[cashewchoo]

Confession: For a long time I didn't really think movements like these were necessary. "Why does it have to be for group X? Why not just have it open to everyone?" I still see a lot of sentiment like that on the internet. I felt like they were themselves racist.

I've slowly come around. I understand now why things like this program aren't racist, why they exist, and why the people they target can uniquely benefit from outreach. Moreover, I don't think I understand enough the struggles that underrepresented groups go through, and the fact that I'm oblivious to them is part of my own privileged upbringing (white, male, middle class, suburbs, nuclear family, single income, etc).

I think I still have a long ways to go, and one thing I've been thinking about is how I can try to capture the worldview that I used to have while I was in the "this isn't a problem, stop posting about it/i'm tired of reading about it" camp and thus use it to explain to people who are still stuck in it. The only reason I think I came to understand is because a dear friend of mine gradually explained it to me in a way that I understood.

Anyway, while I was writing this, lots of low-quality comments have come and been deleted, so I feel like it's worth hitting post. I can't eloquently and convincingly articulate why things like this are needed yet, especially to an already-convinced-otherwise audience, but maybe someone else can.

[nicbou]

These groups are relaxed learning environments in which outsiders can play, experiment, and express themselves.

I think we can all think of a hobby or topic we'd feel more comfortable joining if there was such an environment to introduce us to it.

For example, I'd love to play soccer, but I'd embarrass myself at the local field, especially with the language barrier. A "soccer for out of shape immigrants" group would certainly get me to play more. Likewise, I'd take a "welding for bead-curious urbanites who never get their hands dirty" class.

We can all appreciate the value of such environments. We just have to accept that the barrier of entry is different for everyone. For some, it might be gender or colour.

[Grieving]

I don't know if this is true everywhere, but my objection is mainly that there are no similar but unrestricted programs at all here. It's one thing to make a program tailored to girls when there's already one tailored to boys, or one that's not but happens to appeal mainly to boys. It's another thing entirely when the only options are girls-only.

> white, male, middle class, suburbs, nuclear family, single income, etc

You have next to nothing in common with a poor, rural white male with a single mother, so why shut them out based on your own privilege? Since poverty is already seen as a proxy for race, why not just start programs in poor areas without explicit focus on race? It has the same general effect without shutting the door on other underprivileged people.

[bennysomething]

I can sympathize with feeling of needing this. But I can't help thinking, what if my daughter wanted to go to this with say a black friend, she wouldn't be allowed. It sort of feels like it will ultimately create division rather than heal it.

I'd prefer kids were taught that they can try anything they dam well please. They just need to try.

Btw this is all hypothetical, my daughter is two and we live in the UK.

[vharuck]

>But I can't help thinking, what if my daughter wanted to go to this with say a black friend, she wouldn't be allowed.

I don't think that's the case. Quoting from a description of one event hosted by Black Girls Code:

>Who can participate in the hackathon?

>The Hackathon is open to girls of all experience levels. All are welcome and encouraged to register, whether a participant has previous coding exposure or is new to coding and app development!

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/bgc-and-nike-virtual-hackathon-...

If your daughter wants to go with her friend, I don't think the staff at the event would mind. Heck, they might love it to know a little girl in their target demographic had a coding buddy.

>I'd prefer kids were taught that they can try anything they dam well please. They just need to try.

They should also be taught that, but they're only human like the rest of us. Discouragement is often irrational, but that doesn't make it irrelevant.

[Viliam1234]

In this case, a better solution could be to organize the activity at a place where black people live, but allow anyone to join.

Okay, this addresses the race, not sure what to do about gender. Maybe choose a stereotypically girly topic and make posters in pink color, but again allow anyone to join, I guess. Send a signal, don't close the door.

[Viliam1234]

For me, it's this half-full half-empty cup. Depending on what angle I look from:

It is good to help underprivileged people...

It is bad to assume that race and gender are the only sources of privilege, thus throwing under the bus e.g. all the poor disabled people guilty of the sin of being born white and male...

I guess it's better to help some underprivileged people (and throw the others under the bus) than to help no one... but when you put it this way, it reduces the happy feeling.

[cwkoss]

I'd like to see more programs like this focusing on class disparity.

College finance system already works this way to an extent. I think making more educational programs adjust cost based on means would have the effect of helping the least-privileged people in our society without the moral hazards of racial segregation.

[tpoacher]

I feel the same, but with an added caveat. Just because some movements/concepts are 'A Good Thing™' doesn't mean that they are not amenable to abuse by 'Not So Good Things™'.

E.g., whenever a company lobbies for stuff, it's never "for the profits of our stakeholders"; it's always "for the sake of the children".

Therefore while I applaud positive movements, I'm also always weary to note the timing and subtext in which they are presented, and very often it feels like there is a disingenuous agenda behind them, that sours the apple for me.