Black youth don't necessarily need to find other black idols to look up to. They - much like any other youth - need to feel like they have access to the same tools that everyone else does to succeed. Tools = access, technology, opportunity, mentors, funds, etc...
Typically, these youths assume that others that look like them had access to the same tools that they have/had hence why they "need" to see successful people that look like them. As a result, if you truly want help them succeed in the long run, rather than simply show/tell them about successful black people (who may/may not have had a similar upbringing), help them gain access to those same tools.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat
> "If negative stereotypes are present regarding a specific group, group members are likely to become anxious about their performance, which may hinder their ability to perform at their maximum level. For example, stereotype threat can lower the intellectual performance of African-Americans taking the SAT reasoning test used for college entrance in the United States, due to the stereotype that African-Americans are less intelligent than other groups. Importantly, the individual does not need to subscribe to the stereotype for it to be activated. Moreover, the specific mechanism through which anxiety (induced by the activation of the stereotype) decreases performance is by depleting working memory (especially the phonological aspects of the working memory system).
I don't think explicitly adding ethnicity to the YC app would be good for anyone .. for one, these are (mostly) teams of 2 or more. Accepting or not accepting a team/idea/application doesn't reflect judgement of the individuals within the team, regardless of their background(s).
Since there is only 1 application per team, it may also introduce unnecessary and awkward questions between the founders even prior to YC's evaluation.
Every black person is an individual obviously, but I think it's safe to say that most of us don't have the luxury of thinking of ourselves as "just another person", as much as we may like to. You tend to notice when you're the only black person in a mostly non-black room (just as the average white person would probably feel out of place in a mostly black event). That's been my experience in the vast majority of my life, and even though many of the most important people in my life are not black, the feeling of being the lone black representative in these situations is never really far away. All this to say that "colorblindness" sounds great in theory, but in reality, it's a privilege that not everyone has.
I think you're right that there are practical issues of when and how to collect voluntary ethnic information...but seriously, how awkward is that discussion between founders really, compared to things like equity split and job titles? It could just as well be left to the individual team members to identify or not.
But my overall point is that even if YC decides it shouldn't actively do anything about its minority imbalance (if it, in fact, exists), it would be nice to do some from an informed position, rather than a blind assumption that meritocracy is working as hoped.
This is not possible the way it works now (one HN user submits the application for the whole team). Asking isn't any more awkward, but it is unnecessarily so, in the sense it does no benefit to the team (vs the equity question, which forces a discussion thats likely been put off too long). I'm not white myself, but I'm more concerned about people with ambiguous ethnicity (mixed, adopted, immigrant etc) who may not like such questions (particularly as many applicants are quite young). Nonetheless, I agree that's a minor quibble.
But I just don't see YC as having much of a role in solving such social problems other than how it already does so (by funding startups and (now) non-profits to "make things people want"). YC may have an outsized influence in tech, but it's really a tiny, quirky little band of ~20 people (>(1/2) of which are part-time).
Clearly YC would benefit if more underrepresented minorities learned to code and started companies, but it seems the best way to do that is to make those things easier for everyone. I.e. fund startups that improve education (clever, code academy etc) and startups that make it easier to start startups (fundersclub, wefunders etc).
http://www.johnsonrd.com/ie/lj/ljprofile.html
http://www.parc.com/event/713/high-efficiency-solid-state-en...
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/11/technology/diversity_acceler...
Another Y Combinator representative told CNNMoney: "We've never collected any stats about people's race or ethnicity. It's not a big factor when we're judging applications."
Maybe the founders (if any) can identify themselves
I have no idea about yc; but you might find this answer on quora useful: http://www.quora.com/Who-are-some-notable-African-American-f...
For a black kid, seeing black people in leadership roles does matter. It's a reality that for many poor black kids in America, the only obvious path out of poverty is sports or drugs, neither of which are very good options...especially for nerdy black kids living in poverty. That's not to say entrepreneurship is an obvious path out of poverty for anyone (white or black), but being technically savvy is extremely good for your value in the employment market, no matter what you choose to do.
Anyway, I believe you are underestimating the amount of self-imposed race-based limiting factors. I think we're all probably also underestimating the external society-imposed limiting factors on people of color in America, as well (because most of the people on HN are white, grew up in a middle class household, and male).
In addition, it's not at all unreasonable to think that way. Why waste your time on something that you will ultimately likely not be allowed to do? That's good decisionmaking, not "self-imposed race-based limiting factors."
Having a clear line of progression into a career, validated by people you feel connected to, is important. I would say that having a familial connection is strongest, followed by a social connection, and lastly followed by cultural/ethnic connection.
For many of these kids, the first two types of connection are already very weak for high paying careers. Well, at least for those careers that have reasonable prospects of success (ruling out music performance and sports). It can be transformative to these kids to have some example to follow. Believe it or not, not everyone in America is born believing in the reality of the American Dream. It just seems that way to many, because they have been surrounded by people for whom the American system is working from their earliest memories. Many others grow up awash in evidence the game is strongly rigged against them. If that's what the preponderance of evidence tells you, then why try?
I would go further and say that not all the limits black people face in this country are self-imposed. Even if you're doing all the right things, there is a burden to constantly prove you're not one of those black people on the evening news. Not to mention, black people disproportionately lack the privileges of wealth and social connections compared to other ethnicities. This leads to a vicious cycle of self-fulfilling prophecy on the perceived capabilities of black people, as perceived from both within and outside of many black communities. I would argue that institutions should feel some responsibility to recognize these inequalities and even act against them in ways that align with their philosophies.
He just announced his newest venture, Bevel, a health and beauty 'brand' for people of color.
I don't know him personally, but his public persona seems very welcoming if you wanted to reach out depending on what you're trying to achieve.
[1] - http://www.crunchbase.com/person/tristan-walker
[2] - http://allthingsd.com/20131218/tristan-walkers-next-act-buil...
As a south-american, the term african-american irks me. It reeks of political correctness, not respect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill#Evolution
EDIT: eh, what did I get myself into... over here we're just plain white/black/latin/asian/etc, despite some media usage of the term 'afro-descendant'. I do support affirmative action policies in general, it's just my personal opinion that teaching kids to be self-conscious about race in this context is not necessarily positive.
To insist on a "color blind" view of society, our industry, etc. is to deny the real experience of people of color within it, who have found discrimination and prejudice.
We can and should say to racists that try to prove some sort of race-based superiority that genetically "race" is a silly fiction, and has no basis in reality. But, we can't deny that black folks in America have a very different experience than white folks. Doing so is counter-productive to the conversation that needs to happen.
I inisit on color blindness in all kinds of social, business, and political relationships, but I do not deny that blacks have a much tougher time, other things being equal.
Race-based discrimination, whether supposedly for or against blacks, does not actually provide value for blacks in general in the long run, and neither does it provide value for non-blacks.
As a side note, other things are not equal. For instance, coming from an abusive family in America is probably much more of a disadvantage than being black. We need to stop fetishizing race in particular.
Who is "festishizing race"? And, what does that phrase mean in this context? Do you believe I'm fetishizing race? Or OP? Or some other comment in this thread?
I'm merely saying that to insist that race not be part of the conversation is a passive approach to maintaining the status quo. Or, to quote Elie Wiesel: "We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim."
In every conversation? No. In a conversation about the under-representation of minorities in tech? Yes.
"Encouraging people to discriminate based on race is the status quo, ignoring it is the exact opposite."
Ignoring oppression is not the opposite. It is the tacit approval of oppression.
I agree wholeheartedly. And you should fight the opressor.
I understand the need to relate by example, but am I wrong to insist on a reality where race/ethnicity has jack to do with success in tech entrepreneurship?
> I'm merely saying that to insist that race not be part of the conversation is a passive approach to maintaining the status quo.
I'm fine conversing about race. But I don't think that you are actually advocating simply for more conversation. I think you are trying to oppose what I am advocating.
I am advocating that as individuals, we should treat other individuals in a colorblind way. I do not think that that would maintain the status quo, I think it would significantly improve the status quo over time.
No one considers black an offensive term, and in many cases "African-American" is clunky and imprecise, for example this thread. OP is really asking about black founders.
>white South African would be.
The "African" in "African-American" has nothing to do with where you were born or where your parents were born, just like the "Free" in "Free Software" has nothing to do with beer. It has to do with the origin of the features that make you distinct (in a historically particular way) from white Americans.
Of course, if white Africans who move to America identify as African-Americans, it's certainly their right, and I'd gladly refer to them as that.
Youth seems like the more troublesome homogeneity here. For whatever that's worth.
Michael was a super nice guy and should be considered a great example here. I always appreciated him bringing beer to the dinners personally though I remember the group office hours with him and his great insights into problems or struggles we were having just as fondly.
If black highly intelligent role models are who you're after - Neil Tyson exhibits all of qualities that a kid of any race/creed/religion should aspire to have.
source: I'm a jew and I love Neil.
He's also quite accessible, I have randomly ran into him in NYC on a couple of occasions and was always cordial.