mjbh7k

Does anyone remember Leo, the homeless man that was given the chance to learn how to code? The libertarian tech utopia press loved it, but Leo never claimed his money and decided to keep living on the streets [1]. Homelessness is complex and is not a simple problem to fix.

The problem with this open letter is it is written with contempt and a complete lack of awareness of the author's own privilege. The "I don't want to see it, I earned my right to be here, make it go away" sentiment shows how little the author has thought about the problem and his own standing in the world.

Has he ever tried hanging out and having a conversation with any of these people? I do it all the time here in New York and used to do it a lot in SF (a city I now avoid because of people like the author). I recently had a great conversation about physics with a homeless man on Skid Row. The point is maybe he needs to stop, have a conversation, and find some empathy.

Most homeless shelters are dangerous places and are filled with restrictions, so many homeless people prefer the freedom of the street. Urge your local government to invest in long term housing for the homeless and not just shelters. Lift restrictions on building in SF to create more housing in general. Support mental health facilities. There is a lot of work to be done, but saying you earn a good living and therefore shouldn't have to see it isn't good enough. If you want that life move to a gated community, not a major city.

[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/leo-the-homeless-coder-2015-2...

Again, no one ever said white people are not suitable for this role or can't be involved in any way. This is the third time I've pointed this out. No one is saying white people can't be empathetic, or thoughtful, or innovative when it comes to topics of race. It's just that people of color are even more qualified to lead these programs as they have first hand experience existing in an exceptionally racist system.

White people are already in charge of everything, they don't also need to be in charge of diversity. That's exactly why these positions are being created in the first place.

"But it's not the only qualification necessary for the job."

Exactly, but it is one qualification of many. If you have a white man with a stellar application for that position, and a woman of color with a similarly stellar application for that position, doesn't the woman of color necessarily get the job because she has more qualifications than the white man?

The point is there is always going to be a person of color that is more qualified than the white man for that leadership position because their experience as a person of color makes them more qualified for the position, everything else being equal, and they should thus be given it. Is that not reasonable?

Nope, I really don't think saying the chief of diversity should be non-white is racist. I can intellectually understand the impacts of racism, but I'm seen as a cis-gendered white male when I'm out in the world and don't experience the effects of racism personally. It's a different thing to live in the US as a person of color and experience the small daily abuses that that comes with. When I come home with my girlfriend, who is a woman of color, and she starts crying because a white person followed her in a store, or assumed she didn't have money, or she overheard a comment made about her, yet I was treated with respect and dignity all day, it's very difficult to deal with. I can intellectually understand the effects of racism, yet I don't experience it.

Forgive me if I think she is more qualified for that job running diversity initiatives than I am, even though I'm very well read on the topic.

There are plenty of women of color applying for editor positions. Yet you go to the National Book Awards and the audience is predominantly white women and Daniel Handler makes jokes about watermelon on stage [1].

[1] http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/11/21/365707391/...

"The US is 77.7% of the US population"

I think you mean 77.7% white? It should be noted that the census counts North African and Middle Eastern as white, which is inaccurate. That number also drops to 62.6% when you take out Hispanics that describe themselves as white. So it's probably more like a 20 point difference than 2.

Sure, but we're talking about white women, which make up about 33% of the population of the US. Are you arguing that it's ok that 79% of the publishing industry is white and 78% is female?

- "This is not work for white folks to lead"

Well, it's not. It's kind of missing the point if your diversity initiative is being run by white people.

- "Some of the biggest barriers to progress are white women"

Second wave feminism, largely led by white women, often leaves out women of color. I mentioned this below, but the publishing industry is 79% white and 78% female. This has a huge impact on the types of stories that get to be published, which subsequently has real results on culture and society.

- "we need solidarity with our Asian friends and colleagues"

I mean yeah, sure, nothing super deep on that one. There should also be solidarity with white friends and colleagues, preferably ones that do a lot of listening and understand how not to take up all the space.

I've been seeing this discussion a lot lately, particularly in the publishing world. 79% of editors are white and 78% are women [1], so the statement has validity at least when talking about the gatekeepers of what stories get to be told. Marlon James recently posted about his experiences with it [2] and many writers of color have since shared similar experiences.

My take is that it's not "us vs them", but a need to illuminate where the barriers lie.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/jan/27/us-study-finds-...

[2] https://www.facebook.com/marlon.james1/posts/101537967097308...