Your "argument" is puerile, privileged bellyaching in response to someone donating his own money towards helping an organization teach kids how to code.
That said, I think teaching anyone to code is better than not teaching them to code. If you choose who you teach based on the color of their skin, I don't see how that isn't racism.
You're ignoring the cultural context in favor of whatever correct perspective you have. Unfortunately, natural language doesn't respond well to simple analysis like yours.
Quite the opposite. I'm arguing in principle, and if you would like to redefine these words, I have no problem with that.
> try taking one more step and imagine how this "racism" would manifest itself
I fear that people continue to only associate with those in their small bubble of what makes them comfortable instead of reaching out and forging relationships that span sex/color/religion. Maybe they feel that they need a "black" version of education, and feel less confident in their ability to thrive in a multi-cultural society. Instead of opening up to new cultures we cement ourselves in one that we can identify with based on superficial factors like skin color and clothes.
I'm actually arguing from a position deeper than "white men should be able to join too!". Please, don't take it that way. I think humans tend to be afraid of people who are different than themselves, and that's the core issue. When we turn our skin color into an identity, we segregate ourselves from so many people. I think something like sports/teambuilding would be more effective at breaking down the barriers we're witnessing in our society.
There is, but I don't think that being inclusive to black girls requires being exclusive to everyone else. Not only that, they're cutting themselves off from potential peers who can help them grow their passion for programming.
Maybe I'm being naive, but I think it's possible for a brand to appeal to people of multiple races. In my mind I see other minority kids feeling left out and unappreciated. This kind of hits close to home, so I'm not just speaking out my ass. But just to reiterate, I don't think reaching out to people of a specific demographic is inherently wrong. I just wish it could be done without being exclusionary.
My point was, however: you're taking an absolute view of discrimination based on race being racism. It's not the case.
The goal of this program is to create a sanctuary where black women are able to feel more comfortable because they are going to be among peers they can relate to. Participating in an activity with your peers can be very helpful in fostering interest, comfort and confidence in someone.
That being said, I would prefer if this program was focused on women who are minorities (black, latino, eastern european, asian, etc.). You don't need to see people of just your own race to feel like you are among your peers. Furthermore, although the focus would be open to women who are minorities, they should footnote that they are open to the participation of men who are underrepresented in technology or caucasian women, who are also under-represented in technology. You can have a focus without being exclusionary.
Racial discrimination isn't inherently bad. Doctors "racially discriminate" regarding certain treatments such as heart disease, hypertension, etc because of their disparate prevalence among minorities. So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished. "Discriminating" against whites and men (fucking laughable) in an attempt to create a safe and welcoming environment for a severely underrepresented group is a positive use of discrimination.
I would argue your doctor analogy is flawed in that doctors don't racially discriminate, but biologically discriminate. I guess I can see why you would think that.
> So whether discrimination is bad depends on the context and whats being accomplished.
I agree, but I still haven't seen a good argument for racial discrimination. Can you cite examples of where racism was good for society? I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, but I think in the long run, segregating ourselves is not the right way forward. Maybe this is too disney, but I'd like to live in a world where we can disregard race and reach out to whoever needs it.
Are you justifying racism via economic output? I've seen this line of reasoning go horribly wrong before..
Obviously teaching people how to be productive is good. But what about teaching people to discriminate against others? If we were to argue from principle, I would agree that racism is not a virtue. That said, I don't adhere to principled reasoning 100% of the time and would be happy to help "black girls" code.
And just because I know this is coming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6976062
A non-black girl/boy comes along and says that they want to participate, too. The black girls/their instructors tell them to piss off because they are not black and a girl to boot? If this is not racist, I don't know what is.
How about a program for any children under a certain age - be they black or not? If they wanted to include more of the under-represented minorities in the program, they could promote it more heavily in the areas where the minorities tend to live/congregate. Such approach would achieve a similar goal without being racist.
The point of the whole civil rights movement wasn't just to extend all political and economic rights on paper to the black population and then just leave it at that. The point was to extend justice and fairness to all Americans. Anyone who takes a look at the last 40 years of American History can understand that that has not happened.
Unfortunately, since the systemic barriers are both externally enforced AND to a degree internally self inflicted, any attempt to address some of the self-inflicted barriers will be "discriminatory".