6 ms·

100% agree. How is it racist to offer something as a business, it's not like it's a government or other public project. We already have BET so this is just a si

100% agree. How is it racist to offer something as a business, it's not like it's a government or other public project. We already have BET so this is just a similar offering in a different format. "Netflix for black people" might not be a good choice as a tagline, though.

commandlinefan 5y ago
> How is it racist to offer something as a business, it's not like it's a government or other public project I've seen people suggest that censorship is only censorship if the government does it, but suggesting that racism is only racism when the government does it too is a first.
- zwieback 5y ago
  You might want to parse out my sentence again. There's tons of racism perpetuated by businesses but I don't think this is one of them
- snakeboy 5y ago
  > but suggesting that racism is only racism when the government does it too is a first. I think you've misunderstood this post. This is less like a "white's only" restaurant, and more like an Italian food restaurant. It's supporting a cultural niche, not excluding another.
  - namdnay 5y ago
    Now I’m European, so maybe I’m not in the right cultural mindset for this, but your comparison really highlights what is problematic for me: based on someone’s skin colour you are determining their culture/heritage. What does a Nigerian have in common with a Jamaican, apart from the melatonin in their skin? Why would they have similar tastes in media?
    - snakeboy 5y ago
      If they're a few generations removed from their Nigerian or Jamaican ancestors, they probably don't have strong ties to their home countries' cultures. This seems true of most Americans whose families emigrated 3+ generations ago. "The melatonin in their skin" explicitly shaped many aspects of law, society, and culture in the US up until the 60s, which is still in living memory, so I don't think it's that surprising that there would still be measurable differences in culture and media interests. Think about how much your parents' lives and the stories they told you are reflected in your present-day values and interests.
      - wolverine876 5y ago
        > "The melatonin in their skin" explicitly shaped many aspects of law, society, and culture in the US up until the 60s I see it regularly today, as African-Americans and many other people commonly say. We can recall that overt racism is practiced in certain political groups which have expanded in popularity. Research shows that racist attacks have greatly increased over the last few years. Regarding the law, many of the laws that existed before the Voting Rights Act have been recently reinstated since the Supreme Court invalidated key parts of the Act and banned federal courts from addressing many state voting issues. It's also not rare anymore in my personal experience, as it was before 2016. In the last month a white person told me that people with black skin were 'biologically different', which accounted for economic inequality. Over the weekend another told me, highly ironically, that 'minorities' were more prone to disinformation than white people, and that was the cause of problem of disinformation on the Internet. (For the record, I disagreed with both as effectively as I could - you can't tacitly approve.) A significant cause of discrimination is that its impact and presence is overlooked by people who aren't affected by it. Racism doesn't affect me (directly), so it's not hard to say it's minimal.
        snakeboy 5y ago
        I wasn't trying to imply racism ended in the 60s, to be clear! I intentionally avoided discussing modern politics in order to make a stronger (albeit more limited) argument, by emphasizing explicit legal discrimination. Even if someone doesn't believe in systemic racism, it's not a point of debate that black people alive today were explicitly persecuted under the law based on the color of their skin.
  - skyde 5y ago
    not exactly because unlike show such as “ The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” this new niche is show that say the white males are evil and responsible for everyone problem. It’s like KKK but i’m reverse
tomp 5y ago
Actually the courts think that a similar business, "cakes for straight people", is in fact discriminatory and also illegal.
- imbnwa 5y ago
  LMAO, you're really reaching for those grapes. The courts ruled that "cakes for straight people" meant cannot be sold to non-straight people, which is in fact discriminatory and also illegal. I don't think BlackOakTV is requiring photo identification as proof of Blackness to sign-up. Stop it. Edit: For clarity, the Supreme Court actually ruled in favor of the homophobic cake shop in Colorado strictly on freedom of religion grounds, however religion is clearly not the factor here. And for your argument to be effective, you'd have to agree that a homophobic cake shop can't get away with discrimination simpliciter.
  - runbathtime 5y ago
    You can only discriminate against white people. You can't discriminate against all of the political elite's pets. Pets include blacks, browns, gays, trans, and all the victim groups. Also businesses usually can't discriminate either. I get that this tag line is more for marketing purposes, and in fact they might not refuse to take white ppl's money that want to sign up... but they are in fact discriminating in the type of content they will produce and stream-- but since its against whites it is okay.
    - imbnwa 5y ago
      > You can only discriminate against white people. You can't discriminate against all of the political elite's pets. Pets include blacks, browns, gays, trans, and all the victim groups. Wow. Pets, okay. > I get that this tag line is more for marketing purposes, and in fact they might not refuse to take white ppl's money that want to sign up... but they are in fact discriminating in the type of content they will produce and stream-- but since its against whites it is okay. Lemme ask you a question: are the American arms of Univision/Telemundo/Korean Broadcasting System also discriminatory since they also will likely not put up content by ethnicities other than their own, which would also be "against whites"? Cause they actually have FCC approval.
runbathtime 5y ago
It is a double standard, not only would the mods not allow a post of a company that says its mission is to create the Netflix for white ppl, but YC would never dream of funding it. I am all for discrimination, but you have to let everyone discriminate and currently whites can't.

commandlinefan 5y ago

> How is it racist to offer something as a business, it's not like it's a government or other public project I've seen people suggest that censorship is only censorship if the government does it, but suggesting that racism is only racism when the government does it too is a first.

zwieback 5y ago
You might want to parse out my sentence again. There's tons of racism perpetuated by businesses but I don't think this is one of them
snakeboy 5y ago
> but suggesting that racism is only racism when the government does it too is a first. I think you've misunderstood this post. This is less like a "white's only" restaurant, and more like an Italian food restaurant. It's supporting a cultural niche, not excluding another.
- namdnay 5y ago
  Now I’m European, so maybe I’m not in the right cultural mindset for this, but your comparison really highlights what is problematic for me: based on someone’s skin colour you are determining their culture/heritage. What does a Nigerian have in common with a Jamaican, apart from the melatonin in their skin? Why would they have similar tastes in media?
  - snakeboy 5y ago
    If they're a few generations removed from their Nigerian or Jamaican ancestors, they probably don't have strong ties to their home countries' cultures. This seems true of most Americans whose families emigrated 3+ generations ago. "The melatonin in their skin" explicitly shaped many aspects of law, society, and culture in the US up until the 60s, which is still in living memory, so I don't think it's that surprising that there would still be measurable differences in culture and media interests. Think about how much your parents' lives and the stories they told you are reflected in your present-day values and interests.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > "The melatonin in their skin" explicitly shaped many aspects of law, society, and culture in the US up until the 60s I see it regularly today, as African-Americans and many other people commonly say. We can recall that overt racism is practiced in certain political groups which have expanded in popularity. Research shows that racist attacks have greatly increased over the last few years. Regarding the law, many of the laws that existed before the Voting Rights Act have been recently reinstated since the Supreme Court invalidated key parts of the Act and banned federal courts from addressing many state voting issues. It's also not rare anymore in my personal experience, as it was before 2016. In the last month a white person told me that people with black skin were 'biologically different', which accounted for economic inequality. Over the weekend another told me, highly ironically, that 'minorities' were more prone to disinformation than white people, and that was the cause of problem of disinformation on the Internet. (For the record, I disagreed with both as effectively as I could - you can't tacitly approve.) A significant cause of discrimination is that its impact and presence is overlooked by people who aren't affected by it. Racism doesn't affect me (directly), so it's not hard to say it's minimal.
      - snakeboy 5y ago
        I wasn't trying to imply racism ended in the 60s, to be clear! I intentionally avoided discussing modern politics in order to make a stronger (albeit more limited) argument, by emphasizing explicit legal discrimination. Even if someone doesn't believe in systemic racism, it's not a point of debate that black people alive today were explicitly persecuted under the law based on the color of their skin.
- skyde 5y ago
  not exactly because unlike show such as “ The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” this new niche is show that say the white males are evil and responsible for everyone problem. It’s like KKK but i’m reverse

tomp 5y ago

Actually the courts think that a similar business, "cakes for straight people", is in fact discriminatory and also illegal.

imbnwa 5y ago
LMAO, you're really reaching for those grapes. The courts ruled that "cakes for straight people" meant cannot be sold to non-straight people, which is in fact discriminatory and also illegal. I don't think BlackOakTV is requiring photo identification as proof of Blackness to sign-up. Stop it. Edit: For clarity, the Supreme Court actually ruled in favor of the homophobic cake shop in Colorado strictly on freedom of religion grounds, however religion is clearly not the factor here. And for your argument to be effective, you'd have to agree that a homophobic cake shop can't get away with discrimination simpliciter.
- runbathtime 5y ago
  You can only discriminate against white people. You can't discriminate against all of the political elite's pets. Pets include blacks, browns, gays, trans, and all the victim groups. Also businesses usually can't discriminate either. I get that this tag line is more for marketing purposes, and in fact they might not refuse to take white ppl's money that want to sign up... but they are in fact discriminating in the type of content they will produce and stream-- but since its against whites it is okay.
  - imbnwa 5y ago
    > You can only discriminate against white people. You can't discriminate against all of the political elite's pets. Pets include blacks, browns, gays, trans, and all the victim groups. Wow. Pets, okay. > I get that this tag line is more for marketing purposes, and in fact they might not refuse to take white ppl's money that want to sign up... but they are in fact discriminating in the type of content they will produce and stream-- but since its against whites it is okay. Lemme ask you a question: are the American arms of Univision/Telemundo/Korean Broadcasting System also discriminatory since they also will likely not put up content by ethnicities other than their own, which would also be "against whites"? Cause they actually have FCC approval.

runbathtime 5y ago

It is a double standard, not only would the mods not allow a post of a company that says its mission is to create the Netflix for white ppl, but YC would never dream of funding it. I am all for discrimination, but you have to let everyone discriminate and currently whites can't.