nrdlg on political bikeshedding:
The term “marginal” has no fixed definition outside a specific context. Consider this scenario: someone stands on the far side of a room while others gather at a table. This person detects a threat, perhaps a small fire, only visible from their position. They alert the group and come to the table to address the issue. Everyone appreciates their input, and by joining the table, they physically become part of the majority.
In this post, mrdlg talks about his RFC proposal for the open source project NixOS which he was a contributor to.
In these types of dust ups, it’s often a disgruntled white man who wants to only focus on the technical aspects of a project while ignoring the reality of real or perceived violence against marginalized folks that are contributing to the project that don’t look like them. It’s uncomfortable for them to confront an issue to which there is no logical way to approach this problem. It would mean that they would need to have a tough conversation and they don’t want to do that. They just want to focus on the tech.
What stood out to me the most in this post was this:
Now, imagine another fire starts under the table with everyone seated. Those at the table, including the previously “marginal” individual, can’t detect this new threat. Their once unique position is lost, and they’re now part of the group that’s unaware of the new danger.
[…]
It’s crucial to note that even this scenario is relative. To another group or from a broader perspective, everyone at this table could be considered marginal.
[…]
Traditionally, public displays of childish behavior were not tolerated in professional settings. Recently, however, a troubling trend has emerged: the justification of bullying behavior based on claimed marginalized status.
Wow. First, let’s deconstruct the last quote:
Traditionally, public displays of childish behavior were not tolerated in professional settings.
I will give him the benefit of the doubt; sometimes people working on a project can take adjudicating disputes between different contributors too far, policing speech and shutting down discussions that is in almost no way detrimental to either party. I am hoping that when he analogizes speaking up about systemic issues in disadvantaged communities that that is what he means. If it isn’t what he means, then we can already assume he is arguing in bad faith; this analogy fails because he equates creating an inclusive environment in technical projects to childish temper tantrums and bullying.
This false claim of static marginalization ignores the contextual and temporal nature of marginalization we discussed earlier. It allows certain individuals or groups to maintain a position of perceived moral authority, even when they’ve become part of, or aligned with the majority
And there it is. I cannot change my ethnicity and I have felt no need to change my sex or gender but even if I did that does not make my lived experience temporary. You can wish it away, you can logic your way through the mental gymnastics it takes to actually believe that when maintainers are addressing issues for marginalized folks contributing to a project they are bullying you and throwing temper tantrums but the fact remains. Racism, sexism, and transphobia are inherently political issues and addressing them in a project is critical to making sure differing ideas are collected to ensure the vibrancy and health of the project.