I’m white and I’m not fragile!
Layla Saad tells us; “Robin DiAngelo defines white fragility as ‘a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves.’” (me and white supremacy, p. 40)
I’m sure Robin DiAngelo and Layla Saad would label and dismiss me as having ‘white fragility.’ Why? Because I disagree with them.
How does Layla Saad see ‘white fragility’ in a person? She looks at their skin colour and sees their nasty ‘complicit’ nature underneath; “If your understanding of racism and white supremacy does not include a historical and modern-day understanding of colonization, oppression, discrimination, neglect, and marginalization at the systemic level and not just the individual level, then you are going to struggle when it comes to conversations about race. You will assume what is being criticized is your skin color and your individual goodness as a person rather than your complicity in a system of oppression that is designed to benefit you at the expense of BIPOC in ways that you are not even aware of. [emphasis mine]” (Ibid, p 41,42) Who has the bigoted view point here?
Anne Bailey writing in New Discourses nails the rotten core of the concept ‘white fragility;’
DiAngelo asserts that “whiteness” isn’t just a skin color. It’s an entire system of oppression, and all white people are complicit in perpetuating this system. She also claims that non-white people can uphold white supremacy by participating in white culture or even “acting” white. Her sweeping definitions accuse nearly everyone of racism and white supremacy. This is by design. Her framework leaves no need for individual scrutiny. Addressing people as individuals would leave room for dissent, and dissent would destroy her argument. The more people who are condemned, the more disciples DiAngelo collects. Unless DiAngelo is omniscient, which is highly doubtful, her collective condemnation is flat out false. You simply cannot charge millions of individuals with racism using only their denial of guilt as proof of their guilt.
5 Reasons the Book “White Fragility” is Shallow and Destructive, JUNE 17, 2020, NEW DISCOURSES
And yet this is exactly what Layla Saad does- ‘charges millions of individuals with racism using only their denial of guilt as proof of their guilt.’
Layla Saad following Robin DiAngelo, states to anyone who disagrees with her viewpoint; “This lack of understanding leads to white fragility, either by lashing out to defend your individual sense of goodness or feeling that you as an individual are being shamed for being who you are, thus leaving the conversation. This is a dangerous impediment to antiracism.” (me and white supremacy, p. 42)
According to Layla Saad, if I dare to disagree with anything she says or has written in her book I am 1) DANGEROUS - “White fragility makes you dangerous to BIPOC.” (Ibid p. 43) 2) UNRELIABLE - “White fragility makes you an unreliable ally to BIPOC (Ibid p. 44) 3) FEARFUL - “White fragility, which is really fear . . “ (Ibid) and 4) HARMFUL - “White fragility, which is really fear, can quickly turn into active harm . . . to BIPOC by striking back.” (Ibid)
I totally disagree with the concept of white fragility and Layla Saad’s mean minded characterization of me (and anyone who dares defend themselves against her accusations.)
How can I defend myself without being dangerous, unreliable, fearful and harmful to BIPOC people. Once again I can only appeal to the clear-headed thinking of Anne Bailey:
Most people shudder at the mere thought of being accused of racism. It’s an ugly accusation, and most logical people would be (understandably) defensive. Sinister accusations without any concrete evidence are…wrong. But, as we’ve discussed, DiAngelo insists that defensiveness is proof of both fragility and racism. DiAngelo’s pseudo-scientific premise locks well-meaning people into an impossible conundrum. If you refuse to admit you’re racist, that means you are both mentally and emotionally fragile, as well as racist. If you admit you’re racist, at least you aren’t fragile. Admission of racism is clearly the better of the two options, and in the pursuit of righteousness (and to avoid being labeled fragile), that’s what most readers will settle on. Once DiAngelo has successfully manipulated your emotions and forced you to admit you’re a racist (with no evidence), she’s now got you desperately searching for a solution…a way out of your racism.
5 Reasons the Book “White Fragility” is Shallow and Destructive, JUNE 17, 2020, NEW DISCOURSES
Thank you Anne Bailey for speaking up for reason and integrity.
Given the above discussion, my responses to Layla Saad’s five reflective journal prompts (me and white supremacy, p. 45) about white fragility are: I don’t have white fragility and reject your manipulative accusations (regarding prompts 1 and 2).
Regarding prompt 3, the only person in your book that has weaponized ‘white fragility’ is you because of the way you characterize anyone with white skin who disagrees with your poisonous arguments.
As to prompt 4, I don’t feel anything when I hear the words ‘white people’ or black people or BIPOC people. I do feel that we are all people no matter what our skin colour is. We are all trying to live our lives as best we can. All lives matter.
Prompt 5 is a classic example of a loaded question; “How has your white fragility prevented you, through fear and discomfort, from dong meaningful work around your own personal antiracism to date? (Ibid) Right back at you - How has your resentment and bigotry towards whites (black fragility) prevented you from doing meaningful work around your own personal antiracism to date? You answer first.
I am actually beginning to feel that by working through the stupidity and drivel of ‘me and white supremacy’ that I am becoming a ‘good ancestor!’