It's actually written into GitHub's Open Code of conduct. (The 'Open' Code has not accepted any changes for quite some time even though this particular issue was under discussion [1].) The Open Code expressly excuses discrimination against some races and genders, specifically by explicitly ignoring any critique which might fall under a 'reverse'-ism; 'reverse-racism' or 'reverse-sexism' [2]. This line in the Open Code was previously discussed here [3].
I wasn't aware of this history. One thing to note is the sentence that precedes 'reverse'-ism:
>Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort. We will not act on complaints regarding:
> ‘Reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’
I'm okay with it, because I can get a job elsewhere. Some minorities can't. I don't need to be able to get a job at GitHub, because for some stupid reason, society has a general bias in favor of me. I can work anywhere, but the folks they're giving a shot are folks who don't have it as good as I do.
If this continues to proliferate, instead of achieving a World where minorities have equal opportunity with non-minorities, we will instead end up with a mix of institutions where those in the majority have an advantage and other institutions where those who are minorities have an advantage. This doesn't look like equality, but a reversion to something looking like "separate but equal".
> (6) Some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women.
I'm just glad I dumped Github. I'm pretty sure they'd find my white female friends [some of whom needed to transition] being discriminated against as okay based on those slides.
Do you mean that it does not exist or that it cannot exist? I've heard this exact phrase before, "reverse racism is a myth," and it seems like an example of a thought-terminating cliché.
So, as far as I'm aware, there is "racism-as-defined-in-some-academic-circles", where it's only racism when it's systematic and directed by a privileged ethnic group against an unprivileged ethnic group. Which is (IMHO) different from what non-academic people understand racism. Maybe that's what parent means?
> "when it's systematic and directed by a privileged ethnic group against an unprivileged ethnic group"
Honest question: does it have to be directed by "a privileged ethnic group" or is it valid if it is by any general group or even a single, privileged person?
Presumably, the "privileged group" should have a perceived ethnic composition different from that of the "unprivileged group", otherwise discrimination can't be based on ethnicity. But I guess it doesn't mean that all members of that ethnic group need to share this outlook.
That said, I'm no academic, but I remember reading something about this a few years ago, in the case of a woman in France accused of anti-white racism.
[1] https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/issues/82
[2] https://github.com/todogroup/opencodeofconduct/blob/gh-pages...
[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10043668