[mibbitier]

I disagree. Everyone can be a minority if they decide to, depending on how you cut the population.

To claim "white males" are a majority is just an arbitrary distinction you're making. Everyone is a majority or minority depending on your criteria.

You don't fix racism/sexist/etc with more racism/sexism/etc. You fix it by being inclusive, and judging people on their merits.

[natrius]

The goal of this program isn't to fix racism or sexism. It's to encourage a group of people to explore programming who do so at lower a rate than many other groups. If the talents and desires needed to program are evenly distributed among the population, this is a targeted way to improve the lives of people who wouldn't discover programming on their own. A program that wasn't narrowly targeted would have a lower return on investment.

[mibbitier]

And that's fine. But you can't have it both ways...

If you believe in free speech, you have to accept people saying things you don't like.

If you believe in freedom to set criteria on who you accept for something, you should also accept "white men only private clubs" etc.

[natrius]

While I might find someone's speech distasteful, I'd fight for it's legality. While I'd find "white men only private clubs" distasteful, I think they should be legal.

When it comes to taste, however, I'll absolutely have it both ways. Some racial preferences are noble. Some are repugnant.

[EricDeb]

They already exist... they're called fraternities... minus a token person of color here and there

[nollidge]

Nobody wants it both ways here. I do accept "white men only private clubs". I think they're shitty and absurd, but so be it, it's a free country.

I'm not sure what you're arguing against. Nobody said they're excluding non-blacks or non-girls. Maybe they would, and I would definitely disagree with that. What they are doing is focusing their attention on black girls. Other children are not being disadvantaged in the process just because there isn't a group that caters specifically to their demographic.

[mibbitier]

I was just pointing out a possible double standard in some peoples thinking... eg racism/sexism is fine, but only if it's in a certain direction.

[rmc]

This is not an either/or, black/white situation. It's not just A or B. There are lots of options here. Don't pretend there are only 2 options.

[rmc]

Everyone can be a minority if they decide to, depending on how you cut the population.

Correct. But not all minorities have the same amount of power/wealth/prestigate/social stigma/advantages. "Minority" was originally a term to refer to some people. Don't take it too literally. It's not "minorities" per se that's bad, it's when one "minority" has much less power and advantages than the people who aren't in that minority.

[nollidge]

What exactly do you disagree with?

> Everyone can be a minority if they decide to, depending on how you cut the population.

No, not if they "decide to". I think you mean that every person on the planet has minority status within any number of categorizations, but we're talking about categorizations that actually matter in terms of discrimination.

Or do you mean to argue that U.S. soccer fans, marathon runners, and male nurses (all minorities) have similar life experiences as racial minorities?

> To claim "white males" are a majority is just an arbitrary distinction you're making.

It's not arbitrary if it's a salient factor in determining a person's social and economic outcome.

> You fix it by being inclusive, and judging people on their merits.

Indeed. Interesting, though, that you're more concerned about how this group is acting in regard than how society at large is...

[_pius]

Everyone can be a minority if they decide to, depending on how you cut the population.

In other news: down is up, black is white, and true is false, depending on your criteria.

There are actual facts in the world and you don't get to change them to suit your side of the argument.