7 ms·

" I didn’t create Cryptoparty just so a bunch of privileged white boys could.." Why did she drag race into it? Completely unnecessary. She has valid points wit

" I didn’t create Cryptoparty just so a bunch of privileged white boys could.." Why did she drag race into it? Completely unnecessary. She has valid points without this.

sedev 14y ago
Her agenda is about making crypto accessible to lots of people that it's not currently available to. To those people, hackerdom often looks like an undifferentiated mass of white dudes. Leaving race out of a discussion like that is not a neutral thing: omitting race is a statement of its own.
- robryan 14y ago
  This isn't the white males fault though, I am sure all of them would be happy to see more diversity. The event is open invite though and this is the crowd that it attracts right now.
- boboblong 14y ago
  Are you saying that crpyto is not available to people who aren't white guys?
thejsjunky 14y ago
It's inherent to the concept of "privilege"; the understanding is that the people with the most "privilege" in the western world are men who are white. If you are making a point that a group has "privilege", it makes sense to point out they are mostly white since it affects the amount of "privilege" they have. That said, that particular remark seems to be imbued with some bitterness and desire to wound; which may be understandable coming from someone frustrated, but prevents me from endorsing it myself. edit: quotes are not for sarcasm, but to denote less common usage/meaning
- anewguy99 14y ago
  I've always found concepts of privilege to be lacking explanatory power. A European-derived culture is dominant in America, but east-Asian Americans still manage to do better than whites in education and in earnings. If racial privilege is powerful, it is not all-powerful. At the same time, I find the focus on race and class privilege to be incomplete. A poor white boy growing up in Appalachia has less privilege than a member of any race or gender growing up in a California suburb. But if he manages to get to college (statistically unlikely), he will learn from his professors how his success is all because of his skin and his genitals.
  - thejsjunky 14y ago
    I think it's important to note the concept of privilege in this sense is a bit nebulous, is distinct from the common usage, and based on context. I'm partially at fault for the confusion here for talking about "privilege" as an absolute. Privilege is something that basically everyone has. It's about talking about the advantages one has due to factors like sex, race, geography etc over others when all other things are equal. It's not a concept that is focused on race or gender; but any sort of difference. The reason that I think it often focuses on race and gender is because those are areas where people are particularly unaware of their own privilege and where the issues are most crucial. As you point out, you could have a young black women who grows up wealthy and this would imbue her with some privilege related to that compared to a poor white male. However, > A poor white boy growing up in Appalachia has less privilege than a member of any race or gender growing up in a California suburb. As a general statement this is wrong; it needs to be qualified as above in terms of who exactly is being compared and on what sort of privilege. In this example both have some privilege and I'm not sure being wealthy would always out weigh being black and female (or vice versa). What I do think is reasonable to say is that if you look at large groups, white males do have a bit more privilege than many other groups. Again, in particular instances this can be completely turned around, so context is important to keep in mind. So why focus on white males in the general sense as a group with a lot of privilege? Because it's a converging of many types. They don't deal with many issues women and minorities do and even if you take a color/gender-blind issue like wealth; as a group white men are doing much better in that regard than others. I agree though that it would be beneficial to consider it more widely, and it's important to try and do that in discussions.
anewguy99 14y ago
This isn't the first time that I've seen anti-white racism on Hacker News[1]. The emotion behind theories of class privilege gets separated from its intellectual content, and people think it is okay to say things like this to their fellow hackers. It isn't. [1] For example, a previous comment thread blamed Elon Musk's success on the fact that he is a white male (as if every white male were a billionaire). I didn't comment at the time because I was logged-in to my main account, and defending white people against racism is un-PC. But I do worry that this kind of attack is accepted here and goes uncommented.
- TheZenPsycho 14y ago
  repeat after me. there is no such thing as reverse racism. By comparing this (oh no, someone called me white on a blog, and said I was successful) to the experiences of oppressed minorities, belittles history, it belittles their experiences. and it makes you look like a spoiled privileged white boy.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    anewguy99 did not say anything about "reverse racism". He was talking about racism.
    - TheZenPsycho 14y ago
      "reverse racism" is what it is called when someone claims that someone is being "racist" against the privileged majority. It's nonsense. It doesn't make sense that there is systematic oppression against ... the cohort that is undeniably and unshakably in power. If you insult someone for being white, yes it might hurt their feelings. Do the same to an unprivileged minority and it is potentially life threatening. There is no comparison.
      - jlgreco 14y ago
        > systematic oppression > Do the same to an unprivileged minority and it is potentially life threatening. There is no comparison. Racism must be systematic in order to be 'real' racism? Instances of racism must be comparable to one another in severity in order to be 'real' racism? These implications of severity and comparability are entirely your own invention. anewguy99 was not suggesting anything of the sort, you have assumed that he was because your pet definition of 'racism' requires that those implications be present when the word is used. If you want to use another definition than the casual/traditional one, that is fine. But don't expect others to take your pet definition seriously, and don't expect to extract legitimate meaning from what others are saying when those others are using the common meaning of the word.

" I didn’t create Cryptoparty just so a bunch of privileged white boys could.." Why did she drag race into it? Completely unnecessary. She has valid points without this.

sedev 14y ago

Her agenda is about making crypto accessible to lots of people that it's not currently available to. To those people, hackerdom often looks like an undifferentiated mass of white dudes. Leaving race out of a discussion like that is not a neutral thing: omitting race is a statement of its own.

robryan 14y ago
This isn't the white males fault though, I am sure all of them would be happy to see more diversity. The event is open invite though and this is the crowd that it attracts right now.
boboblong 14y ago
Are you saying that crpyto is not available to people who aren't white guys?

thejsjunky 14y ago

It's inherent to the concept of "privilege"; the understanding is that the people with the most "privilege" in the western world are men who are white. If you are making a point that a group has "privilege", it makes sense to point out they are mostly white since it affects the amount of "privilege" they have. That said, that particular remark seems to be imbued with some bitterness and desire to wound; which may be understandable coming from someone frustrated, but prevents me from endorsing it myself. edit: quotes are not for sarcasm, but to denote less common usage/meaning

anewguy99 14y ago
I've always found concepts of privilege to be lacking explanatory power. A European-derived culture is dominant in America, but east-Asian Americans still manage to do better than whites in education and in earnings. If racial privilege is powerful, it is not all-powerful. At the same time, I find the focus on race and class privilege to be incomplete. A poor white boy growing up in Appalachia has less privilege than a member of any race or gender growing up in a California suburb. But if he manages to get to college (statistically unlikely), he will learn from his professors how his success is all because of his skin and his genitals.
- thejsjunky 14y ago
  I think it's important to note the concept of privilege in this sense is a bit nebulous, is distinct from the common usage, and based on context. I'm partially at fault for the confusion here for talking about "privilege" as an absolute. Privilege is something that basically everyone has. It's about talking about the advantages one has due to factors like sex, race, geography etc over others when all other things are equal. It's not a concept that is focused on race or gender; but any sort of difference. The reason that I think it often focuses on race and gender is because those are areas where people are particularly unaware of their own privilege and where the issues are most crucial. As you point out, you could have a young black women who grows up wealthy and this would imbue her with some privilege related to that compared to a poor white male. However, > A poor white boy growing up in Appalachia has less privilege than a member of any race or gender growing up in a California suburb. As a general statement this is wrong; it needs to be qualified as above in terms of who exactly is being compared and on what sort of privilege. In this example both have some privilege and I'm not sure being wealthy would always out weigh being black and female (or vice versa). What I do think is reasonable to say is that if you look at large groups, white males do have a bit more privilege than many other groups. Again, in particular instances this can be completely turned around, so context is important to keep in mind. So why focus on white males in the general sense as a group with a lot of privilege? Because it's a converging of many types. They don't deal with many issues women and minorities do and even if you take a color/gender-blind issue like wealth; as a group white men are doing much better in that regard than others. I agree though that it would be beneficial to consider it more widely, and it's important to try and do that in discussions.

anewguy99 14y ago

This isn't the first time that I've seen anti-white racism on Hacker News[1]. The emotion behind theories of class privilege gets separated from its intellectual content, and people think it is okay to say things like this to their fellow hackers. It isn't. [1] For example, a previous comment thread blamed Elon Musk's success on the fact that he is a white male (as if every white male were a billionaire). I didn't comment at the time because I was logged-in to my main account, and defending white people against racism is un-PC. But I do worry that this kind of attack is accepted here and goes uncommented.

TheZenPsycho 14y ago
repeat after me. there is no such thing as reverse racism. By comparing this (oh no, someone called me white on a blog, and said I was successful) to the experiences of oppressed minorities, belittles history, it belittles their experiences. and it makes you look like a spoiled privileged white boy.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  anewguy99 did not say anything about "reverse racism". He was talking about racism.
  - TheZenPsycho 14y ago
    "reverse racism" is what it is called when someone claims that someone is being "racist" against the privileged majority. It's nonsense. It doesn't make sense that there is systematic oppression against ... the cohort that is undeniably and unshakably in power. If you insult someone for being white, yes it might hurt their feelings. Do the same to an unprivileged minority and it is potentially life threatening. There is no comparison.
    - jlgreco 14y ago
      > systematic oppression > Do the same to an unprivileged minority and it is potentially life threatening. There is no comparison. Racism must be systematic in order to be 'real' racism? Instances of racism must be comparable to one another in severity in order to be 'real' racism? These implications of severity and comparability are entirely your own invention. anewguy99 was not suggesting anything of the sort, you have assumed that he was because your pet definition of 'racism' requires that those implications be present when the word is used. If you want to use another definition than the casual/traditional one, that is fine. But don't expect others to take your pet definition seriously, and don't expect to extract legitimate meaning from what others are saying when those others are using the common meaning of the word.