In
Late May during the global pandemic the
killing of George Floyd in
police custody in Minneapolis set off huge
protests that continued
throughout much of the summer. The
protests were reinforced by the
deaths of other Black people. Led by the
Black Lives Matter movement,
protests spread into Canada, the UK, and
Australia. There are demands
– notably to de-fund police. Toronto
police have a slogan “To
Serve and Protect” that doesn’t ring true
for Blacks or
aboriginal peoples. Clearly this is a time
for more insights into
racism. It has been said there is no
problem of blacks in the US. The
problem is the whites. Not just a few bad
whites. All whites. Whites
like us, and whites like me. It
was time to read White
Fragility: Why it’s so hard for White
People to talk about Racism,
by Robin DiAngelo, Beacon Press, 2018. DiAngelo
is an academic, an author, and a
consultant on racism. She fills her
book with examples of white responses to
discussions in her workshops
on racism. There is anger, sullen silence,
and tears – all
responses that distract, and so simply
reinforce, continuing white
racism. White people in North America live
in a society that is
deeply separated by race and white people
are the beneficiaries. She
is white and she is part of it, as are am
I. Her book is full of
insights and examples. The book speaks
most clearly to the US.
DiAngelo claims to also speak to the wider
Western world. The fit
wasn’t quite right for a Canadian of
British extraction, but she
did have useful things to say to me. I
give a summary of some
insights by chapter. Introduction.
The introduction tells us that we whites
are socialized into a deep
internalized sense of white superiority
that we cannot see. We become
fragile in conversation about race. We
think any challenge to our
worldview is an attack on ourselves
individually, believing we are
good moral people. We react by strong
defensive response. The
reactions distract us so we never begin to
understand the true
victims of the white racial system of
which we are a part. Our
reactions and our responses are “white
fragility.” They preserve
the status quo and hold white racism in
place.
Chapter
1.
Why
it is so Difficult to Talk about
Racism.
Racism is not about bad people. It is
about a system into which we
whites are socialized. Somehow we have to
get past those white
fragility reactions that we inevitably
absorbed from our social
surroundings. With on-going learning and
openness, it is possible to
hear comments about our behaviour that has
been racially problematic
for someone, and to hear the comments as
helpful to our understanding
of ourselves, as well as stopping us from
repeating the behaviour.
Then we will no longer add to the daily
frustrations and indignities
that people of colour endure from white
people who see themselves as
open-minded and not racist. Chapter
2.
Racism and White Supremacy.
Race is socially constructed. It is not
related to superficial
biological differences. Race emerged as a
way of reconciling the
noble concept of equality with the reality
of genocide, enslavement
and colonization. The idea of racial
inferiority was created to
justify unequal treatment. We exploited
people for their resources,
not for how they looked. Then the ideology
of unequal races justified
the exploitation. There was something
wrong with black people, and
nothing wrong with the policies that
oppressed, enslaved and jailed
them. In
the early US, only whites could become
citizens; immigrant groups
from European Countries petitioned courts
that were controlled by
whites to be recognized as Caucasian. The
notion of the US as a
melting pot in reality applied to only
Europeans. Race – the social
construct - changed over time. Irish,
Italian, Polish, Spanish and
then people from the former Soviet Union
became “whites.” Even
new immigrants whose internal identity is
quite different may “pass”
as white, be treated as white and benefit
from the advantages of the
status in the white controlled society. It
is our job as concerned
whites to figure out what these advantages
are rather than to deny
their existence out of hand. The social
construct also flows along
class lines – poor people may not be seen
as fully white. But
racial division has kept black and white
working classes from
protesting together. Racism
is not prejudice. Prejudice is a normal
human experience that does
not identify bad people. However, action
based on prejudice is
discrimination – ignoring, excluding,
threatening, ridiculing and
violence. Racism comes from a group’s
collective prejudice backed
by the group’s legal authority and
institutional control. Racism
continues despite the good intentions of
individual actors. Racism is
different from individual prejudice and
individual racial
discrimination by the historical
accumulation and on-going use of
institutional power and authority to
support it and to systematically
enforce discriminatory behaviours. Only
whites can be racist in the US. Only
whites have the collective
social and institutional power and
privilege over people of colour.
Racial disparity between whites and people
of colour continues in
every institution across society.
Individual whites may be against
racism, but still benefit from the system
of privileges. Racism has
been called “a system of advantage based
on race.” White
privilege is these advantages. They are
taken for granted by whites
in government, workplaces and schools but
cannot be similarly enjoyed
by people of colour. Of course whites do
have to face barriers. They
are just not the barriers of racism. Being
seen as white brings a status and identity
imbued with rights and
privileges denied others – like a feeling
of self-worth, freedom of
movement, sense of belonging and sense of
entitlement. White is the
norm. Colour is the deviation. There is
Black History Month, but no
white history month – white is just the
invisible norm. There are
exceptional black players which means
“Jackie Robinson was the
first black man whites allowed to play in
major league baseball.”
When blacks like Obama reach positions of
power that does not
challenge racism in ways that are
threatening to that system. White
people claim to stand outside the system
they are just an individual
– just a human. But they bring all the
white notions from white
socialization like individualism and
meritocracy. White
supremacy is more than an individual white
or a militant hate group.
It is the overarching political, economic
and social system of
domination. It is global and promotes the
idea of whiteness as the
ideal for humanity. It is particularly
relevant for countries
associated with Western colonialism or
with US global power. It has
shaped a global system of European
domination. White supremacy is
never acknowledged. It cannot be studied
without addressing how it is
mediated by race. Given
the historical and continuing white
supremacy, claims of reverse
racism are petty and delusional. Rather,
the system elevates whites
as a group: 10 richest Americans - 100%
white; US Congress - 90%
white; US governors - 96% white; US
Teachers - 82% white; etc., etc.
Naming white supremacy is important
because it makes the system
visible and because it puts the onus for
change on white people,
where it belongs. The
white racial frame is how whites circulate
and reinforce racial
messages that position whites as superior.
Whites are seen as
superior in culture and achievement, and
people of colour as
generally of less social economic and
political consequence. Because
social institutions such as education,
medicine and law are
controlled by whites, dominance is taken
for granted. That whites are
disproportionately enriched and privileged
by these institutions is
taken for granted and assumed to be
because we are better. There
are also submerged negative racial images
that work at a subliminal
level in movies, neighbourhoods, school
teachers. When did you have a
teacher of the same race as you? What
races live nearer to you than
others? Predominantly white neighbourhoods
are teaming with race,
reinforcing powerful parts of the white
racial frame. Simple things
act subliminally – like telling a child
not to say out loud that
that man over there has black skin. It
teaches children the white
frame. We don’t talk about race. Black is
somehow different and may
not be good. Chapter
3.
Racism after the Civil Rights
Movement. Many
of the 60s generation marched. Now there
is a new kind of racism.
Everyone claims not to be racist, but
racism continues unabated.
There is colour-blind racism in which we
say we just don’t notice
race. So racism doesn’t exist and so we
don’t need to talk about
it. Worse, not noticing race doesn’t
recognize the validity of the
other person’s colour and their very
different life experience.
This non-overt racism is called “aversive
racism”. It is
subconscious because it conflicts with
rationally held beliefs in
equality. Averse
racism allows the perpetrator to maintain
a positive self-image. For
example: rationalizing segregation as
unfortunate but necessary to
access good schools; arguing workplaces
are virtually all white
because people of colour don’t apply for
the job; or avoiding
racial language by using coded terms like
urban, underprivileged,
diverse or good neighbourhoods. Such race
talk preserves the white
frame – we’re good, they are bad. Cultural
racism begins at a very early age – small
children know it is
better to be white than a person of
colour. Millennials claim more
tolerance and commitment to equality and
fairness than previous
generations. But research shows otherwise.
High school children
recording racist stories among peers
produced large numbers of
blatant racist comments. The findings:
young people are exposed to
explicit racism; a “good person” cannot be
seen as a racist.
Incidents were “offstage”, that is among
whites alone. In the
incidents there was a protagonist,
cheerleaders for laughter, silent
observers, and – rarely – a dissenter. At
“front stage”, that
is with blacks, white students acted
overly nice, avoided meeting and
engagement, mimicked black mannerisms and
speech; used code words to
talk negatively. This is the younger
generation. Chapter
4.
How Racism Shapes the Lives of White
People.
White people feel they belong. Their child
being born white in a
hospital, DiAngelo’s parents would have
been treated better than
people of colour and were likely
surrounded by white doctors and
nurses. People cleaning the room or
cooking in the cafeteria were
likely people of colour. DiAngelo feels
she belongs when she looks at
TV, magazines, advertisements, teachers
and counsellors. Whites are
free from the burden of race. Sometimes we
are surprised to find that
the black man is the school principal. For
career choices, whites have lots of role
models. Almost anyone in a
position to hire DiAngelo will be white.
Although we are aware that
race has been used against people of
colour, unless one of us does
something wrong, race is not seen as a
problem for us. People of
colour cannot relax in this way. They are
seen as inferior, if they
are seen at all, and they have to navigate
whites’ sense of
superiority.
Whites
have freedom of movement – they need be
far less concerned about
where they go. People of colour need to be
concerned about areas of
organized white nationalists – or simply
of an area where there
will be only whites or whites unfamiliar
with black people around
them. White people are just people. White
authors like Shakespeare,
Dickens, Hemingway, are just authors. They
speak for all of us. Toni
Morrison is a black author. James Baldwin
is a black author.
Representations are white – like white
Jesus and Mary. White
solidarity is an unspoken white agreement
to protect white advantage
and not make another white feel any racial
discomfort by confronting
them when they say or do something
racially problematic. Silence
maintains the racial hierarchy and we
benefit from such white
solidarity. Confronting costs a
substantial social price for the
person who does it. Calls
for a return to “the good old days” are a
function of white
privilege – the ability to remain
oblivious to our racial history.
Any historic period in the US was not
“good old days” for blacks
or asians or indigenous. Trump’s call to
Make America Great Again
worked as racial manipulation of white
people, deflecting blame for
the current condition of the white working
class from the white elite
towards various people of colour –
undocumented workers, immigrants
and the Chinese. And DiAngelo gives a list
of the huge new
concentrations of wealth focussing on
white, mainly male, Americans.
The good old days of traditional family
values are racially
problematic: in those days whites fled the
cities to the suburbs to
avoid people of colour and they wrote
covenants to keep schools and
neighbourhoods segregated and to avoid
cross-dating. Then there was
the extreme resistance to busing to
de-segregate schools. How does
nostalgia for the past sound to African
Americans? There
is a pervasive white racial “innocence”
because we are not taught
to see ourselves in racial terms. White
people who grew up in
segregation claim they were sheltered from
race. We turn to people of
colour who may also have grown up in
segregated spaces on account of
policies that blocked them from moving to
white neighbourhoods to
learn about racism. Are these people of
colour innocent of race? Is
white segregation racially innocent? The
white flight to suburbs is
based on assumptions that blacks are more
prone to crime, so that too
many blacks means crime rises, home values
fall and the neighbourhood
deteriorates. Yet research on police crime
data does not bear out the
association of crime with blacks and
latinos in the area. Also, the
vast history of brutal violence by whites
is trivialized by white
claims of racial innocence. Blacks and
Latinos are stopped by police
more often than whites for the same
behaviours as whites and get
harsher sentences. Whites’ crimes are
attributed to external
factors like a single parent home and they
get the benefit of doubt.
Judges more often attribute the cause of
black or Latino crimes to
personal attributes - more prone to crime,
more animalistic, less
capacity for remorse. Yet trying to get
white recognition that they
have advantages faces defensiveness and
denial. Expecting
people of colour to teach whites about
racism implies it has nothing
to do with us, it requires nothing of us,
and it disregards the long
history of times people of colour have
tried to tell us. Without our
building trust and meeting them halfway on
vulnerability, this will
likely be viewed as just another
invalidating exchange for people of
colour. People in the US live segregated
lives and are seldom
encouraged to build cross-racial
friendships. There is less
segregation for poor urban whites, but if
they have upward mobility,
they move towards other whites. Meritocracy
is
a precious ideology for many in the US but
in reality,
neighbourhoods and schools are separate
and unequal. Without whites’
interest and effort in changing this,
advantage just passes down the
generations. Whites feel uncomfortable if
placed among many blacks –
so imagine how white schools might feel to
black parents. Whites do
not feel they miss anything by not having
friendships with people of
colour. Think about the message: we lose
nothing of value by racial
segregation. And we are trained into a
whole set of patterns – that
DiAngelo lists - that form the basis of
white fragility. Telling us
to treat everyone the same is no longer
enough. Now it is our
responsibility to grapple with how our
white socialization infects
our daily lives and how it makes us
respond when that socialization
is challenged. Chapter
5.
The Good or Bad Binary.
After the civil rights movement one could
not be a good moral person
and be complicit in racism. Racism was
reduced to simple isolated and
extreme acts of prejudice. Racists became
ignorant, uneducated, old
and Southern whites. Well intentioned,
middle-class, people raised in
the enlightened North could not be racist. Given
this paradigm to call someone a racist is
a deep insult that triggers
defence or deflection and blocks any
reflection on a possible insight
into one’s behaviour that might bring
self-learning. Thus it
becomes impossible for whites to
understand racism let alone
interrupt it. For whites, racism is a
concept like murder - someone
has to commit it for it to happen. Whereas
in fact racism is an
embedded on-going part of the structure of
society. The
good/bad is false. All people hold
prejudices across racial lines in
a society deeply divided by race. One can
have friends of colour, not
tell racist jokes, yet one is still shaped
by the society, is seen as
white, experiences life as a white;
everything about one will develop
from a white perspective. And people tend
to put themselves on the
good side – which leaves nothing to be
done about their racism.
Even people in a course on racism cannot
handle a situation if they
accidentally slip with a mimicked
stereotype. Because calling that
slip out – as should be done - then gives
that person the body blow
of classifying her on the evil racist side
of the good/bad racism
paradigm. In the defensiveness and
embarrassment her slip can longer
be dealt with and learned from – at least
by that person. Related
to good/bad racist/non-racist, there are
ways of placing oneself on
the good side and thus requiring no
further work on racism, for
example: “I don’t see colour”; “I’m
married to a person of
colour”; “Focussing on race is what
divides us”. The particular
comments can be challenged and the book
does that. Being married to a
man doesn’t allow DiAngelo to live a
gender-free life. One cannot
be taught to treat everyone the same –
socialization teaches you
how you treat people. To suggest that
talking about racism is racist
is puzzling. Ending racism is more than a
lifelong quest, but
DiAngelo says she is working on it. Chapter
6.
Anti-Blackness. Talking
about race in general terms like white
racism is helpful for
whites because treating them as part of a
race it interrupts their
individualism and the helps them to learn
about themselves as part of
that group. But for people of colour it
reinforces their being part
of the big “coloured” group identity.
Further, their particular
colour group loses its specific racial
experiences. But this chapter
targets the unique anti-black sentiment
integral to white identity in
the US that is inculcated into whites from
childhood. Relentless
messages of white superiority exist
alongside messages of black
inferiority. The
concept of race began as a need to justify
slavery; an inferior black
race simultaneously created a superior
white race. Whites projected
onto black slaves aspects of themselves
they didn’t want to own –
lazy, child-like. Today blacks are seen as
dangerous – a perversion
of the continuing major direction of
violence from white to black –
that leads to an aversion and hostility.
These feeling emerge.
There
is on-going white resentment of
affirmative action – a 60s era
program designed to improve the situation
of continuing documented
discrimination in employment. White
imaginations indignantly fill
with special rights and quotas for blacks
– all untrue. Qualified
minority applicants are given the same
opportunities as whites. No
employer has to hire unqualified minority
applicants, and the main
beneficiaries of the program were white
women. By 2018 the program
had been largely dismantled and several
states had no program. Yet
DiAngelo still finds white males bristling
with anger over
affirmative action. Copious
research attests to white disdain for
blacks: the school-to-jail
pipeline; mass incarceration; and white
flight. A study shows highest
segregation between blacks and whites,
lowest between Asians and
whites, with Latinx intermediate. Whites
assume that brutality
towards back children or teens must be
deserved. There has been an
immediate rejoinder to
Black Lives Matter: All Lives Matter.
Coates
has pointed out in his Case
for Reparations
the early economy was built on slave
labour – the White House and
Capitol included. Current laments of black
family pathology pale in
comparison with torture of black fathers,
rape of black mothers and
the sale of their black children. “...
America’s relationship to
the black family reveals the country not
to be its nurturer but its
destroyer. And this destruction did not
end with slavery.” Anti-blackness
begins
with a deep guilt about what whites did to
them. It was
rationalized by believing they are less
human so what was done
doesn’t count. There seems to be a curious
satisfaction in abusing
blacks, from wearing blackface to
portraying them as apes and
gorillas. There is also argument made that
white identity depends on
the projection of inferiority on blacks.
“Uppity” blacks that
look us in the eye and claim equality are
particularly resented.
Black advancement is a trigger for white
rage. Despite
all this a black man was elected president
– the ultimate
advancement and the ultimate affront. Not
surprisingly, voting rights
were curtailed, the government was shut
down and more than once the
office of the president was disrespected
by other elected officials.
The chapter ends with the description of a
movie
The Blind Side
that captures the stereotype of white
saviours of inadequate blacks
who can then take to sport successfully. Chapter
7.
Racial Triggers for White People.
Whites expect racial comfort, and they
resent racial stress in the
cocoon reinforced by institutional and
resources. When ideologies
like colour-blindness, meritocracy, and
individualism are challenges,
the reactions are strong and emotional.
There is a theory about how a
person’s social comfort relates to the
“field” (location) –
like a janitor’s room – and the capital or
social value a person
has in that field. We have to rapidly
adjust to negotiate each
context and our expectations of how to
work with such actors and
their relative power in that particular
context. Race, class and
gender are at play in negotiations and
“habitus” is a person’s
awareness of their situation – for example
a teacher in a
custodian’s office to request more chalk
from “his” store. What
is done? What is talked about and what
taboos? Unfamiliarity with the
social customs and uncertainty causes
disequilibrium. Habitus is an
automatic reaction to help us regain
control. For
white fragility a minimum racial stress is
intolerable and the
reaction is emotions like anger, fear and
guilt with defensive
actions like argumentation, silence and
physically leaving. The
triggers are listed in the book and seem
reasonable, but the
reactions are not. Here are 2 of her 11
examples. Suggesting a
white’s viewpoint comes from a racial
framework – a challenge to
the white belief in their objectivity.
Acknowledging that access is
unequal between racial groups –
challenging the white belief in
meritocracy. The
chapter ends with an example of this. It
was told to DiAngelo by a
teacher about an incident involving two
black students at a colleague
teacher’s desk. The incident blew up into
the newspapers and a law
suit. DiAngelo was called in to talk to
the teachers. The teachers
saw DiAngelo as punishment. The teacher
said one black student was
taken aback when his colleague called her
“girl.” She asked “Did
you just call me Girl.” The second student
said it was OK, the
teacher called all her students that. Both
teachers were angry about
having to be “so careful” and “not being
able to say anything
anymore.” To them, students of colour were
oversensitive and
complaining about racism where it didn’t
exist. Since the teacher
called all students girl, the matter had
nothing to do with race. One
student didn’t have a problem with that.
In their reaction, the
teachers never considered that they might
be missing some knowledge
or context. And they had no concern for
the student’s feelings.
They could not separate intention from
impact. Despite a racial
violation with possible legal
ramifications, the teacher continued to
believe he was right. His colleague,
following the normal pattern of
white solidarity, joined him in using the
student who saw no problem
as invalidating the other student of
colour. The teachers used the
incident as an opportunity to increase
racial divides rather than
bridge them and to protect their own
worldviews and positions. Chapter
6.
The Result: White Fragility.
There is a short example of white
fragility. Someone who talks over a
black workshop participant cannot see
herself in racial terms because
she does that to everyone and when pressed
she refuses to continue in
the workshop and sets herself up as
someone treated unfairly. And
indeed many whites feel there is
discrimination against white people.
Children start to construct a sense of
white superiority and race as
early as preschool. DiAngelo gives
examples in the reaction of white
actors to concerns about lack of diversity
in the 2016 Oscars. One
way in which whites protect positions when
challenged on race is the
discourse of self- defence – it is they
who are victimized, blamed,
and attacked. Setting themselves as the
victims of antiracist
efforts, they as victims cannot be
considered “beneficiaries” of
whiteness. They have been unfairly treated
by a challenge to their
position or by being expected to listen to
perspectives and
experiences of people of colour. In this
way they get time and
attention. Racism loses time and
attention. Attempts
to discuss racial issues results in
incoherent talk. Many white
people are unprepared to look at their
racial perspectives and to
work to shift their understanding of
racism. They can only
re-inscribe white perspectives as
universal. The continual retreat
from the discomfort of authentic racial
engagement in a culture
infused with racial disparity prevents
white people from forming
connections across racial lines. DiAngelo
then gives another example
situation. The
chapter ends by showing how white
fragility acts as a form of
bullying. Whites have little capacity to
deal with challenges to
racial positions and are thus fragile. The
responses are not fragile
and wield the historical and institutional
white power and control.
We cry – and the attention and resources
rush to us. We take
umbrage and respond with righteous
outrage. We play devil’s
advocate, pout, tune out or withdraw. It
is bullying in that if you
confront me I will make things so
miserable that you will just back
off. White fragility serves to keep people
of colour in their place. Chapter
9.
White Fragility in Action
begins with a series of short examples
from DiAngelo’s experiences.
She no longer gets open hostility to
presentations on white racism. White
people in workshops are receptive to her
presentations so long
as they are abstract. Yet as soon as she
deals with something
happening in the room, white fragility
erupts. Something like: May I
give some feedback? Sharon, I know it
wasn’t intentional, but what
you said about Jason’s story invalidates
his experience as a black
man. Sharon defensively says she was
misunderstood, then angrily
withdraws. Everyone rushes to defend her –
what she meant was. No
one seems to care about Jason. When
patterns in white supremacist
culture are named or questioned there are
predictable responses from
a set of assumptions. If these are
examined there are emotions that
activate the predictable behaviours. The
behaviours are justified by
claims. And the book provides lists of
emotions (feelings),
behaviours, claims with some case
examples. Finally, there is a list
of 22 assumptions that if challenged
trigger the white fragility, for
example: I am free of racism or I know all
I need to know. Chapter
10.
Rules of Engagement
emerge from whites participating in
workshops on racism. The first of
11 rules that emerged for DiAngelo is: the
only way to give any
feedback on actual behaviour is not to
give it. She gives the other
10 rules for those who insist on giving
feedback anyway! Many
white people need to build trust before
exploring racism in a
workshop and guidelines produced for such
workshops have this
trust-building in them. There are six of
these trust-building
methods? Strategies? Exercises? given and
it is assumed that these
guidelines can be used universally. Yet
they pre-suppose white
fragility and so in themselves support the
status quo. As for people
of colour, the status quo needs to be
interrupted, not reinforced.
The build-trust message in the guidelines
is basically “be nice.”
For whites, suggesting someone is racist
is not nice. So the
guidelines can be turned against people of
colour. Whatever
the noble thoughts and posters promoting
diversity they saw in their
childhood, white people raised in white
society are conditioned into
a white supremacist world view. Stopping
racist patterns must become
more important than working to convince
others that we don’t have
them. Chapter
11.
White Women’s Tears. The
book shows that tears of white women in a
cross-racial setting cause
serious frustration to people of colour.
White women feel entitled to
shed them freely. But white women’s tears
in such a setting
re-inscribe rather than ameliorate racism. Emotions
are political. They are shaped by biases
and beliefs in our culture.
If I believe only bad people are racist, I
will be offended if a
racist assumption is pointed out. If I
believe having racist
assumptions is inevitable but possible to
change, I will be grateful
if an assumption I was unaware of is
pointed out. There
are several problems with white women’s
tears. There is a history
of black men being tortured and murdered
on account of white women’s
distress. DiAngelo’s Afro-American
colleagues warn her: “When a
white woman cries a black man gets hurt.”
Not knowing this or being
insensitive to it reveals a lack of racial
humility. DiAngelo gives
some example situations. The
other big problem is that when a white
woman cries all the attention
goes to her interrupting a workshop and
preventing any learning about
the racism that caused the tears and often
leaving the black person
who received the racism ignored. And in a
common subversive move,
racism becomes about white distress, white
suffering and white
victimization. Men’s
white fragility manifests in other ways,
such as: controlling the
conversation; proclaiming a simplistic
“answer” to racism; being
the outraged victim of “reverse racism;”
silence and withdrawal;
and hostile body language. All of these
push race off the table. So
in cross cultural settings we must examine
our emotions and how our
actions will affect others before
reacting. Things like tears don’t
feel like solidarity to black observers.
White tears don’t
accomplish anything constructive. White
women’s tears have a strong impact on men.
DiAngelo notes the
dominant role of white men in society and
the patriarchy in the
response to the damsel in distress. Black
men’s survival can depend
on not having a damsel in distress, yet
that drives a wedge between
black men and black women. Chapter
12.
Where do we go from Here?
This chapter shows how all the white
fragility emotions, behaviours,
claims and assumptions go if the racial
paradigm can be changed.
There is a meeting in which DiAngelo is
told by a colleague that she
has upset a new black web designer. She
figures out that a comment
made about a black woman’s hair was
inappropriate and she asks to
meet with the web designer to apologize.
She discovers she did
something else racist. She is asked if
next time the matters could be
raised publicly and DiAngelo says yes.
It
is hard to pass over the normal reactions.
But in a new paradigm,
feedback might give feelings of gratitude
or interest. It might lead
to listening, reflecting and seeking more
understanding. Behaviour
can be saying things that suggest
openness, for example one can say,
“I see I have some work to do.” The
list of new paradigm assumptions includes:
being good or bad is
irrelevant; and, I have blind spots on
racism. Adopting the different
assumptions could reduce defensiveness,
allow for growth and increase
our worldview. It’s important to get
oneself educated on racism
just as you would go on the web if you
learned you had a medical
disease. In
trying to repair racism, it is important
to be simple and direct. Ask
for a meeting and say why. Take ownership
of the racism simply and
directly. Admit behaviour was offensive.
Also ask if anything else
was missed. Things may move forward.
Sadly, attempts to repair are
rare among white persons. Here,
as in several other places, the book warns
not to put the burden of
getting information about racism from
people of colour. The
responsibility is ours – white people’s.
For those in the
internet era, getting information should
not need too much work, but
DiAngelo tells how to get information
anyway. There
are some people of colour who make it
their business to teach white
people about racism, albeit on their
terms. Using them is fine. We
can demand that we be given racism
information in schools and
universities or, I would add, in life-long
learning courses. We can
get involved in multi-racial organizations
or white organizations
committed to working against racial
injustice. As a minimum we can
reflect on information and feedback we
have picked up so far. We
can commit to welcoming feedback offered
and reflecting thereon. In
the moment of our white fragility reaction
we can commit to: take a
deep breath, listen, reflect as long as
needed, if necessary talk to
someone with a stronger analysis, but then
go back to the person to
talk about the situation. Importantly, we
must break the silence
about race and racism with other white
people. Some
people feel guilt about white supremacy.
However that serves as an
excuse for doing nothing. There is no real
basis for that guilt.
White people did not choose their social
conditioning – it
happened. DiAngelo does not feel guilt;
nor do I. We can accept that
we have social conditioning and move on
with it. Then we can get
enthusiastic about finding where we
collude with white supremacy and
work on that. A
positive white identity is one supposed
way of doing antiracist work.
But DiAngelo claims that this is nearly
impossible given that white
identity is inherently racist. Trying to
be less white, that is less
racially oppressive, is better. It means
being open to the racial
realities of people of colour. It means
breaking with white
solidarity and silence. Working
together requires a humility that assumes
that each of us is part of
the problem. DiAngelo tries to affirm the
other’s position before
she offers any insight – I understand. I
have been there. But
working with people of colour I came to
understand ... If one has an
ongoing relationship it’s sometimes fine
to move on and return to
the matter later. DiAngelo says her bottom
line is her own integrity,
not a need to change or correct someone. People
of colour asking for advice on dealing
with white fragility put
DiAngelo at a loss. She suggests asking a
white person they trust to
point out something they don’t want to let
go of. White people can
take the hostile reactions better. Navigating
white
fragility is survival for people of colour
and the consequences
can be agonizing. One can be seen as a
trouble-maker or lose one’s
job. But DiAngelo reports things people of
colour do to help her. She
asks friends of colour to give her
feedback and promises she will
handle it. She explains at length that
when she feels feedback unfair
the main thing not to do is to ask another
person of colour. That
encourages collusion and minimizing the
racist experience. Conclusion.
The
conclusion is short. The default of the
system is to keep reproducing
racial inequality. All the system needs is
for white people to be
really nice and smile at people of colour
and have lunch from time to
time. Interrupting racism needs courage
and intentionality. It is not
passive. And we must never consider
ourselves finished with learning.
Receiving feedback – and listening – and
reflecting - is
lifelong. “It is also deeply compelling
and transformative.”