Valence — Social network for black professionals

@lanre_akinyemi this is exciting, congratulations on the launch!

@joaosardinha Black people in tech - especially senior positions is niche

@lanre_akinyemi @joaosardinha black people in tech is something we look forward to. I have to agree it’s a niche too.. we can be celebrated differently..

@andrew_cho Yup - some people need ALL the privilege 🤦‍♂️

@andrew_cho well the excluded group does say it's racist because they are excluded. I feel excluded and would be inclined to say the same. All of this talk of inclusivity going on, yet we exclude others :D

@therealrossmac If you knew the statistics behind the bias towards black professionals you would understand why this exists.

@xstex Then kindly share your statistics. I'm fully aware of unconscious bias, and white privilege. Maybe I'm in no position to comment, what I do know is segregation is a backwards move. There's much better ways to solve the problem than creating a platform exclusively for 'a certain race of people'. 'A certain religion' maybe, but a certain race, c'mon man.

@therealrossmac "this is a really weird product to be launching" This guy would never say that publicly at an all woman group launch. I don't see anywhere you have to be black to sign up though. i wouldn't agree with that. Where'd you get that impression?

@therealrossmac No, if you ain't black, you can't sign up. Would you expect to be able to join a female-only group or would you consider that "sexist"? Or is the notion that something is for black people only distasteful to you? There's a reason why these communities exist. Some existing structures, communities and systems are either downright noninclusive at worst or unintentionally shut women and minorities out at best. Therefore, when it comes to these specific groups being able to engage in knowledge exchange, learning from peers or simply finding the support etc, the means to do so can be more difficult. They might, and often do, overwhelming feature one type of people (e.g - white men) whose experiences may differ in significant ways. Frankly, POC, women and other minorities groups have long had the burden of explaining things like this, to people like you, who disparage, belittle or generally disrespect our need for community due to exclusion, which you either wilfully refuse or don't care to acknowledge in the first place. Let's be real: you can do this research, find the stats etc for yourself on experiences of POC, black people in leadership etc, if you were remotely invested in doing that work. If more people like you actually did do the critical thinking for themselves; challenged their biases, took a hard look at how current systems/communities that are filled with a powerful majority can shut others out, then found ways to proactively tackle that (instead of "organically" expecting it to resolve) then maybe there wouldn't be a genuine need for us to create communities and safe spaces like this. But based on this thread, will be a very familiar microcosm of society to many POC, women and other underrepresented groups: those with the privilege to be the "status quo" questioned or challenging the need for a spaces and being put in the position to explain or deliver "proof" for people who are already very represented in many facets of society and can easily find all types of communities that they can be part of without question. People crying if this were about connecting "white professionals" then it would be racist. Take a harder look a professional networks and spaces. You'll find the vast majority of leadership groups are already "white" (and male) leadership groups by default.

@xstex @therealrossmac "Maybe I'm in no position to comment" - then don't. :)

@paulparsons1981 community and representation is so important for all types of people. At its core, Valence is on a mission to support a group of people – some of whom might be your friends or current/future teammates. We shouldn't view their efforts as zero sum. I.e. You and I aren't disadvantaged because of something like this.

@paulparsons1981 They're trying to close a gap. Creating a platform only for white people would only make the gap bigger. Do you see the difference? In one case you're solving a problem, in the other you are the problem.

@rrhoover I completely get that, what my comment was highlight is the double standard of if this was positioned differently, how would it be taken.

@thomgroutars The best way to close the gap is to not isolate groups, but include them and shine. My point was about if this was the other way around, it would be called racist, which is not fair and the number of upvotes on my comment shows I am not the only one who sees that.

@rrhoover @paulparsons1981 Except it's not a double standard. There's a valid reason for one to exist and not the other.

@iiiitsandrea Most of us disagree with the premise of the survival thing. We have been asking about actual data proving this claim by the way.

@iiiitsandrea @soueuls why not go do some research yourself and report back? The data is out there, however, no one here is your personal Google.

@iiiitsandrea @aachanta I am commenting because I have made my research. Now I am waiting for anyone to mathematically prove what they are claiming in this thread. There is even a African American guy admitting that it's completely racist

@sjackson They might be. Do you have some proof that Google selects its employee using racial criteria?

@sjackson Steve, you have to see both sides. We talk of inclusivity and wanting to be a part of the board and decisions etc but then we exclude others (me) from this platform and other people. Have you heard of "Black Twitter" ? people form their own communities on those platforms either way. Every platform is racists and excludes other's in every way.

@soueuls absolutely not. Regardless of what there criteria is, it has created a problem of minimal ethnic diversity. Products like this and initiatives like CODE2040 are needed to bring a highlight to a large population that is looked over.

@sjackson so you don't have any proof of Google favoring certain races over others? Then you can't claim they are racist neither voluntarily nor involuntarily.

@edisonjoao6871 good points. I absolutely see both sides. Ultimately I think all jobs should hire with blind testing as someone else suggested in this thread. Hire on talent, not on race, gender, etc.. For anyone to feel excluded from this platform because it's targeted to black professionals just doesn't get it IMO.

@shopedelano you can't say all of that and look at the consumption culture of hip hop that almost never promotes investing within the black community. Rather let me spent my racks at the strip club and buy chains and a european car :D City Girls promoting hot girl summer, but instead should be promoting get an internship in tech or finance during the summer and progress in life! This is the same argument that I sort of give undocumented immigrants and the whole immigration topic (there's rules when you go to a country). These are self inflicting wounds our people create. Also, know that when a group of people feels excluded how can you not see that as reverse racism which is what those individuals are arguing.

@shopedelano I am not disputing any of the facts you mentioned. I'm disputing the way they are promoting the platform. Had they promoted it as "an inclusive platform" or a "non-discriminatory platform", that would have been great. However, they are promoting it as a platform for black people, and this is the opposite of non-discriminatory. By definition, racism means discriminating a group of people in a certain context based on something which is completely unrelated to that context. If you make skincare products for black people, that is not racist, because you are discriminating based on the relevant characteristics of black people's skin. However, skin color has nothing to do with entrepreneurship or business. So discriminating in business or entrepreneurship based on skin color is racist. You might as well make a platform for businessmen who like cats. To touch the essence of your point, I don't think we necessarily need more black people in business. I think we need more competent people - and if they happen to be black, green or violet, it doesn't matter. So if we really want to fight discrimination, instead of saying "we need more black people in business", we should say "we need to make sure that people advance in business regardless of race, and if we do that, we will get to whatever the natural ratio of black vs white people is, in business". Incidentally, I don't think that would match the ratio of black vs white people in the general population - but not because of skin melanin. Because of cultural differences which exist between groups. In other words, you are unlikely to get to a uniform ratio when taking any two distinct groups of people. This is because you are comparing it with two theoretically random samples of the population.

@edisonjoao6871 This is definitely the most racist take yet. Congrats.

@edisonjoao6871 Would love to better understand your argument, but I'm a bit confused. There are problematic behaviours within every community. How does this negate my above argument? Are you suggesting that black people who 'spend racks at strip clubs' are contributing to the reason why black people are systematically disadvantaged?

@sarrah the most racist take by you. You know I'm speaking facts and can't deny that. That's all you can say. Contribute to the conversation. Add something. Don't just call people racists, that's racist in itself. Congrats racists for being the first person to ever call me racist. How much shallow can you get?

@tribeeclectic Yes there are better solutions. There has been for the past few thousand years it's called double blind testing. You can Google it yourself, it's pretty neat when it comes to flattening multiple variables you are not interested in such as races or feet size, it even works with family names, whether you like to go swimming or not.

@tribeeclectic playing devils advocate as I am not a white man and race is even more complicated for latinos. I believe that you are closing yourself to some valuable criticism because I (not a white man) am closed to this platform and could perhaps see what they are talking about. As I mentioned in other comments, we talk of inclusivity and have all of these diverse programs in tech/finance, but then I see something like this that excludes others. I believe (trust me I'm working on my startup and being as solution driven as you say) that coming together is much better than isolating every sub culture group. Also, lighten up. It's product hunt. Everyone comes here because we're all makers and get inspired from the new products and comment to provide criticisms and feedback. It's part of it.

@dev_nikema You're so right, I can't believe people actually think this is racist, its ridiculous! I'm excited to join too! Oh wait no, gosh darn it I can't join, my skins not the right colour.

@ayalamac The black community is discriminated against on a daily basis today, in 2019. This is a great resource to help bring equity to a situation where the racism that still exists holds them back.

@andrei_nedelcu This is the lamest comment I've ever read on ProductHunt.

@xstex of course it's lame, it was meant to be. But at least it's not racist (unlike this app idea).

@xstex since you said my comment is lame, I'm going to paste my reply from below. I'm disputing the way they are promoting the platform. Had they promoted it as "an inclusive platform" or a "non-discriminatory platform", that would have been great. However, they are promoting it as a platform for black people, and this is the opposite of non-discriminatory. By definition, racism means discriminating a group of people in a certain context based on something which is completely unrelated to that context. If you make skincare products for black people, that is not racist, because you are discriminating based on the relevant characteristics of black people's skin. However, skin color has nothing to do with entrepreneurship or business. So discriminating in business or entrepreneurship based on skin color is racist. You might as well make a platform for businessmen who like cats. To touch the essence of your point, I don't think we necessarily need more black people in business. I think we need more competent people - and if they happen to be black, green or violet, it doesn't matter. So if we really want to fight discrimination, instead of saying "we need more black people in business", we should say "we need to make sure that people advance in business regardless of race, and if we do that, we will get to whatever the natural ratio of black vs white people is, in business". Incidentally, I don't think that would match the ratio of black vs white people in the general population - but not because of skin melanin. Because of cultural differences which exist between groups. In other words, you are unlikely to get to a uniform ratio when taking any two distinct groups of people. This is because you are comparing it with two theoretically random samples of the population.

@nartydev Do you also want straight pride? If you knew the statistics behind the biased towards black professionals you would understand why this exists.

@xstex Why not use arguments instead of leaving us in the dark?

@xstex @nartydev This information is readily available in many forms. Research, don't expect others to do the work for you.

@xstex @ashley_porciuncula1 No? It Is not my product and I do not have to convince myself that it's a good idea, it is something that can justify the fact of closing this community only a group of individuals. This is the kind of information that needs to be repeated, especially since it's a good argument.

@xstex @ashley_porciuncula1 @nartydev their own cofounder (white female) can't use the product. that just blows my mind