6 ms·

>Hello Sunshine was founded by Witherspoon in 2016 to create content focused on female voices. ... "Kevin and Tom and our partners at Blackstone see what we see

>Hello Sunshine was founded by Witherspoon in 2016 to create content focused on female voices. ... "Kevin and Tom and our partners at Blackstone see what we see – women’s stories matter, and we have economic power as consumers, creators and business leaders. Their commitment enables us to double-down on our mission and our ambitious growth agenda,” Harden said in a release. Reese Witherspoon’s Hello Sunshine to be sold to Blackstone-backed media company for $900 million: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/02/reese-witherspoons-hello-sunshine-to-be-sold-for-900-million.html?&qsearchterm=reese https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/02/reese-witherspoons-hello-sun...

chemeng 5y ago
Yes, it’s very interesting that “X for Women” seems non-controversial to most people, but “X for [underserved group]” brings out the trolls en masse.
- brownerd 5y ago
  Perhaps if you tried to approach people with different views from you with an open mind and genuinely listened instead of calling them "trolls" you'd learn more interesting things. If you study the history of the world, "tribalism" in some sense is a common theme throughout all cultures, many wars and many injustices. It might have been "Protestant vs Catholic" or "Sunni vs Shiite" or "Serb vs Croat" or whichever tribal, ethnic, religious or language grouping was relevant to the area. In every single case, if the groups remained separated and saw one another as "othered" the problems spanned years and generations and the societies remained fractured and insecure. Only in the societies where people dropped the labels that separated them and merged into one identity did they thrive and improve conditions for all people. In short- the best way to help Black people in America isn't to perpetuate our separate identity, but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely.
  - raclage 5y ago
    > In short- the best way to help Black people in America isn't to perpetuate our separate identity, but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely. And you think the source of this power and significance is...media streaming companies?
  - chemeng 5y ago
    My point was more a question/observation as to why this is contentious, but "X for Women" is not seen as contentious. While I don't appreciate your condescending tone. I agree with you that "tribalism" is generally problematic. However, you'll also find that "tribalism" has also been essential throughout history for the persistence of marginalized people and their cultures. There is an inherent tension in many places and times throughout history between identity and assimilation. > but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely. The issue is not the power of the identifier, but the difference in societal treatment, amassed wealth and political power that flows along racial and socioeconomic lines. Which brings me back to my original point, why do we not see the same ire when talking about resources directly aimed at specific underserved needs of women?
    - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
      Being black, but not a woman, it's difficult for me to validate the premise that people aren't as much in arms about "women's issues" as they are about "racial issues." However, while tribalism is definitely a thing, women are generally seen as being included in the tribe. Perhaps that's why you see it as being less contentious. I'll also point out that this "the difference in societal treatment, amassed wealth and political power that flows along racial and socioeconomic lines" is exactly what results from the power of the identifier.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > why this is contentious, but "X for Women" is not seen as contentious. “X for Women” is seen as contentious. In fact, “X for Women" articles on HN often have all the same arguments, with gender in place of race, as this thread, with very slight changes, with focus on serving the unmet needs of women with regard to X painted as sexist and equivalent to external regulation based on gender role stereotypes just as this is compared to state-mandated segregated services.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - rhcom2 5y ago
    This argument for a "colorblind" world view has been criticized extensively. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(racial_classification)#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(racial_classi...
- dcow 5y ago
  I think it’s because gender plays an important roll in society whereas race ~~does~~ should not. Society doesn't benefit from segregating and victimizing. Society does benefit, generally, from a strong female population.
  - tekromancr 5y ago
    Race plays an incredibly powerful role in society. Every aspect of your lived experience is shaped by it, in fact. From what resources you are likely to have available to you in childhood; how you are treated by the justice system; what jobs are available to you; your ability to get a mortgage despite having good credit.
    - dcow 5y ago
      I mean ideally, in a western liberal society of humans, race shouldn't matter in comparison to sex which has biological meaning and social function. Culture matters, but culture isn't race (at least not in a western liberal society).
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > Culture matters, but culture isn't race (at least not in a western liberal society). “Race” is, in origin, a mythology drawn around culture; it is either an actual ethnicity that is an in-group or an imaginary one ascribed on the basis of external appearance as an out-group. And the mere act of creating that distinction by an in-power group can create a shared experience reifying the ascribed ethnicity into a real one over time. But, no, race is not apart from culture, but a product and aspect of it.
        dcow 5y ago
        Sure, I agree. So why do we need a Netflix for black people? How does that help? Why can't e.g. the existing Netflix simply air culturally black content if people are craving more of it? Why does the service itself need to be exclusive and segregated?
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  X for women is controversial on HN too.

chemeng 5y ago

Yes, it’s very interesting that “X for Women” seems non-controversial to most people, but “X for [underserved group]” brings out the trolls en masse.

brownerd 5y ago
Perhaps if you tried to approach people with different views from you with an open mind and genuinely listened instead of calling them "trolls" you'd learn more interesting things. If you study the history of the world, "tribalism" in some sense is a common theme throughout all cultures, many wars and many injustices. It might have been "Protestant vs Catholic" or "Sunni vs Shiite" or "Serb vs Croat" or whichever tribal, ethnic, religious or language grouping was relevant to the area. In every single case, if the groups remained separated and saw one another as "othered" the problems spanned years and generations and the societies remained fractured and insecure. Only in the societies where people dropped the labels that separated them and merged into one identity did they thrive and improve conditions for all people. In short- the best way to help Black people in America isn't to perpetuate our separate identity, but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely.
- raclage 5y ago
  > In short- the best way to help Black people in America isn't to perpetuate our separate identity, but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely. And you think the source of this power and significance is...media streaming companies?
- chemeng 5y ago
  My point was more a question/observation as to why this is contentious, but "X for Women" is not seen as contentious. While I don't appreciate your condescending tone. I agree with you that "tribalism" is generally problematic. However, you'll also find that "tribalism" has also been essential throughout history for the persistence of marginalized people and their cultures. There is an inherent tension in many places and times throughout history between identity and assimilation. > but to remove the power and significance of racial identifiers entirely. The issue is not the power of the identifier, but the difference in societal treatment, amassed wealth and political power that flows along racial and socioeconomic lines. Which brings me back to my original point, why do we not see the same ire when talking about resources directly aimed at specific underserved needs of women?
  - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
    Being black, but not a woman, it's difficult for me to validate the premise that people aren't as much in arms about "women's issues" as they are about "racial issues." However, while tribalism is definitely a thing, women are generally seen as being included in the tribe. Perhaps that's why you see it as being less contentious. I'll also point out that this "the difference in societal treatment, amassed wealth and political power that flows along racial and socioeconomic lines" is exactly what results from the power of the identifier.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > why this is contentious, but "X for Women" is not seen as contentious. “X for Women” is seen as contentious. In fact, “X for Women" articles on HN often have all the same arguments, with gender in place of race, as this thread, with very slight changes, with focus on serving the unmet needs of women with regard to X painted as sexist and equivalent to external regulation based on gender role stereotypes just as this is compared to state-mandated segregated services.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- rhcom2 5y ago
  This argument for a "colorblind" world view has been criticized extensively. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(racial_classification)#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(racial_classi...
dcow 5y ago
I think it’s because gender plays an important roll in society whereas race ~~does~~ should not. Society doesn't benefit from segregating and victimizing. Society does benefit, generally, from a strong female population.
- tekromancr 5y ago
  Race plays an incredibly powerful role in society. Every aspect of your lived experience is shaped by it, in fact. From what resources you are likely to have available to you in childhood; how you are treated by the justice system; what jobs are available to you; your ability to get a mortgage despite having good credit.
  - dcow 5y ago
    I mean ideally, in a western liberal society of humans, race shouldn't matter in comparison to sex which has biological meaning and social function. Culture matters, but culture isn't race (at least not in a western liberal society).
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > Culture matters, but culture isn't race (at least not in a western liberal society). “Race” is, in origin, a mythology drawn around culture; it is either an actual ethnicity that is an in-group or an imaginary one ascribed on the basis of external appearance as an out-group. And the mere act of creating that distinction by an in-power group can create a shared experience reifying the ascribed ethnicity into a real one over time. But, no, race is not apart from culture, but a product and aspect of it.
      - dcow 5y ago
        Sure, I agree. So why do we need a Netflix for black people? How does that help? Why can't e.g. the existing Netflix simply air culturally black content if people are craving more of it? Why does the service itself need to be exclusive and segregated?
pseudalopex 5y ago
X for women is controversial on HN too.