[usuallybaffled]

This adversarial discourse doesn't help anyone.

EDIT: Instead of downvoting, why not provide your view of how this is helping anything?

[CharlesW]

> ...why not provide your view of how this is helping anything?

Because humor is a good mechanism for talking about topics we might not otherwise talk about, but should be.

By "adversarial discourse", do you mean the site or the HN comments?

[usuallybaffled]

The website seems to implicitly say that white men equals bad and any attempt made by white men to improve the situation must be half-hearted and just a PR stunt. Thus all the sarcasm. This view is not unique to this website (if they are even trying to make this claim in some form) but runs through a lot of these initiatives.

Lately, I have even witnessed people complaining that most donations come from white men charities and that this is bad (with some people even suggesting they should refuse those donations to make a point), which seems completely nonsense.

How far does it have to go for these attempts to raise awareness of a problem to turn into racism themselves?

[vacri]

> The website seems to implicitly say that white men equals bad

vs

> Lately, I have even witnessed people complaining that most donations come from white men charities and that this is bad

So... you complain that the website is generalising, then go on to imply that a clear outlier is also the general case?