves.
I personally believe it's this latter form that is the reason that lack of diversity continues to be an issue. There is not a single aspect of our American culture in which we do not compartmentalize people. We still have sitcoms built on the tropes of housework-inept dads and shopaholic moms. We still have separate boys' and girls' happy meal toys. And because of that, I don't think it's surprising that tackling diversity in one of the leaf-node areas has largely failed.
I guess this is a lot of stuffy white dude HNers' first interaction with a little thing called identity politics. Surely no white bystander questioned why the Black Panthers weren't called the People Panthers (and they did provide a plethora of community services, they weren't just a militia group[0]); we're at a time where, after black radical politics was systematically destroyed by the US government and police , white-people-in-general sort of exude this attitude of "you seem to have won [read: lost], stop rioting [i.e. Trayvon] and trying to organize around identity because we live in a post-racial society now and any mention of race, or exclusion of whiteness, is Racism."
But actually: “Just as the capitalist system is not a capitalist plot, so racial oppression is not the work of “racists.” It is maintained by the principal institutions of society, including the schools (which define “excellence”), the labor market (which defines “employment”), the legal system (which defines “crime”), the welfare system (which defines “poverty”), the medical industry (which defines “health”), and the family (which defines “kinship”). Many of these institutions are administered by people who would be offended if accused of complicity with racial oppression.” (that's Noel Ignatiev).
So, the ultimate solution for those who recognize race as a force of institutional violence and marginalization (rather than an outdated idea, because hey explicitly racist speech and laws are impolite now!) would be to dismantle those exact systems and rebuild without any idea of whiteness at all -- "white skin would have as little social importance as big feet." But if you try to do that, at best you're lonely, and at worst you're killed (Obama can assassinate terrorists on US soil, remember).
So Black Girls Code is doing what can be done right now to help a severely marginalized, invisible group (you have to remember the experience of young girls in the US [1][2][3]) get into a field that is basically guaranteed employment if they develop interest and go with it long enough.
If you're white, especially a white guy, no one cares about your Very Reasonable And Logical opinion or how this makes you Very Uncomfortable on the Internet.
[0] http://www.stanford.edu/group/blackpanthers/programs.shtml
[1] http://reelgirl.com/2013/11/im-not-a-pilot-im-a-pilots-wife-...
[2] http://www.metafilter.com/121190/teenage-girls-they-havent-b...
[3] http://sodisarmingdarling.tumblr.com/post/34106027759/what-i...
My understanding is that this program should be seen in the context of a political movement that sees this under-representation as an example of systematic oppression by a society that privileges White males. This oppression comes in the form of discrimination in employment, unequal access to education, and stereotypes that guide White males towards higher paid careers. The movement sees eliminating this oppression as a very high priority.
There are two points where I disagree with this movement. First, there may be explanations of this underrepresentation that are unrelated to oppression. These include lack of interest in programming (due to cultural differences in values), cultural differences in how education is valued, and genetic differences in personality and intelligence.
Second, I think that it is natural and inevitable that the majority culture be dominant, and this has social and economic implications. For example, Israel is fundamentally a Jewish nation, and this implies that Jewish values, culture etc. are dominant in that society. While many Israelis explain economic and social inequality in Israel as a result of the backwardness of Muslims, I think the truth is that really this is just another instance of the inevitable trend in societies. So I would like to curb the worst excesses of inequality that result from different races/cultures living together but I do not see inequality as a something terrible that must be eliminated entirely.
So, while I disagree with them, telling them that they're all assholes is useless.
Building equality is not a zero-sum game between those who-have and those who don't. It is the elevation of our collective humanity through empathy.
If we sympathize with those folks, HN comment threads become even more futile.
There's a lot of power into both taking the full fears of another into consideration while simultaneously trying to present the full fears of their Other to them.
But the name does bother me a bit, too. Not because 'racism!', but because while it accomplishes the goal of making it clear that this is a safe space for black girls, it raises the question "am I welcome here?" for anyone who isn't black. And a handful of my students aren't black (they're Hispanic) - afaik, they are welcome there too - from the website it looks like Black Girls Code is looking to provide opportunities for all girls of color - but as a teacher, I'd like to be able to just say to my class, "hey, you should all check out this awesome event/opportunity" without it turning into a discussion about race. Plus, I have no idea whether I, as a white woman, would be welcome there as a volunteer? I'm used to being the only white person in a classroom full of students of color - that's not something that's ever been an issue at school - but at a place called Black Girls Code, I'd have to wonder whether my help might not be wanted.