Now Reading
GitHub Promotes ‘Reverse’ Racism and Sexism

GitHub Promotes ‘Reverse’ Racism and Sexism

by Giulio PriscoAugust 6, 2015

GitHub, the repository hosting service used by many open source software projects, has adopted the Open Code of Conduct developed by the TODO Group. All seems good – except one thing.

“We hope sharing this with you will enable you to easily establish a code of conduct for your respective open-source communities,” said Brandon Keepers, Open Source Lead at GitHub. “If your project doesn’t already have a code of conduct, then we encourage you to check out the Open Code of Conduct as a starting point and adapt it to your community.”

The Open Code of Conduct is proposed as an easy-to-reuse code of conduct template for open source communities. “We believe open source communities should be a welcoming place for all participants,” notes the TODO Group announcement. “We strongly believe that a code of conduct helps set the ground rules for participation in communities and helps build a culture of respect.”

The Open Code of Conduct, which is shared on GitHub for open source development and feedback, is inspired by the code of conducts and diversity statements from several other communities, including Django, Python, Ubuntu, Contributor Covenant, and Geek Feminism.

‘Reverse’ Racism is Racism, ‘Reverse’ Sexism is Sexism

People“We strive to be a community that welcomes and supports people of all backgrounds and identities,” states the Open Code of Conduct. “This includes, but is not limited to members of any 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, and mental and physical ability.”

So far, so good. The Open Code of Conduct encourages participants to be respectful, considerate, welcoming, friendly, and patient.

But then comes the problem.

“Our open source community prioritizes marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort,” states the Open Code of Conduct.

We will not act on complaints regarding ‘reverse’ -isms, including ‘reverse racism,’ ‘reverse sexism,’ and ‘cisphobia’.

What this statement is saying is that attacking some persons for their ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation is not OK, but attacking some other persons for their ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation is OK. That directly contradicts previous statements in the Open Code of Conducts itself, as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And what is this thing about “‘reverse’ -isms”? Of course I understand what they mean, but terms like “racism” and “sexism” have a perfectly good, inclusive definition. Racism means hurting people based on their ethnicity, and sexism means hurting people based on their gender. So “reverse” racism is just racism, and “reverse” sexism is just sexism. “Positive discrimination” is an oxymoron – discrimination is always negative and bad. Very bad.

This part of the Open Code of Conduct seems written by those “Social Justice Warriors” (SJWs) who take liberalism to such extreme excesses that it becomes a sad, pathetic (and dangerous, too) caricature of itself. Of course, the inconsistency has been noticed and denounced. This Reddit thread reveals that previous version of the Open Code of Conduct didn’t include the “reverse” bit. In fact, other codes of conduct inspired by the TODO Group template, such as Facebook’s code, don’t include reverse -isms.

It’s worth noting that many outraged users have deleted their GitHub accounts in protest.

However, the Open Code of Conduct is supposed to be open source, so that hopefully the reverse bit will be reversed. Complaints and exhortations to restore equality and common sense are beginning to appear on GitHub.

Images from Pixabay and Mathias/Flickr.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by us. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
What's your reaction?
Love it
Hate it
  • Asper ACT

    Someone should make a spoof project to mock the hypocrisy.

  • Ferroxian

    The ‘reversal’ of racism is inclusion…..the reversal of sexism, is again, inclusion…..one does not start hating someone to allow everyone in who was originally hated, no. That is flawed logic and a sign of a prior diseased mental and cultural position if one feels that to include those who were excluded excludes the excluder…no…that is an oversimplification of the fundamental tenets of right and wrong….it is obvious and errant thinking. THAT kind of thinking should be called out and also forbidden. Allow everyone IN…INCLUSION…who had habitually been rejected or minimalised by edict or misapplication of previous rules or rulings. Period! Now if legal remedy or reparations are in order for the previously disenfranchised – that may even become a civil or class-action dispute but to just let everyone in does not presuppose punishment against those who allowed the wrong.

    • Giulio Prisco

      “Insulting or harassing others is not permitted and will cause immediate
      expulsion” is a good rule, simple and crystal clear. It’s also fair,
      because it treats everyone the same.

  • No need to decompile the TODO “Open Code of Conduct”, the SJW authors clearly have an axe to grind with anyone White & Normal. Their “SOCIAL JUSTICE” efforts are just cover for their anti-Whitism.

    “ANTI-RACIST” is a code word for ANTI-WHITE

    • Giulio Prisco

      I prefer to think that most SJWs have good intentions and the heart in the right place, but are too easily commandeered by the few jihadists in their camp, who are motivated by hate. The best things they could do is getting rid of the jihadists and start afresh, then I am sure we could find good ways to reconcile the (apparently) conflicting aspirations for personal freedom and social justice (which are both good things).
      History shows that social movements tend to quickly forget initial aspirations for a world without oppression and end up with a call to arms to replace one group of oppressors with another.

      • ThomasER916

        What you think is wrong.

  • Giulio Prisco
  • columpaget

    Lady, I doubt you’ll ever see this, but you’re awesome and your boyfriend is a lucky guy.

  • columpaget

    So, by this argument the Raj was not racist. Whites in the Raj were a minority, and the Indians of the country they ruled over were the majority. Ergo, as you have make an arguement from majority/minority positions, a dominant minorty cannot be racist. This is clearly nonsense, as is your whole arguement.

    You might try structuring the argument on the grounds of power, instead of population. But it won’t make any difference. At the end of the day, the argument that there’s no such thing as racism towards any given racial group is _moral exclusion_, an inherently fascist argument.

    Some of us have already seen how this kind of thinking allows carte-blanche attacks on the excluded group. Furthermore, this argument always gets redirected sooner or later onto actual minority groups, as another minority group will tend to argue they are ‘more privileged than us’ and so it’s not racism when we attack them.

    Essentially github has committed to a code-of-conduct that seeks to exclude one group from protection, and will ultimately fail to protect everyone. It’s a faulty system that will be hacked. The proper system is to treat all complaints equally. This will protect everyone, and furthermore, people will feel more inclined to support and sign up to it, as it protects them too.