[chesterbr]

Non-minority here. IMHO, the question is valid and should not be flagged. It’s ok to look for/ask about a version of it where a particular demographic feels more represented/included. That does not invalidate the site or the people who don’t belong to such groups, and having the question flagged so fast only raises suspicions over the alleged neutrality of the site regarding gender, etc.

[rich_sasha]

I'm of the general opinion that people should be free to make their own sub-communities, and even within reason restrict access to others. Say women in tech want a male-free space? Well fine.

The issue is, what then about "white men in tech"? Do they get to have a group to themselves, to discuss issues from, dunno, "dealing with tech Feminazis", or whatever white men in tech struggle with? What about white supremacists in tech? Elite SEs against influx of cheap junior labour?

I'm personally not a member of any such "selective" groups and for these reasons feel a bit ambivalent about them.

But as i say, go ahead as far as I'm concerned...

[alldayeveryday]

> Say women in tech want a male-free space? Well fine.

> The issue is, what then about "white men in tech"? Do they get to have a group to themselves, to discuss issues from [...]

An interesting observation that white men having their own space is an "issue" whereas any other collective is not an issue.

[rich_sasha]

As i say, neither bothers me too much. But I'd imagine various groups that want their own space would not like their complement making a space just for themselves, and not letting them in.

[qsort]

GP's reasoning is by modus tollens.

[alldayeveryday]

Concerning this topic I commonly see the logic:

If P, then Q. Not Q. But still, P.