back to article LLVM contributor hits breakpoint, quits citing inclusivity intolerance

Rafael Avila de Espindola, one of the top contributors to the LLVM compiler toolset, has cut ties with the open source project over what he perceives as code of conduct hypocrisy and support for ethnic favoritism. In a message posted to the LLVM mailing list, de Espindola said he was leaving immediately and cited changes in …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    >latin@

    A "word" invented by people who have no understanding of how latin and hispanic-derived languages work, and are probably more "white" than a scottish cave dwelling albino.

    1. Trilkhai

      No, that's how it has become warped in recent decades. Up until that point, "Latin" (Latin-American, Latin lover, etc.) correctly referred to people from countries that speak a language derived from Latin.

      1. joeldillon

        I'm pretty sure it's never applied to, e.g., Romanians. Or French people for that matter.

        1. fandom Silver badge

          Of course it has been applied to french people, actually I have heard it said the were the ones who started saying "latin america" in order to feel included.

        2. Old Handle
          Stop

          You guys are missing the point. The word in question is not Latin, but Latin@. Which I assume is pronounced la-TEE-nat, but I'm not sure.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Latin@

            "Latin@" is presumably meant to imply Latino/Latina, but it looks contrived (and how are you supposed to say it out loud?). I have also seen Latinx, which is meant to imply both male and female, and also any other gender identities (not unreasonable), but I do wonder that the more weight is loaded onto a word, the harder it is for many people to take it entirely seriously, even though it starts with well-meaning intentions. Is there a reason that gender-neutral "Latin" isn't suitable, and what is the difference between Latinx and Hispanic (as Latinx, as far as I am aware, implies Spanish or Portuguese descent, but not French, etc?)

            Similarly, the euphemism treadmill now apparently includes "BAME", which actually sounds like an insult, and also begs the question: if we accept that there are ethnic minorities (as any country will normally have one (or possibly more, in the case of a linguistically varying but otherwise similar population) predominant ethnic group), why should black people (which covers a multitude of origins in itself) be highlighted especially over any other identifiable ethnic minority?

      2. Peter2 Silver badge

        countries that speak a language derived from Latin.

        Did you know that English is derived from a mix of ~10th century Germanic, plus Greek and Latin?

    2. gotes

      I assumed it was some trendy way of writing Latina/Latino.

    3. tekHedd

      And here we go

      How appropriately ironic that this comment thread should immediatey appear attached to news of out of control SJWism. Clearly our troll has a sense of humor.

      1. gotes

        Re: And here we go

        Would the Amiga have been so popular if it was called Amigo? Discuss.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This SJW cancer keeps spreading.

    You should not be coerced into treating people differently because they have a vagina or aren't white.

    Why am in not getting preferential treatment because of my sex and skin color? Is white male the wrong type?

    1. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge
      FAIL

      "Why am in not getting preferential treatment because of my sex and skin color?"

      You are, and you don't even realize it. That's pretty much the point of promoting diversity.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "You are, and you don't even realize it. That's pretty much the point of promoting diversity."

        Diversity of ideas is good - more people with different ideas make it more likely that a viable solution will be found, and if those ideas can be shared and discussed without fear of repercussion then they can complement each other and the sum will be larger than the whole of its parts.

        However, forced diversity based on any racial, religious, political, or sexual criteria is bad. It discrimination and bigotry in pure form.

        When someone says that the way to combat discrimination is WITH discrimination, all I see is a hypocrite.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Good point but .....

          " ... When someone says that the way to combat discrimination is WITH discrimination, all I see is a hypocrite."

          Good point, and I can see the reason why you think as you do BUT .... the issue is that the whole of society IS by its very existence PRO White.

          This is not a dig at you or any other person who maybe in this demographic BUT you are favoured by your skin colour as a matter of simply being the 'RIGHT' colour according to society.

          Your own personal views and potential 'more than real' support of other peoples whatever their colour DOES NOT change the built-in bias that is there in society.

          It is this that people are trying to overcome and this leads to very real discrimination against people that are white because they have the societal advantage from birth, with no need to gain membership or convince people of their intrinsic worth.

          I know that many see this as unfair BUT there has been many hundreds of years of 'unfair' that had real life changing impact on hundreds of thousands of people every year. Sometimes the only way to effect change that has a hope of persisting is to fight fire with fire, therefore the historically persistent yet still endemic discrimination has to be fought with equal discrimination.

          This is NOT personal against the one BUT against the 'Many' that cannot be addressed in any other way. Unfortunately, there are victims to this stategy but it is for the long-term and greater good as all these things tend to be.

          You feel aggrieved and 'Hard done by', please bear in mind that this is not a new experience for so many non-whites that can follow this back for generations and they know so well the feeling you are experiencing.

          A little bit of patience would be appreciated as the wait has been so so long !!!

          1. smacky

            Re: Good point but .....

            If you go back, all the way back. Everybody, every human on this planet has someone in their ancestry who was a slave or horribly oppressed.

          2. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

            Re: Good point but .....

            ...BUT .... the issue is that the whole of society IS by its very existence PRO White....

            Er...not exactly. The whole of WHITE society IS by its very existence PRO White. You will find that the whole of ASIAN society IS by its very existence PRO Asian, and the whole of BLACK society IS by its very existence PRO Black.

            It's just that in the West we have been shoehorning different cultures together on the assumption that everything would be marvelous....

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Good point but .....

              "..BUT .... the issue is that the whole of society IS by its very existence PRO White...."

              mm, not sure that is correct, have you tried to own a company in china? or other places?

              (and quite a lot of biligual people are shocked when in other contries at the crap spoken about them when the speak doesn't realised they understand the language)

              Wierdly a black friend could not understand my shock at his racist language about indian people.

              You will tend to find in most countries tribalism causes intolerance about all other races.

          3. Draco
            Pint

            Re: Good point but .....

            > Unfortunately, there are victims to this stategy but it is for the long-term and greater good as all these things tend to be.

            An laudable ethic that was used to great effect in the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cambodia, etc.

            Trample the the rights of one and you trample on the rights of everyone. Or, as Marcus Aurelius put it almost 2000 years ago, "What is not good for the hive, is not good for the bee."

            If we want to end discrimination, then we must end it, not introduce new forms of it.

          4. ByeLaw101

            Re: Good point but .....

            "Sometimes the only way to effect change that has a hope of persisting is to fight fire with fire, therefore the historically persistent yet still endemic discrimination has to be fought with equal discrimination"

            So instead of fighting against discrimination, your solution is to persist it.. so for the post you are responding to, you are one of the hypocrites they are talking about.

            Your not part of the solution, your part of the problem.

            1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

          5. NinjasFTW

            Re: Good point but .....

            "Unfortunately, there are victims to this stategy but it is for the long-term and greater good as all these things tend to be."

            i'm sorry but anytime someone starts talking about 'The greater good' claxons and and flashing red lights should be going off!

            Also you need to be careful when the victims happen to be majority group that will eventually push back. Trump and co are the result of a disenfranchised majority.

            1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

              Re: Good point but .....

              "Trump and co are the result of a disenfranchised majority."

              There is no "disenfranchised majority". There is only a majority who is getting a minuscule sample of how it (as a statistical group) have treated anyone who is not them and is butthurt at being treated as anything "lesser".

          6. LucreLout Silver badge

            Re: Good point but .....

            This is NOT personal against the one BUT against the 'Many' that cannot be addressed in any other way. Unfortunately, there are victims to this stategy but it is for the long-term and greater good as all these things tend to be.

            So let me see if I have this right. Todays straight white men, whose careers you are deliberately trashing by creating bias against them, should just shut up because hundreds of years ago some other straigth white men did something wrong. And you feel, because clearly no intelligent thought has been applied, that this is justice? It isn't; it really really isn't.

            You feel aggrieved and 'Hard done by', please bear in mind that this is not a new experience for so many non-whites that can follow this back for generations and they know so well the feeling you are experiencing.

            Obviously they don't or they wouldn't be so keen to inflict it upon others. Their ancestors might have, sure, but there's no real discrimination today. I look around my team and we have two straight black guys, one gay white woman, two indians - one batting for each team, and two straight white guys. I hired everyone in the team. All I did was hire the best developers that came for an interview. Their skin colour, sexual preferences, age, physical ability, and whether or not they sit down to pee simply weren't relevant. They could all have been straight white men, or all one legged black lesbians for all the difference it would have made to me - physical characteristics bear no relationship to code quality.

            A little bit of patience would be appreciated as the wait has been so so long !!!

            But it hasn't. You;re attempting to claim some hereditary disadvantage. Most SJWs tend to be in their 20s or early 30s. You've not waited for anything. Ever. That your great grandparents might have been discriminated against does not imply disadvantage to you or that you have waited for your perverse form of justice.

            If we're going to be racist, then everyone should be free to be racist. If we're not going to have racism, then we can't have what you propose because it is just racism.

          7. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Good point but .....

            It is this that people are trying to overcome and this leads to very real discrimination against people that are white because they have the societal advantage from birth, with no need to gain membership or convince people of their intrinsic worth.

            If you think no white people have to gain membership or convince people of their intrinsic worth, try having an Appalachian accent.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Good point but .....

              'If you think no white people have to gain membership or convince people of their intrinsic worth, try having an Appalachian accent.'

              If we're going on accents, I'd rather hire your Appalachian over Bostonian¹.

              I do know that my career suffered a bit as I refused to drop my West of Scotland accent² and 'go native' (as advised to do so by a senior Scottish physicist in Oxfnord).

              ¹ Appalachian I don't mind, but for reasons unknown I really detest the Bostonian accent, even more than Bronx one, but hey, I'm a Scot, so what do I know?

              ² Well, it is mainly a West coast accent...with a strong hint of jute.

            2. Cheesemouse

              Re: Good point but .....

              That's nothing lad, try having a Yorkshire accent. You're completely f%$#@d

          8. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Re: Good point but .....

            The Downvote ratio proves my point !!! ..... Thank you.

            I don't believe that there are so many Racists reading this thread but I do believe that there are MANY who just cannot see the reality.

            The bias is built in, even some people who are SO convinced it is not them !!!

            It is unconsiously there built-in as part of your personality because you have known nothing else and can see no fault in you or the people around you.

            As far as the 'Pro-White', 'Pro-Asian' etc goes not strictly true as even in these groups there are equivalent bias towards the 'Lighter Skins' and against the 'Darker Skins' often conflated with other issues to hide/dilute the act. ...... sound familiar ..... Myanmar for instance ???

            The point raised about there should be NO Discrimination not yet MORE is very laudable BUT history shows that this is not going to happen.

            The only people that can argue this are people that do not/have not experienced the reality as it is over the last 50 years. We can all agree with these 'High Ideals' but they are by definition unachievable so in reality the status quo is maintained ..... proof is all the laudable attempts to date to push equality without 'hurting' anyone that have simply & absolutely failed !!!

            So many people will believe that discrimination has improved and is not as bad as say the 70's BUT this is just not true .... simply it has evolved to be more cleverly hidden, surrounded by good intentions and other diversions from the truth.

            There are 1001 ways to be biased and discriminate against someone and YET be untouchable because the act(s) is so insidious. Proof is 50+ years of real world experience in the UK / Europe / South America / America etc. In all these places the issue is there and often in plain sight BUT everyone would state 'Hand on Heart' that there is little or no discrimination. Even in countries where the norm is a skin somewhat less than white there are the equivalent acts and bias that demonstrate that discrimination is real and alive even in groups that are targetted as a whole.

            Why do you think this is so ???

            Because there is proof of the gain you can make by playing this game all around them.

            These groups are discriminated against themselves and they are reflecting the world they see by adopting the same mindset against their own sub-groups to fight their way to the top !!!

            In their lives, why not that is how the world works doesn't it !!!!

            More downvotes I expect ...... but you just keep confirming the truth as you do !!! :)

            1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

        2. Phil Lord

          "When someone says that the way to combat discrimination is WITH discrimination, all I see is a hypocrite."

          Positive discrimination is a difficult one. On one hand, it is consistent and simple to say we should not do it because it's discrimination. And that's nice, but simple is not correct. Consider the use of positive discrimination in Northern Ireland, to stop the anti-catholic bias. Consider, the legal alterations for voter registration in 1960s in the US, to overcome an effective anti-black block on voting.

          If you think that these things were hypocritical, then that's fine, but they were both effective in ending a violent and coercive status quo.

          Is that what we have here? Not sure, but when you have an occupation which is 90% men, you have to ask questions about whether there is an effective block on women.

          1. LucreLout Silver badge

            Not sure, but when you have an occupation which is 90% men, you have to ask questions about whether there is an effective block on women.

            When the occupation is 100% self selective, then you can only rationally conclude that there is no block on anyone.

            1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

              "When the occupation is 100% self selective, then you can only rationally conclude that there is no block on anyone."

              And we KNOW that it's self selecting because, of course, there is absolutely NO pressure for, e.g., young girls to get pushed towards dolls and cooking sets and away from science kits and construction toys... </eyeroll>

          2. Aitor 1 Silver badge

            Positive discrimantion

            It is quite clear: discrimination is bad, if you think that discriminating is good, they you probably are a bigot.

            Positive discrimination is the effect for the people NOT being discriminated. If you discriminate black people, it is positive por whites, etc etc.

            So no, I am completely against it. I do remind ppl here that I am a foreigner in the UK, and have to live with discrimination (not terrible, but there). I would no like other ppl being discriminated so I get a job, it is WRONG, and I will need one soon...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "... promoting diversity."

        Others need not apply.

        Recently participated in a disastrous book club meeting. After attempting to preemptively qualify my misgivings about a book by describing who I am (my life experiences belie my appearance), I found I could not be heard.

        And these were people who are intelligent, earnest and otherwise perceptive. I was misinterpreted and shut down because I am an ageing white male.

        My main background point was drawing the parallel between the consistent oppression of black people in the US to the PRC's creating a permanent criminal class of descendants of landlords, capitalists, etc. for exploitation to keep the rest of the population happy. "You are better than they are." Which is to say, I have been thinking about all this for decades, and in depth.

        But they could not credit my words, could not understand the idea, because there was a huge roadblock - my face.

        One offered "restorative suggestion" from the book was completely wrong - much akin to quietly and covertly giving additional money to professionals based on ethnicity - when as I pointed out the right thing to do is openly recommend them to your friends and acquaintances. Put your values on the line and publically show that you value excellence, without bias. (They chanted "But the book says...")

        I ask you if you didn't automatically dismiss my saying "(my life experiences belie my appearance)". Is it possible for an aging white male to be right about anything to do with any of the oppressions? Are you actually - in practice - unbiased?

        BTW: in another attempt at qualification - in vain no doubt - I've worked at more than one company that went down in flames due entirely to a lack of diversity. And that includes near-exclusively non-European companies. Diversity is good, exclusions are bad. Practice that.

        OBTW: Have you noticed that the anonymous icon is a white face? Perfect for denigration, yes?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "... promoting diversity."

          If it's at work I very strongly recommend shutting the hell up if you insist in participating in these things.

          Anything you say will be used against you at some point unless you follow the approved herd.

        2. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

          Re: "... promoting diversity."

          ..Perfect for denigration, yes?..

          You use a word which has the letters '...Nigra..." in it!!!! The police have been informed...

        3. Henry Hallan

          Re: "... promoting diversity."

          You may have more luck by explaining it in their language. The key concept is "intersectionality," which explains that people are privileged and/or unprivileged for various reasons, which may intersect in any individual.

          In other words, you might be privileged for being white while being unprivileged for having the wrong social background. Or disability, or health issues, or politics, or whatever.

          It's a powerful idea, not least because it prevents the very "white is always wrong" scenario you describe.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Flame

        > You are, and you don't even realize it. That's pretty much the point of promoting diversity.

        Justice is blind.

        Treating people differently based on race/gender/group identity - or the (alleged) sins of their (alleged) ancestors - is social injustice. That's "SJWism" in newspeak.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          That's just a slogan

          Justice is not blind. Justices see all, and considers it carefully.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Where is my sponsorship?

        Also I feel discriminated because people with family ties with billionaries have a much easier time than I do and enjoy more advantages. Where is my sponsorship again for all this discrimination?

        Or can we only "positively" discriminate on the "right" stuff?

        Discriminating the discrimination.

        1. Phil Lord

          'Or can we only "positively" discriminate on the "right" stuff?'

          Yes. Discrimination on grounds of gender is illegal (in the UK), except under very specific circumstances. One of those circumstances is an extreme standing gender split in a profession. If the bias is not extreme, or starts to disappear, you cannot do it any more.

          1. tekHedd

            It's illegal...

            "Discrimination on grounds of gender is illegal (in the UK), except under very specific circumstances."

            Discrimination is illegal, except where required by law. :)

      5. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

        You are wrong and you don't even realise it....

      6. nethack47

        The suggestion that one can discount people based on skin colour is a problem because it doesn't see nuances and doesn't actually fix the problem.

        Supposedly I am privileged because I am male and generally look northern European. I get treated differently because I am an immigrant, because I have a disability, because I have children, because I don't share others interests and generally because I am different.

        Being preferentially treated is mostly about who you know and how you behave. I happen to work with people who see my worth but I've got a very long CV of places that wasn't inclusive of me.

        Privilege is only obvious when making assumptions about people based on their looks but that is no good for activism or gestures. Worst case like Earth Hour potentially causing instabilities in the electrical grid.

      7. rexyup

        Wealthy whites have been trying to scapegoat poor whites for the sins of the rich for the last 50 years.

        Now, they equate the “white privilege” of the janitor with the “white privileged” of the CEO. Essentially, they are telling folks far beneath them on the socio-economic scale, how well they have it. Which, as we know, is easy for them to say.

        “No, no, don’t look at the black incarceration rates since Democrats began pretending to care for minorities, look over there at the racist joke being told by the powerless gas station attendant ... he’s the reason you’re suffering!”

    2. Mark 85 Silver badge

      This whole mess started back in the early 70's so nothing new here except the ferocity of the attacks. Back then, it was pure numbers.. the company needed X-number of engineers and Y-percentage could not be white. Not qualification based at all. Lots of folks were hired to fill the quotas without being able to do the work. Little has changed excepted the volume level of the attacks have increased.

    3. katrinab Silver badge

      Trans women don’t have vaginas unless they have gad surgery to create one, and most don’t. Genderqueer individuals don’t necessarily have vaginas either.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        And if you happen to have a special vagina (apparently they are) one you are free from coercion, can impose on other people that they must be friendly and welcoming, and will get sponsorships and grants.

        Gee ain't that lucky. Maybe i'll get one of those trans "vaginas" so I can get a sponsorship too just because I have one.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        > Trans women don’t have vaginas unless they have gad surgery to create one, and most don’t.

        FTFY

      3. This post has been deleted by a moderator

        1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

          1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

            1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

              Re: And the village idiot spoketh

              "I guess you’re happier as a cuck."

              Someone who actually finds the word "cuck" a viable form of argumentation...

              Well, that would explain the Anonymous Cowardice, then.

              1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

              2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    4. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge
      FAIL

      Nobody does identity politics like white males.

    5. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

      ...Is white male the wrong type?...

      In this world, very much so. It would only be worse if you were old as well...

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I do not discriminate: I hate all winghers equally

      > Why am in not getting preferential treatment because of my sex and skin color? Is white male the wrong type?

      As has been said already: you are getting preferential treatment. You just do not realise because that positive discrimination is countered by the negative discrimination that you also do receive. The latter on account of lack of moral character and intellectual strength.

      Anything else you would like to complain about during work hours?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I do not discriminate: I hate all winghers equally

        Systemic racism does not exist for this crowd. Not a thing.

    7. LucreLout Silver badge

      Is white male the wrong type?

      It increasingly seems to me that the right-on crowd regard balls as a birth defect.... especially if coupled with white skin.

      I hate racism & sexism, and positive discrimination is just that. There's no good racism and bad racism, there's only racism.

    8. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

      Misunderstanding

      I think the whole resignation thing is a mistake, surely white heterosexual men are always entitled?

  3. HmmmYes Silver badge

    Hod do they know if gays and what not are under represented in tech?

    I dont ask, or get into what my work colleages are doing in their own time. Not my business. And i could not give a fuck.

    1. Steve Knox

      You're not the only source of information in the universe.

      A lot of people have asked how different classes of people are represented, and what they've found is that the systems that have evolved around various types of work have evolved to support individuals who closely conform to majority norms.

      Of course you couldn't give a fuck. You're not affected (except in a positive way.)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        LGBTQ* are extremely overrepresented in tech - especially if by "tech" you mean Silicon Valley.

        That's a fact. And the result is anything BUT tolerance for them.

        1. ST Silver badge
          WTF?

          > LGBTQ* are extremely overrepresented in tech

          Care to provide a reference in support of the above assertion?

          > That's a fact

          How so? Just because you made an assertion, that automatically makes it a fact?

          1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

            How so? Just because you made an assertion,

            Peter Thiel alone counts for a few million. Based on the damage he has done.

            On a more serious note, I am now of the opinion that any flagrant demonstration of sexual orientation in the workplace should be a sackable offense. This includes pins, lapels, badges, etc. Screw whoever you like (provided they consent), wherever you like in whatever position you like. Just do not mix it with the workplace culture.

            Once upon a time I was a bit more tolerant. I changed my mind after observing a bloke put a skirt and declare himself transsexual to avoid a redundancy via the discrimination card. In a UK Fortune 100 company to be more exact.

          2. NinjasFTW

            well a very quick google reported:

            7% of Facebook identified as LGBT in the latest survey. https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-diversity-stats-show-lgbt-numbers-for-first-time/

            Githubs recent survey also reported around 7% LGBT https://www.wired.com/2017/06/diversity-open-source-even-worse-tech-overall/

            According to the ONS around 2% of the population identify as LGBT

            https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/sexuality/bulletins/sexualidentityuk/2016

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Thanks @NinjasFTW

              I don't see the need to provide evidence for the obvious, but there it is. I suspect a rigorous study of tech vs non-tech workers would show a much greater divide. Of course, 'accredited' researchers are hesitant to conduct rigorous studies that may reveal facts inconvenient to their 'social justice' agendas.

            2. ST Silver badge
              WTF?

              In the US, LGBTQ demographics vary greatly by state.

              By the same metric, and playing the same percentages game: 13.3% of US population identifies itself as being of Black/African-American descent: US Census Bureau Population Demographics.

              While at Facebook only 3% of employees are of Black/African-American descent.

              So, according to your theory, Facebook should: (1) fire 50% of its LGBTQ empoyees. (2) fire 20% of its white employees. (3) hire more Black/African-American candidates unti they reach the 13% percentage. But they have to be very careful when hiring African-Americans: they can't hire too many LGBTQ African-Americans. Which, of course, can't be done without asking questions about the candidate's sexual orientation on the job application form. And that's illegal.

              See, that's the problem with being a self-centered bigoted white male and crying foul while playing these stupid percentages game: no matter how you look at the numbers, white still is the dominant ethnicity in the US, at 61.3%. Kind of difficult to claim white male discrimination.

              1. NinjasFTW

                @ST So you ask for metrics to back up a statement.

                Metrics are then provided and then rather than dispute them you shift the argument from LGBTQ to race and throw in an ad hominem attack to boot.

                Your argument also struggles because its not the majority that are asking for quotas but the minority groups.

                Leaving aside the argument as to the benefits of reverse discrimination in the first place, can it still be justified when the group(s) it was setup to benefit has exceeded the desired result of equality?

                1. ST Silver badge
                  FAIL

                  > you shift the argument from LGBTQ to race

                  The argument is about under-represented minorities. That includes LGBTQ as well as under-represented ethnic groups.

                  What makes you uncomfortable about the Black/African-American analogy is the sense of discomfort you experience when facing race-based discrimination. You seem much more comfortable with discrimination based on sexual orientation. The fact that both kinds of discrimination are equally unacceptable and evil eludes you.

                  > Your argument also struggles because its not the majority that are asking for quotas but the minority groups.

                  Ummmm, no. I did not make the assertion that LGBTQ groups are over-represented in Silicon Valley, without providing a single supporting reference. That assertion was most likely made by a heterosexual white male.

                  > [ ...] reverse discrimination [ ... ] can it still be justified when the group(s) it was setup to benefit has exceeded the desired result of equality?

                  I don't see how reverse discrimination has exceeded the desired result of equality when African-Americans are still grossly under-represented in the Facebook example.

                  I also do not see that there was any reverse discrimination applied in the first place, as white caucasians are still the dominant ethnic group both at Facebook, and in the US population demographics.

                  You can't be white, representing 61% of the population, and claim reverse discrimination.

            3. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Everybody can dream a fantasy.

              You can self-identify with whatever you like. But it doesn’t make it any more than fantasy or delusion.

              Sometimes I start out, at the beginning of the day, feeling like I’m King of the World. Then I have to deal with arseholes.

              If you aren’t one, you work with one.

              I am no more a superhot Playboy centrefold (fantasy) than Bruce Jenner is a woman.

        2. zebthecat

          LGBTQ* are extremely overrepresented in tech - especially if by "tech" you mean Silicon Valley.

          That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

      2. HmmmYes Silver badge

        Err.

        Nope.

        I believe in giving people a fair go.

        Turn up with the qualifications and drive and you'll do OK.

        Being a lesbian black woman will never make up if you cannot do the work you are meant to be doing.

        I have a friend who is half caste. His mams African, as in from Africa. Shes very very black. He isnt, he does not even look part black.

        People think he's Asian, if anything.

        My mate spent a few years of his childhood living in posh mud hut. Studying by candle light, being chased by lions, that sort of shit.

        He's in the state now. He gets so much shit from 'Africans' whose families have not been 50m miles out of the USA for generations.

        Not sure the point Im making. But then my mates not sure of the point the USA 'Africans' are making either.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          @ HmmmYes: Could I politely ask you to edit your post to use different words to describe your friend? It is OK to describe your friend as mixed-race, but those words that you have used, although perhaps in somewhat more common use in earlier times, can be seen negatively and are unfortunately quite offensive.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

      3. HieronymusBloggs Silver badge

        "systems that have evolved around various types of work have evolved to support individuals who closely conform to majority norms."

        Given the wide variety of eccentrics and non-conformists (myself included) who work in tech, WTF is a "majority norm"?

  4. jonfr

    Draconian code of conduct

    It is at no surprise to me that draconian code of conduct doesn't work. FreeBSD has adopted even more draconian rules on the project. I don't know about other open source projects. What I do know is that this set of rules do not work. Both in the long term or the short term.

    The reason being that bad people are bad and good people are good. The rest is a grey bits of mixture with all colours and problems in it. What happens does happen and dam that code of conduct in the process.

    1. Phil Lord

      Re: Draconian code of conduct

      For reference the code of conduct is:

      be friendly and patient,

      be welcoming,

      be considerate,

      be respectful,

      be careful in the words that you choose and be kind to others, and

      when we disagree, try to understand why.

      Seems relatively hard to interpret "be friendly and patient" as Draconian.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Stop

        Re: Draconian code of conduct

        No, this is the new FreeBSD code of conduct that caused an uproar in February. It's extremely SJW.

        1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

          Re: Draconian code of conduct

          It's extremely SJW.

          I concur. It includes anti-fatso discrimination clauses which for me is a step too far.

          THAT "non-discrimination" is a no go in my book. F*ck off, get off your chair, stop stuffing your face with pizza in a basement and go to the gym. Or at the very least go for a run around the neighbourhood.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Draconian code of conduct

          Followed the link, amongst the BS there was

          'Deliberate use of "dead" or rejected names.'

          Eh? WTF am I missing here?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Draconian code of conduct

            That's using someone's name before they decided they wanted to self identify as something else.

            In other words if I now decide I'm Manuelix, a afro asian gender neutral waiter from Barcelona, you are no longer allowed to address me as Bob or use the pronouns I don't lke.

            Not kidding.

  5. Shart Tank

    That feels unwelcoming and unfriendly. Please report to HR.

  6. David Webb

    I read the code of conduct (why spell colour and behavior? Stick to either British English or English - simplified) and came to the conclusion that Torvalds would be screwed.

    As for the other thing, I agree with not discriminating against anyone, except people who disagree with me, and people who prefer AMD to Intel or Nvidia, or Xbox to PlayStation, them lot can go and (insert Torvalds comment here)

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      And fscking emacs users.

      And those who use tabs in python code, they are first up against the wall

      1. disgruntled yank Silver badge

        Hey!

        If you use emacs, you never have to worry about tabs in your Python code.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: Hey!

          Persecute the heretic....

          Kill the unbeliever ...

          1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

            Re: Persecute the heretic

            Are we talking about Macolytes here?

            if so, hang about a sec - I'll just get my pitchfork...and torch and baseball bat and broom-handle and sexually frustrated African bull elephant and...

      2. AJ MacLeod

        Emacs and Tabs

        Conflicted - I want to upvote you for the first line and downvote you for the second!

  7. alain williams Silver badge

    The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

    I applaud the LLVM code of conduct, short, easy to read & inclusive; summary: be nice to others.

    I dislike the Outreachy Eligibility for being sponsored. The writers seem to have decided that white men are bad and so are excluded from sponsorship to a technical project. They seem to think that they can increase diversity by increasing divisions and discrimination by excluding some people on the basis of race & gender.

    Somehow an organisation that promotes discrimination has succeeded in getting USA tax exempt status - this should be rescinded.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

      So is LLVM suddenly doomed, or will they cut ties with "Outreachy" and make everything all better?

      Maybe it would be best for sensible people to fork LLVM away from Apple's control now. It's one of the best things there's ever been in system software.

    2. veti Silver badge

      Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

      Thousands of organisations that promote discrimination have tax-exempt status in the US. They're mostly called "churches".

      And this is really an example of the pervasive bias that campaigners complain about. You see an injustice and want to correct it, which is fine. But in the process, you overlook a much larger injustice that just happens to be weighted the other way (in favour of the majority).

      Did you overlook it because it's weighted the other way? I would guess, you simply didn't think of it because it's not news, hence not part of this story. But whatever your reasons, the net effect is inherent bias in favour of the status quo. This is precisely why proactive steps are sometimes needed to make any headway in the other direction.

      1. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

        Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

        How do churches promote discrimination? It's true that you wouoldn't expect to see a Hindu going to aRoman Catholic service, but that's rather like saying that you wouldn't find someone whose hobby was fishing joining the golf club....

        1. fandom Silver badge

          Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

          Why not? I have a met a Hindu catholic priest

          1. james_smith

            Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

            I have a met a Hindu catholic priest

            I doubt it. Maybe you met a Hindi speaking catholic priest.

        2. BinkyTheMagicPaperclip Silver badge

          Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

          Religious organisations shouldn't have charitable status, full stop. Neither should private schools.

          See the recent-ish furore about the Catholic adoption service that shut down rather than subject to equality laws that same sex couples should also be able to adopt. Just because you believe in a sky pixie doesn't mean the laws of the land can be avoided.

          'How do churches promote discrimination' - how to even start, the list is so bloody long.

        3. Phil Lord

          Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

          For example, a religious school can discriminate both their children and staff have a certain religion. For most organisations, this would be illegal as it would breech the equal opportunities legislation; but the churches lobbied and achieved a specific exception in the law, which means that they can do it.

        4. katrinab Silver badge

          Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

          "How do churches promote discrimination?"

          If I went to a catholic church with my girlfriend and said we wanted to get married, how do you think it would go?

    3. Sil

      Re: The promote discrimination while claiming to fight it

      I must side with de Espindola.

      The code of conduct mentions "race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, colour, immigration status, social and economic class, educational level, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, size, family status, political belief, religion or lack thereof, and mental and physical ability"

      It shouldn't. No one should ask or care about any of these in the context of a technical project.

      Also, "violations of this code outside these spaces may, in rare cases, affect a person’s ability to participate within them", is an open door for unfair and prejudiced firing of a member you dislike.

      As for Outreachy, there is no such thing as positive discrimination, in the same way there is no such thing as cultural appropriation.

  8. razorfishsl

    So now the Leftwing is going to try and take over the open-source community.

    There should be NO acceptance of money from ANY politically motivated group.

    Won't be long before they start inserting their own people at the top of the tree and we can see WHY they targeted "LLVM" because it has tentacles into major projects.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Soon open source projects will have Equal Opportunity or Incusiveness or Social Community Officers. They will be sponsored by the big companies, who will use this poison to signal their virtuousness to the world.

      If I was a company that wanted to kill a particular community that's what I would do. Embrace and divide the community with this crap. When it doesn't work just turn the extremism a bit more till you alienate enough of the productive collaborators for the project to die. Cheap to hire from all those women with worthless so called social degrees.

      Quick! Someone point them in Poettering's direction!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Quick! Someone point them in Poettering's direction!

        You got an upvote, but I should caution you, think what will happen if Poettering 'borgs' this lot into the meatspace cult side of his collective, you do realise that systemd is only the start?, it's the silicon phase of his eventual plans for all humanity¹ (just wait until they start getting really clever with the bio-artificing..)

        ¹ 'Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth.'

        H.P.Lovecraft, The Dunwich Horror

  9. GordonD

    What if Linux...,

    After reading Alain's post, I clicked on his list and yes, it is a nice friendly code of conduct, but that did raise a one big question.

    What would have happened if Linux had this code of practise?

    I'm sorry Linus, you can't come to the conference, because you are rude to people.

    Open source technical projects, and especially stupidly complex projects are probably not the best place to fight gender equality battles. Judge people on the basis of the diffs they submit. Anyone suitably competent will have a solid reputation before anyone actually knows their racial background, gender preferences etc. This is true equality.

    1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

      Re: What if Linux...,

      "Open source technical projects, and especially stupidly complex projects are probably not the best place to fight gender equality battles. Judge people on the basis of the diffs they submit. Anyone suitably competent will have a solid reputation before anyone actually knows their racial background, gender preferences etc. This is true equality."

      That would only work, I think, if -- when making one's FIRST code contribution -- a random alphanumeric identifier were assigned by an automated system to every contributor, and ALL contributions were stripped of ANY content except a description of what the code was intended to be -- e.g.; "Print Driver: [CODE]". For recommendations of code replacement, the description, followed by the code to be replaced, a divider, and the new code and a Reg-style up/down vote system. No arguments pro or con allowed, no Torvaldsian invective allowed, no input of ANY sort allowed except the pure code on which to decide. This wouldn't solve the problem of girls/minorities being steered away from tech by societal pressures before they even GET to this point, but if your argument is that project members will pick the best code regardless of its source then obscuring the source shouldn't do anything but make the code stronger.

  10. Grikath Silver badge
    Facepalm

    ah...

    The Campaign for Equal Height is at it again....

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: ah...

      Cue the Goodies apart-height.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: ah...

      Obviously all men must hunch down to be a foot lower than the women they are speaking with. Otherwise it's oppresion.

  11. prof_peter

    The code of conduct that Rafael has so much trouble with (https://llvm.org/docs/CodeOfConduct.html) basically requires professional conduct in official LLVM forums, although it's phrased in slightly touchy-feely language.

    Basically it equals "don't be an asshole", and requiring that of someone in a professional context is evidently considered "restricting their freedom of speech" nowadays.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @prof_peter

      So you are discriminating against assholes!

  12. Gene Cash Silver badge

    > The code of conduct that Rafael has so much trouble

    If you read the article, you'd realize that it's not the code of conduct he has a problem with... it's the association with Outreachy who are apparently a bit discriminatory.

    1. Walter Bishop Silver badge
      Big Brother

      How the social injustice movement has permeated the community

      @Gene Cash: "If you read the article, you'd realize that it's not the code of conduct he has a problem with... it's the association with Outreachy who are apparently a bit discriminatory."

      And how the social injustice movement has permeated the community and how one is required to sign this the code of conduct in order to take part in conferences. Signing such document does two things, it concedes to LLVC the authority to regulate ones conduct and it concedes to the LLVC that ones conduct requires such regulation. This whole social justice movement is just a pretext to beat up on white straight males.

      'The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it'

      'The last drop was llvm associating itself with an organization that openly discriminates based on sex and ancestry'

  13. W.S.Gosset Bronze badge
    Stop

    Both sides' extremes are idiots

    This chap (one of the smartest hedgefunders in the business) has a pre-prepped summary of being a grown-up:

    https://www.quora.com/What-dont-most-liberals-realize/answer/Tom-Costello-22

    > I think both conservatives and liberals make errors in their core assumptions. Here are a few core assumptions which I think are continually made by liberals and conservatives but to different political ends:

    * Correlation is not causality.

    * The ‘average’ of a population doesn’t tell you anything about any individual member of group, nor does citing an individual member that deviates from the average, counter any argument about the group as a whole.

    * Inequality of outcomes isn’t evidence of anything.

    * There are no circumstances where a specific categorization applies to every member of a group. In all measurable ways, people fall into a distribution of the property in question. One has most, one has the least, and most people are somewhere in the middle.

    * Every public policy benefit has a cost. There is no ‘free lunch’ or ‘free’ anything else… ever.

    There are ‘facts’, and then there are how we ‘feel’ about the facts. One doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the other.

    * A person’s ‘true intent’ is unknowable to anyone but them. There is no psychic ability to infer intent from what they said.

    * If you want to know what people ‘really’ think, look at what they do, not what they say.

    1. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

      Re: Both sides' extremes are idiots

      ...* There are no circumstances where a specific categorization applies to every member of a group...

      All Roman Catholics acknowledge the Pope as the Head of their Church.

      1. Graham Dawson

        Re: Both sides' extremes are idiots

        Sedevacantism.

        1. Glen 1 Bronze badge

          Re: Both sides' extremes are idiots

          no true Roman ca- Scotsman

    2. Grikath Silver badge

      Re: Both sides' extremes are idiots

      So the man paraphrased the Notebooks of Lazarus Long...

      Not that he isn't right.. So was Heinlein.

    3. Mike Moyle Silver badge

      Re: Both sides' extremes are idiots

      "* A person’s ‘true intent’ is unknowable to anyone but them.(...)"

      And sometimes, not even then. Therein lies the problem.

  14. Walter Bishop Silver badge
    Facepalm

    What has any of this got to do with writing code?

    This precisely illustrates what happens when you let the socially inclusive diversity crowd start making the decisions. The best people leave and the organization withers from within. What's with the image of 'a person rioting in protest' at the top of the article?

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The only valid form of positive discrimination

    is discrimination on ability to do whatever the role entails.

    1. alain williams Silver badge

      Re: The only valid form of positive discrimination

      My strong instinct is to agree with what you say.

      However I am mulling that education is one field where one might soften a bit: accept someone in from a poor educational background (ie bad school) in the hope that your school (a good one) can fix past problems. But I suppose that you would only do that for pupils who, while having not attained good exam grades, you (somehow) deduce are bright enough to do well in your good school.

      So: I return to your assertion: discriminate on the basis of assertained innate ability rather than exam results.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The only valid form of positive discrimination

        I actually agree with you. It's easier said than done, but I've seen people rise up from disadvantaged backgrounds. For example, in college I tutored a black woman who was woefully underprepared by America's failed inner city schools. IIRC she lacked the basic arithmetic and algebra skills for the easiest chemistry course, but caught up in a matter of weeks. You rarely see that drive to succeed in 'privileged' youths. The 'oppressed and disadvantaged' seem to do just fine when they manage to avoid crime and welfare traps.

        Positive discrimination isn't even necessary for that to work, as long as there are schools and employers with opportunities for *anyone* to prove themselves - as opposed to the increasingly rampant credentialism.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: The only valid form of positive discrimination

          Providing extra teaching support is one thing.

          Requiring that your school admits people by quota of colour is another.

          Demanding that the exam results match that quota is problematic.

      2. WatAWorld

        Re: The only valid form of positive discrimination

        - Should we discriminate in favour of Kim Jong-un's daughter just because she is female.

        - Should we discriminate in favour of a given slave owner's son just because he is black?

        - Should we assume that the children of Africa's dictators are all disadvantaged and deserving of privileges to compensate them for the "undeniable advantages' white privilege has given the sons of Virginia's coal miners?

        Positive discrimination is only valid when based on individual circumstances, not simply skin color, sex, or gender.

        If it were in my power I'd definitely slightly discount the grades of students that had elite schooling, excessive private tutors, and so on.

        And I'd definitely give a slight boost to orphans, people suffering chronic disease in childhood, or who'd grown up in war-torn countries.

        And not just for schooling, but also for jobs, up to say age 29 -- a slight boost to those individuals who'd been disadvantaged by their parents lack of wealth, and a slight discount to those who'd been excessively advantaged by their parents wealth.

        Positive discrimination based on individual circumstances is valid.

        Positive discrimination based on skin color or sex is no better than the positive discrimination done in Germany during the 1920s and 30s. "Oh but we have statistics to prove our case." So did they. And their press supported it too.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

  16. Matthew Taylor

    Stagnation through niceness.

    The best, most driven people aren't always the most well behaved (hello Mr Torvalds) - but the same passion that makes them volatile on message boards, can also drive a project to greatness. This is especially true in software, whose best practitioners tend to eschew the subtleties of social politics. Of course, as soon as a project comes to be seen as "established", the niceness police kick the door in, and, like a rocket when the main booster cuts off, the project begins to coast.

  17. Oengus Silver badge

    Most discriminated against

    We were talking about "Affirmative Action" a few years ago and a friend of mine said that he was in the most discriminated against group that exists... He said he was "A straight married white male with children".

    1. eldakka Silver badge

      Re: Most discriminated against

      > "A straight married white male with children".

      I don't know who'd be the most discriminated against, but I do know of at least one group who is more discriminated against that that.

      Unmarried males, sexual orientation irrelevant, race irrelevant, religion irrelevant, no children.

      "blah blah has already left to pickup their kids from school, you'll have to do it"

      "blah blah has to drop off their kids at school in the morning, so you'll have to come in early to do that work"

      "blah blah wants to take time off over Christmas/easter/<insert school holiday period here> to be with their kids, so you'll need to change your leave to another time"

      "You'll have to work on the the public holiday on Monday, blah blah has kids so can't come in"

      "You'll have to come in to work at 2am on Sunday morning for 4 hours, because blah blah has kids so can't do it"

      Even if it's not explicitly phrased as an instruction, it's usually phrased in a why to try guilt you into it at least.

      1. alain williams Silver badge

        Re: Most discriminated against

        @ eldakka

        I don't think that your examples are due to discriminated against but evidence of social forces that encourage people to help other people. The ''cost'' to him of doing these things is far less than the cost to those who do have kids. When he becomes a dad then he will feel some of the benefits (although he would feel the benefits far more if he were a mum - society still believes that mothers care for their kids while fathers should go out to earn to pay for them).

        You could, by your thinking, say that someone who is not carrying a bag is discriminated in a crowd of bag laden shoppers as it is expected that he will hold the door open for them while no one holds the door open for him.

      2. Glen 1 Bronze badge

        Re: Most discriminated against

        "you have to work..."

        vs

        "boss sexually assaults you, no one takes it seriously "

        "threats of violence including death threats because of which bathroom someone else says you're allowed to use"

        "people assume you're the janitor/admin staff rather than a experienced engineer"

        Don't get me wrong, I'm all for meritocracy, but the shortsightedness of the "what about me" brigade. Reeks of *precisely* the kind of privileged behaviour these codes of conduct are designed to highlight as wrong.

        Like the thread about Stack Overflow the other day - yes, facts trump opinions. Facts like:

        "Person A has derogatory remarks made about <an irrelevant attribute> twice a week"

        "Person B's sole contact with 'the community' was being told they were stupid for asking a stupid question and <insult implying they are stupid because of irrelevant attribute>"

        Yes it *IS* virtue signalling. Its signalling the virtue that "scumbags are not welcome here" Being a white/straight/male doesn't make you a scumbag. Being a scumbag makes you a scumbag.

      3. WatAWorld

        Re: Most discriminated against

        In the USA and Canada "unmarried males" have both the lowest average income and lowest average wealth of any of the 4 marital status/sex combinations.

        1. Married males

        2. Unmarried females

        3. Married females

        4. Unmarried males

        That is grouping together all ages, all educations, all occupations.

        If you want to know who is the most discriminated against, I think you'd have to look outside of natural protected groupings.

        Back in the 1960s it might have been women who could type. If you were a woman and couldn't type, you'd be hired as a clerk and might learn the business. If you could type you'd be a typist until that occupation became obsolete.

        Today it might be the very ugly and those with particular sorts of mental illnesses that prevent them seeking assistance from others.

  18. James 47

    El Reg shouldn't even report on this SJW horseshit anymore

    1. WatAWorld

      There are weeks where I don't come on The Reg because they've published SJW propaganda about others. But their reporting on this story is not biased enough that I'd call it propaganda.

      It is good to read that at least one person in our industry is taking on social norms and the establishment to dispute what is today's "scientifically based acceptable form of" racism and sexism.

  19. Lee D Silver badge

    Wow... first, The Reg does have a contingent of exactly the kind of people I didn't expect, albeit small. Everything from trans-hate up.

    However, I think the pertinent quote is:

    "The community change I cannot take is how the social injustice movement has permeated it. When I joined llvm no one asked or cared about my religion or political view. We all seemed committed to just

    writing a good compiler framework."

    Which seems to me to be quite insightful. When nobody ASKS your religion or political view, in an unrelated forum, then you can't be discriminated against for it. And what the hell kind of relevance does religion or politics have when writing a compiler?

    Maybe my workplace (a school) is blessed but I can't ever remember race or religion or politics being mentioned, discussed or relevant except as required by the curriculum or as it naturally occurred in conversation. And when discussed, it's a discussion. Not anti-feminism, anti-anti-discrimination and everything that's happening here.

    And people miss the difference between things like "pro-feminism" ("women are better") and "equality" (men and women differ only in ways that shouldn't matter to the job at hand).

    Do you know what? In the same way that what concerns me more than a president shagging a porn star is that he thought he needed to buy her silence to cover his embarrassment at doing so, not just say "Yeah? And?", I really don't care about your sexual preference, chosen gender, religious affiliation or politics. I'm happy to discuss your opinions but I really don't care about anything that chops you into X amount of groupings.

    And I'll tell you what - an article like this that has prompted such a conversation? It demonstrates exactly WHY I don't care about that stuff. When we're talking tech together, it's fun. We're all equally techy if different areas and it works well and that's why I come here, to talk tech. When we're talking this stuff, all the prejudices and ignorance come rushing to the surface and it really exposes an underbelly of racism (and anti-anti-racism which are different things), trans- and homophobia, and all sorts.

    This guy wanted to write a compiler, and complained that EXACTLY the type of stuff these comments have turned into gets in the way of doing so, purely because it has nothing to do with writing a compiler. I happen to agree with him.

  20. Draco
    Joke

    Proposal for Reg Comments

    Seeing how the comments section of El Reg appears over represented with cis white males, thus creating a toxic commenting environment for remaining 92% of the world's population*, I propose:

    1) cis white male comments shall comprise no more than 2% of all comments in discussion threads - this is to allow for a more diverse flow of comments, as well it applies some positive discrimination to redress all past injustices.

    2) No cis white male shall be allowed to leave the first comment. Not only would this violate the first proposal, it would also set a toxic environment for other commenters thus discouraging them from leaving a comment.

    3) No cis white male comment shall be given prominence over other comments. All cis white male comments must appear at the end of the discussion thread - preferably, requiring secondary authentication each time someone may wish to view them.

    4) All comments not made by cis white males shall only have an up vote icon since there is no need to down vote diversity comments.

    5) All comments made by cis white males shall only have a down vote icon since there is nothing they could say that could require up voting.

    *white population has been roughly estimated as Europeans + North American + Australia = ~18%

    ** white male population is ~50% of white population = ~9%

    *** cis white male population excludes homosexual, trans, queer, etc = ~8%

    It should be obvious from these numbers that cis white males are the majority oppressors.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Proposal for Reg Comments

      Just two technical errors.

      Whites are about 85% plus of the said regions population..

      ..and queer / other folk are less than 2% of the population. < 1% female. < 2% males. So about the same incident levels as schizophrenia / bipolar etc. Actual biological trannys etc are about < 0.2%. The others who make outlandish claims regarding self-identified sexual psychology are almost without exception mentally ill. Always part of a broad spectrum mental illness. Which is why they have such an exceptionally high suicide rate. Over time they either kill themselves or are institutionalized for extended periods of time.

      Last statement made based on a very very large sample encountered while living in San Francisco over the last 30 plus years.

      1. Draco

        Re: Proposal for Reg Comments

        It is just a rough estimate. I suppose I could have been more dramatic and said that 90% of the world's population is cis white male - most people in the SJW camp wouldn't have noticed.

      2. WatAWorld

        Re: Proposal for Reg Comments

        Whites are about 85% plus of the said regions population..

        ..and queer / other folk are less than 2% of the population. < 1% female. < 2% males. "

        ...

        Last statement made based on a very very large sample encountered while living in San Francisco over the last 30 plus years.

        The problem is so many of us are so ethnocentric. What we see is how it is.

        But that isn't reality.

        Your own all powerful privileged "racial" group only rules 4 out of 27 countries in the Americas.

        Reality is that by US dictionary definitions only half of caucasians are white. Their white excludes Asian Indians, North Africans, West Asians, Hispanics, and anyone else who isn't pale pink in winter.

        The world is 35% Chinese Asian. 25% Other Asian. 19% white. 19% black.

        To us the world is North American and Europe. But Europe is the second smallest continent next to Australia.

        Africa is larger than the USA, China, and Europe combined.

        Regarding the prominence of non-cis males. For centuries until maybe 1850, the vast majority of male leading members of the European Royal families engaged in gay and straight sex.

        It would be truer to say that cis males only began to run things after the industrial revolution. But even that isn't true. It is the children of the wealthy who run things. In limited parts of the world the children of the wealthy just happened to be male, and people assumed they were cis male.

        Hence: Cis male comments should be limited to 19% of the column inches. This can be accomplished by using a dynamic font size, ranging from 0.5 pt to 3 pt.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  21. Paul 195
    Paris Hilton

    White Hysteria?

    El Reg commentators are generally a pretty reasonable bunch, but there's something about this stuff that sends a lot of them into a frothing rage. My middle-aged whiteness here won't protected me from being punished with downvotes for saying this, but:

    1) The point of diversity initiatives is not to "punish you for the sins of your ancestors" as one commentard below has said. It really is an attempt to level the playing field, a playing field that white heterosexual men (like me!) barely ever recognise as actually being tilted. Sometimes these efforts can be pretty ham-fisted, and if it tips into open discrimination against white folks, well, that is also wrong.

    2) Somebody below complained that they literally "could not be heard" because they were white and middle aged. Well, that doesn't seem very fair, but welcome to the world as perceived by most women, which is even worse if you are any colour of woman other than white.

    3) The term Social Justice Warrior really irritates me. It seems some of the people chucking it around really are "snowflakes" to pick up another pejorative term which started out with the alt-right. They pick up their ball and go off in a huff whenever anyone points out that large parts of the world of work are still overwhelmingly run by and for white men.

    4) White privilege is becoming a problematic term. I think MacPherson's formulation of "institutional racism" in his report into the botched Stephen Lawrence enquiry is a much more precise and accurate way of defining the problem. It also allows us to admit that institutional racism is not something only practiced by white people, but can also be found alive and kicking in many Asian countries. It also doesn't imply that all white people are privileged in other ways, which clearly many are not.

    Oh, and Paris Hilton because I thought something decorative on this post might lesson the rage of some readers. OK guys, I don't mind your downvotes but at least try to keep your replies civil.

    1. Mycho Silver badge

      Re: White Hysteria?

      I agree with much of what you say, but White Privilege was always a problematic term. It devalues the important of systematic racism against eastern europeans in the UK just as one example.

      Positive Discrimination is better than nothing but it will always be a shit solution. Even BLM is moving toward empowering poor young Americans in general rather than identified by race.

      1. Aitor 1 Silver badge

        Re: White Hysteria?

        I am also slighty discriminated, for not being born in the UK.. and yep, I am white.

        Also, I dont want positive discrimination, I just dont want discrimination.

        Give a good, paid by the state education to everyone, and then just hire on talent.

        I am ok with that.

        1. BananaPeal

          Re: White Hysteria?

          "hire on talent"

          how you decide who talented? everything is a code interview?

          when you work with 100 dudes and one girl, it's easy to make up your mind that girls aren't smart. then you pass over them at the college. so maybe you need to be forced to have 10 girls to 100 guys and then maybe some remember "girls aren't so bad!" and they choose to hire more.

          but if only one... is hard. you see???? fff

          1. Mycho Silver badge

            Re: White Hysteria?

            how you decide who talented?

            Here's a suggestion, maybe ask someone in HR? They do this for a living.

    2. WatAWorld

      Re: White Hysteria?

      1) The point of diversity initiatives is not to "punish you for the sins of your ancestors" as one commentard below has said. It really is an attempt to level the playing field, a playing field that white heterosexual men (like me!) barely ever recognise as actually being tilted.

      ...

      2) ...Somebody below complained that they literally "could not be heard" because they were white and middle aged. Well, that doesn't seem very fair, but welcome to the world as perceived by most women, which is even worse if you are any colour of woman other than white.

      3) The term Social Justice Warrior really irritates me. It seems some of the people chucking it around really are "snowflakes" to pick up another pejorative term which started out with the alt-right.

      Gee, sounds like something straight out of a Goebbels speech about how oppress and ignored Germans were after WWI.

      How is discriminating on the basis of skin color going to fix a playing field that was unlevel due to class and social connections?

      Women not being heard, but read any newspaper today or listen to any TV station. What is the majority? It is women.

      Going back decades, men never talked about being men. Since the end of WWI when regular men got the vote (which was the same year women got the vote in the UK), what men voiced was for the good of their industry or their country, not their sex.

      SJWs and you don't like the term. But you sure like terms like alt-right.

      I forgive you because you're obviously too young or read too few newspapers:

      SJW is the label THEY GAVE THEMSELVES. We capitalized the term because they don't fight for social justice, they fight for identity politics and discrimination.

      1. Dog11

        Re: White Hysteria?

        @WatAWorld

        SJW is the label THEY GAVE THEMSELVES. We capitalized the term because they don't fight for social justice, they fight for identity politics and discrimination.

        I'd never heard that. I've never heard anyone describe themself as a SJW. Can you give a cite for usage prior to (negative) use by... trying to avoid terms you don't like... your group of friends?

      2. Paul 195

        Re: White Hysteria?

        > Gee, sounds like something straight out of a Goebbels speech about how oppress and ignored Germans > were after WWI.

        I invoke Godwin's law. You lose.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: White Hysteria?

      A few loud people with an agenda to push always complain about systemic discrimination without actually pointing to that discrimination.

      In my experience the productivity of women in the workplace is consistently appalling once they group up. They bitch, moan, and talk about weight and who hooked up with who. On and on and on.

      And they tend to be the ones leaving early no matter what breaks because of the kids. Which is fine but then don't expect to be compensated the same as someone who will do what takes to keep the boat afloat.

  22. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  23. kelbag1974

    I actually believe that positive discrimination does more harm than good. Whilst on paper it looks good to the board or governing body to show that you have a diverse workplace, in reality you can get a situation where people from a minority group are considered by their peers to be nothing more than token faces* and are subtly discriminated against as no matter what your abilities you're only there to 'tick a box'.

    In the 90's the token face was a female employed in an engineering capacity, today it's different although I personally pay no attention as we're all the same underneath the labels. What matters (or should do) is whether you can do the job, learn how to do the job and not be a dick whilst doing so.

    *personal experience whilst employed by a national rail company in the early 90's as a telecoms apprentice, at 16 I was actually told by another of the engineers that, as a female I shouldn't be there as I was taking up a job that could have been given to a man who needed to support his family, why didn't I just bugger off and work behind a shop counter (sexism wasn't considered to be a hanging offence back then). My response was that I didn't know many 16 year old men who would have taken a low paid apprenticeship to support his kids. But the upshot was,that after 10 years of being considered incapable of the job and begrudged every promotion I got because of my appearance not my ability by my peers I took the redundancy offered despite loving my job.

    These days I've been lucky enough to work in organisations that ignore the box ticking exercises and instead employ staff based on ability alone. This method, surprisingly enough, has actually managed to employ people no matter what they look like or get up to in their private lives. In an ex bosses words "if it's legal, between two consenting adults and not shoved in my face who gives a shit? I couldn't care less if you wear a dress or trousers we have a job to do just don't come to work wearing a mankini". Not exactly PC but he was one of the least judgemental people I've known unless you screwed up.

    It's nice to be judged on what you can do not what you look like or what your sexual orientation is.

  24. elvisimprsntr

    I think this pretty much sums up what is wrong with society and politics.

    https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/

  25. tentimes

    What if I actively dissent from having a vagina?

    People seem to obsessively think vaginas are really cool. I don't like them, especially a camels vagina. I have nightmares of pig vaginas too.

  26. disgruntled yank Silver badge

    Outreachy

    "Outreachy" sounds like the sort of thing you get sent down to HR for. "Jones, the intern from Vassar complained that you were awfully outreachy at the reception." How can you not like the name?

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Suggestion: Read the messages on the LLVM mailing list

    Here's the URL where "de Espindola said he was leaving immediately and cited changes in the community". https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/122922.html

    It's taken me 5 to 10 minutes to skim read the whole thread (at present 10 messages), and form my own view about the matter. I'm struck by how highly regarded de Espindola is in the LLVM project. And the largely respectful tone of the discussion there.

    For what it's worth, in my experience sometimes a Code Of Conduct helps a community grow, and sometimes it's used for virtual signalling and oppression. And sometimes somewhere between the two extremes.

    Your mileage may vary.

    1. WatAWorld

      Re: Suggestion: Read the messages on the LLVM mailing list

      I thought the code of conduct was actually pretty good -- and it would be if it were interpreted literally.

      But if adjudicators are going to assume one sex or gender (they're different things) are always telling the truth, if they're going to get fussy about words and language, then no.

      But otherwise the actual Code of Conduct reads like something I'd sign on to.

      But being affiliated with a group that seeks to advantage a group that already makes up 2 out of 3 university students in the USA -- that makes no sense.

  28. WatAWorld

    It would be nice to see some people in the journalism industry stand up for the truth too.

    A community that discriminates is not an inclusive community.

    Only small-minded ethnocentric people think that all white Americans males were:

    1. had one or more parents

    2. did not grow up in war torn countries

    3. did not suffer from chronic disease

    4. did not get physically bullied at school for years

    5. never suffered sex abuse from their parents, schools, or priests

    Only small-minded ethnocentric people think that all non-white and female people had to endure such hardship.

    It is good to see that some people in other industries are standing up for the truth.

    It would be nice to see some people in the journalism industry stand up for the truth too.

    The UK is not the USA, but look at the list of the UK's richest 10 people. Only 7 of the 10 fall into what is being assumed today by The Establishment (including journalists at recognized publications and modern "human rights advocates") as universally disadvantaged groups.

  29. WatAWorld

    Women only make up 2 out of 3 university students in the USA, better fix that now.

    It is 2018, not 1960. The people in the USA who are young women entering university and the workforce today have benefited from affirmative action and female centric learning techniques all their lives.

    And that shows up in the statistics that show them as being 2 out of every 3 university students (65%).

    Geeze, better start an affirmative action program, they're only up to 2/3.

    So let's use systemic discrimination to push that 1/3 men out of the only fields they're still comfortable studying. (Systemic discrimination is what we call inadvertent discrimination that results from actions taken for some other purpose. For example, putting your job ads in an ethnic newspaper makes it seem like you're only interested in people from that ethnic group and deters other people applying.)

    STEM is only male majority because young women (wisely) do not see it as a good choice.

    The study of STEM fields is largely depersonalizing (how often does integral calculus or number theory come up in conversation). And it is hugely thankless.

    I'm getting older now. I'm in hospital a lot.

    And I'll tell you this: the sort of people who go into engineering, smart and practically minded, if they're women they go into nursing or medicine.

    And they love their work more than any engineer or IT person I encountered in my entire career. They get more sincere heartfelt thank-yous in an hour than you'll get in your life.

    Plus:

    1. Nobody is going to ship their jobs off to the third world.

    2. They're employers will pay to train them to keep them up-to-date with technology changes.

    3. They're helping real people, rather than helping the rich get richer.

  30. GIRZiM Bronze badge
    Stop

    White, cisgender, European man with a question

    Having read the article and all the responses, I need a bit of clarification.

    I can see an argument why LLVM might like to consider connecting with some body that provides help to those from economically deprived backgrounds irrespective of any other factors, so that poor, white men might get some help to level the playing field relative to rich, white men - that would make sense. But only insofar as it doesn't advantage them any more than they already are over the other groups - maybe, rich, white trans people don't need as much help as poor, white men but poor, BAME women need more help than poor, white men.

    That aside, however...

    Have any white, cisgender men (of any origin) been actively disadvantaged by this?

    Or is the complaint that no white, cisgender man will be getting a free lunch today?

    Has any white, cisgender man (of any origin) had his lunch taken away from him in order that some other non-white, and/or non-cisgender man (of any origin) and/or woman might eat at his expense?

    Or is this all a lot of "Wah, wah, wah, it's not fair, I want free stuff too" by people who are not only privileged to start with but haven't lost anything either?

    I only ask because, as a white, European cisgender man from an underprivileged background who was, nevertheless, advantaged by being born into a family that took education seriously and made sacrifices to give him opportunities they never had themselves and was thus able to achieve the status of 'poor boy made good' as they say, I'm not really sure why I should be upset that someone else was given a free lunch to help them along their way when their starting position was even worse than my own. I don't feel disadvantaged or discriminated against because I wasn't given a freebie - it won't cost me anything, so how am I disadvantaged by it?

    Am I missing something significant here? Some great injustice, perhaps? Or is it all just an outpouring of that typical attitude I all too frequently notice fervently espoused by those with so little imagination, so poor in spirit, so lacking the milk of human kindness that, instead of realising that they too should be better off than they are and doing something about it, they would rather see others worse off than improve their own situations?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

      Your argument is deeply flawed. Consider:

      "New iPhone 20. Order now for a $2000 discount!

      * Discount only available to white heterosexual males"

      And let's see what happens.

      1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

        Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

        If white, heterosexual males were disadvantaged versus other groups then, yes, you'd have a point. But the fact is that white, heterosexual males are advantaged over others and do not, therefore, need any more positive discrimination than they already have.

        You aren't being disadvantaged by the help someone else gets that gives them the same opportunities that you already have and the fact that you think your example speaks to the unfairness of it is precisely why people say "Check your privilege". Your argument is based upon exactly what I described: a sense of "Wah, wah, wah, want a freebie too!" It's simply the inverse of the 'SJW identity' politics that people complain about - it's about the surface, not the substance; the words used, not their meaning.

        Unless you are not a white, cisgender man then both you and I already are amongst the most advantaged group in the entire world - I don't know about you, but the only advantage I don't have myself is that I wasn't born into the top 1%.

        Check your privilege - seriously.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

          If I work 10 hours to pay to go a conference, and a woman doesn't need to because she has a vagina then that's 10 hours the woman privileged with the vagina can use to improve her skills over me.

          Or she can go online and moan and get another sponsorship.

          1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

            Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

            Okay, well, in return for the ten unsponsored hours of work you do that the woman doesn't, perhaps you could offer to balance things out by taking a pay-cut so that you don't earn more than any woman - then you'll have an argument that she is being advantaged over you by sponsorship and you not being advantaged over her by being paid more to begin with.

            1. Mycho Silver badge

              Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

              We should probably call a stop to this privilege-patching before someone suggests women need their lifespans shortened to bring them in line with men.

              If everybody were equal the world would be so boring. I can't imagine everybody being as bad at dancing as I am.

              1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

                Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

                We should probably call a stop to this privilege-patching...

                Very well put and, if you turn it around, so that men have their lives increased to reach parity with women instead, then the complaint about women/whoever being unfairly advantaged by this bursary is exactly he same argument as "it's not fair that men are having their lives extended (to when women aren't" - it's utter nonsense.

                1. Mycho Silver badge

                  Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

                  If somebody found a way to make heart disease more survivable and only gave it to men because it lengthens lifespan by an average of five year so that makes people equal, I'd say that was unfair.

                  To each according to their needs, not according to the needs of other people who have arbitrary traits in common with them.

                  1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

                    Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

                    No, that's too simplistic. It all depends upon context.

                    If you are disadvantaged vis a vis others by not living as long as they do then you have a need for that life extension in order to lead an equivalent life. If you aren't, however, then you don't. So, it's not simply a question of whether it's only given to one group or another but of why it is only given to that group.

                    So, given that the groups in question vis a vis LLVM are disadvantaged by an accident of birth in an unequal society, they have a legitimate need for that aid. As I said, when you don't want others to be given help to attain the same level of opportunity as you, your only option is to campaign to make that state of affairs cease - otherwise all you are doing is turning up the bass the mid and treble equally and end up in exactly the same situation, only louder.

                    If anyone can show that their own life chances are disadvantaged by someone receiving a bursary, the criteria for which they aren't themselves don't meet, then they might have an argument; otherwise, however, it's all just infantile "wah, wah, wah, want a freebie too" wailing of the developmentally arrested trapped in the mindset of the toddler.

                    1. Mycho Silver badge

                      Re: White, cisgender, European man with a question

                      Clarify for me, are you actually saying that if men are disadvantaged by living shorter lives than women then men should be prioritised for life-extending treatments over women? Because that's what it sounds like and I doubt you actually believe that. Improved healthcare ought to be available for all.

  31. MonsieurTM

    The oppression of the Code of Conduct.

    It is an unpleasant fashion for volunteers to adopt said codes. Unfortunately these distract from the original purpose of the organisation and it becomes self-serving. Why because people bang on and on about the CoC and not about what was originally being done.

    In the UK we have seen what happened with such thought policing: the surprise of Brexit. All that happens is people retain their original ideas, but practice double-think, lying or avoid the topics in wider groups. Thus they bubble themselves, cease engaging and the rest do not know because they do the same.

    CoCs are a meme, a virus, corroding the very values they claim to promote by the very uninclusive, intolerant way they operate.

  32. BananaPeal

    so many insecure white males...

    lol

    like udders have said when you have 90/100 dudes in the industry you have to wonder if they're making it difficult for women to advance.

    it's not that society sees whiteness and balls as bad, it's just that they realize that men with balls who happen to be white, tend to coagulate and conspire together and through social connections make their workplace homogeneous and through their behavior a "boys' club".

    so these scholarships and affirmative action are society's way to combat the natural inclination we white males have to stick together and say misogynist things like "women just aren't that good at math" when we talk to each other.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: so many insecure white males...

      "women just aren't good at math/IT" and misogyny are different things.

      I could as well say "men just aren't good at crotcheting". Is that misandry?

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Stupidity piled on stupidity..

    This is how bloody stupid the whole SJW crap is.

    Under EEOC race/ethic quota rules Espindola is actually an "oppressed" minority. He would be categorized as an "Hispanic" and would qualify for a whole range of goodies and special treatment under the various race quota programs and could sue anyone who he thought was "infringing his civil rights". Lawsuits where you are always guilty until proven guilty.

    So the net result of this idiotic "outreach" is that LLVM has actually greatly reduced the number of "minorities" working on the project. In project hours terms.

    Not to go all Godwins Laws but the EEOC / DOJ race rules are little different from the Nürnberger Gesetz. Even a small bit of blood despite having no actual stereotypical physical characteristics of that "race" makes you of that race. So a woman I knew who despite having flame red hair, freckles, milk white skin and looking like she just stepped of a street in Galway was a "Hispanic" because her grannie was technically "Hispanic". So she qualified for all the Hispanic race quotas in school and college and had almost all her tuition paid and a big scholarship on top. One of the best programmers I ever worked with was, according to the EEOC, black. Because he had a mixed race grandparent. He was also 3/4'ers Danish and probably the blondest person I have ever known. So blonde Scandinavian that the Danish tourist board would think twice before using his image as being too perfect. He also had his way paid through college by minority scholarships. All thanks to affirmative action. He came from a poor family and if not for his "black" grandparent would never have been able to pay his way through school.

    Yet my dearest friend who is African American , born in Africa of African ancestry going back many generations and who has a very wide circle of friends from all over of continent who consider her very much one of their own, of their family, but according to the EEOC / DOJ she is not African American. Because she is the wrong color. She is white Afrikaans. Her family are not very well off so she never went to college despite trying really really hard to make it happen.

    Everything about affirmative action / SJW is stupid stupid stupid. All the way down.

    Show me a SJW and I will show you a racialist. And usually just a straight up racist. Can only ever think in terms of race. Invariably either a self righteous middle class twit of limited world experience and intelligence or else a straight up huckster. Either way someone who has done far far more harm than any possible good over the decades for the purported target of their sanctimonious largess.

    1. chiggsy

      Re: Stupidity piled on stupidity..

      Of course you are right. Why should being an SJW mean you are not a racist? You think they all are gay positive? Trans positive? Certainly not. They also, unfortunately, are not liberals, like Clinton, any more than Trump's base is conservative. Liberalism is inclusive. Their feelings about identity politics have taken them far, but the problem with defining oneself as a feeling creature, to define oneself by the depth and purity of one's feelings is always manichaeism. The He Man Woman Haters always show up in opposition.

      But it's not about them, really, although those "self righteous middle class twits of limited world experience" is an odd way to speak about the poor SJW's. Hillary lost the election. For all the racial rhetoric, the first thing the GOP did was go after contraception, because that and abortion is the foundation of women's liberation. As for self righteous, were you not the same way back in the day?

      You were, and, you are.

      Seriously though, these people were beaten to death a very little while ago, and it's has not stopped everywhere. It's good to see them creating collectives, and pooling knowledge.

      How is this about race and not sexuality? Maybe he does not want to hang around with a bunch of trans people? Certainly there's lots of them around. Why not simply mentor a few people he likes?

      I'm not sure why you are so upset about the system. Seems to be working fine. A female programmer is exactly who these programs should be supporting, hopefully her co-workers don't drive her out of he field, or ask her for a date a thousand times until she gives up and becomes a Project Manager at 4x the salary, because she can talk to people.

      ANYWAY:

      Your danish friend is black, brah. One drop, is all it takes. You know the rules. That's why you never hear someone saying "I''m 1/16 negro!" One drop.

      Your "African American" friend doesn't have a drop of the gold eh? Afrikanns? Goes back many generations does she? To the 1800's! And, did she mention what her family did when they got there? She certainly is the wrong colour. Wait, did she go in for an interview? Or she just applied? Because if she just applied sight unseen and she was from Africa, of course she's not getting in. She had to just show up and shake hands, tell some Africa stories, and she'd probably be in.

      Your outrage is misplaced. They gave 2 scholarships away on a technicality. Affirmative action is supposed to help people who have been the subjects of systemic bias. Nobody got in who looked black right? And that's why affirmative action is needed.

      Espindola wrote a nice little letter and they seem to respect him a lot. So, it's definitely NOT because he does not want to be near trans, gays or blacks, right? How is the the SJW's fault again? They are just like you, you know. They don't need scholarships, schools teach to their strengths and they don't fail until university.

      The boys are dropping out, very unfortunate because they have a lot of time to be online, and nothing they can do can't be done by robots. Can't send them to war, you need more than high school to be a soldier, crime won't pay, too much surveillance. That kid who shot up his school in Florida? He did not start out a nazi, he started as a dork. Turns out the assumption that men were better intrinsically was mistaken.

      They do boy stuff, and get treated poorly because again, the SJW's are just like you. Same neighbourhoods. Same background. They already won the revolution, even the nazis speak in their language. Listen next time you get a chance, it's identity politics. 15 years from now, their hubbys will be getting alimony, and it'll be their turn to curse the court system, and their sons will get their scholarships paid, and the girls will cry injustice, and pull out copies of Ayn Rand and conspire with the AI's, ( if they still are taking our orders by then, cross your fingers ) just like programmers today are ensuring AI's have all the biases of coastal dwelling suburban guys who hang out on 4chan.

      They learned that they had to match the microaggressions they encountered. Cue the crying. No surer sign of privilege exists than outrage at resistance.

      Buddy, you had affirmative action your whole life, and for sure an Afrikaaner had the same. More so. I'm sure she's a nice person Lots of friends, all over the continent, right? Family poor, them's the breaks, not everybody takes full advantage of a privileged position.

      Of course, you want to do nothing, just keep the status quo, and keep the gravy train coming. I completely understand your feelings of alienation, and uncertainly, and injustice. However, I have to say, you guys have been doing a lot of crying, about how unfair equality is. Nauseating. Man up.

      After all, one thing is crystal clear.

      You ain't the man your grandaddy was, are you? This is the truth that you want suppressed. Something once secure for you is up for grabs, what it is, I do not know but you are hiding weakness with all these protestations. We'll see.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Stupidity piled on stupidity..

        @ chiggsy

        Its obvious from your rambling screed that you A) dont live in the United States B) dont live in California; and C) have never lived in San Francisco. So have zero experience of the SJW universe in all its utter insanity. In other words you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Just parroting mindless drivel you've read somewhere or else saw on the telly. So sound like just another smug git who lives in lily white bubble.

        Me, 30 plus years US, 30 plus years Cal, and over 25 years SF. Lived in minority majority neighborhoods for most of that time. So all that stuff you read about second and third hand through deep ideological filters I've actually seen it. Lived it. It aint nothing like what you see on Channel 4 or read in the Guardian.

        Plus I grew up in a country were my best friend during my teenage years was openly gay at a time and in a place where gay people got the shit beaten out of them on a regular basis. He and his friends liked me to hang out with me, a big obviously straight guy built like a line backer, because they felt safe when I was around. So dont try trotting out that particular cliche. I lived it. I've seen its effects. You know. The cuts and bruises. The post beating effects. It aint pretty.

        So just admit it. You know about as much of this particular subject as the typical A Level school debating team member does on any of the great subjects of life that they pontificate on at great length with utter conviction and with zero comprehension or understanding of. Because, you know, they really have nt a clue what they are talking about.

        On this partular subject real life is nothing like what you think it might be. Take it from us who actually know what they are talking about. Because, you know, we have actually lived it for many decades and not just read about it in the Guardian or saw some agitprop documentary on Channel 4 like you seem to have.

  34. rexyup

    The Primary Bigotry in the USA is Economic

    It's far better to be a wealthy woman in the USA, than a poor man.

    It's better to be a wealthy black man, than a poor, white, male.

    Most welfare recipients in the USA are white.

    Yet, in this country, we take away contracts from men who were born into poverty, and there are many ... take Appalachia for example ... and they give those contracts to women born into money.

    Because, we say, the man born into poverty was privileged, because he was a man.

    It's completely insane, and everyone knows it. We have to see the Emperor's clothes, though. At least if want to keep our jobs and not be outcasts.

    The elite are hoping beyond hope, that the lower classes, of all races, don't band together and rise up.

    And so, this is how they keep that from happening.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019