[flagged]
It's just like the criticism of Biden having appointed "so many" Black female judges. As if they are not perfectly qualified or even more qualified than a white male judge would have been. Not to mention the fact that "qualifications" has never really been the criteria for any of this.
In other words, merit is far too nebulous a concept for a true "meritocracy" to ever exist.
The fact that we are not allowed to do that on HN speaks for its ideological and dangerous grip on free thinking. The chilling effect is real.
Maybe I was being too equivocal. The parent commenters /do/ believe the developer is receiving preferential treatment based on one aspect of their declared identity. And it's not hard to share their sentiment: what warrants a thin Python wrapper library, which does not really bring new capabilities itself, receiving $20k when there are many other projects which could make an even bigger impact with that money? It seems unusual to me. Especially when considering they were choosing from a pool at GitHub scale, which is about as diverse as it gets in the open source software community.
I don't share the belief that "non cishet/white" people are unduly denigrated when they achieve success--not more than any other person on average, anyway. In fact, I see quite the opposite: there's tremendous amounts of pride when "non cishet/white" people achieve success.
If that was the case you wouldn't be here to continue doubling down on casting doubt on someone's success.
...I'm not seeing anything on the readily available info indicating a gender either way.
(and I say this with an intention towards satire)
b) why the hell was finding that worth your time
Generally the only reason people dig up a trans person's deadname is for harassment or discrimination.
eg. on Biden: https://news.yahoo.com/the-inside-story-of-how-biden-promise...
The promise of the superficial characteristics came first. Then a solution (a candidate, in this case) was chosen from a limited solution set
When people do things like this, they make it clear they don't want optimal outcomes, with regards to performance and the like. They make it clear that other, superficial, characteristics carry greater weight.
This hurts any functioning society, certainly in the long-term. However, some people want that--for some societies.
Should we hire judges based solely on their LSAT score? Or perhaps only judges from the most ivy league, selective law schools? Or maybe we should select for judges who can recite the law by memory?
Judges need to represent the people that they stand in judgement of. You want people that know what it is like to grow up poor or to grow up under racism or whatever. And Black women are severely underrepresented in the federal judiciary.
Of course, any person selected as a judge needs to meet a minimum level of competence (something that has usually been the case up until at least a few selections from the last administration). Regardless, the solution set of Black female attorneys and judges is plenty large to be able to find fully qualified candidates for many, many federal appointments.