White fragility

Here's the thing about this book, if you disagree with anything, you're proving the author's point; and if you agree with anything, you're proving the author's point.

There are things in here that I agree with, or I never thought about a particular way and like, but there are also things I disagree with.

Agreements/good points. The last chapter is the best (though I still had some issues). The information about affirmative action was interesting in that it was not at all what I'd been under the impression it was. She also gave good historical context to some things. Not getting defensive outright is a good thing to keep in mind. The thing that made “colorblindness” the most clear was actually equating it with not seeing gender and how it's inherent - that's good to keep in mind as well. Also, I agree that people who think they're progressive can be the least receptive to some of the concepts.

Disagreements. Like I said, the whole book is a Kafkatrap. She also contradicts herself on a number of occasions and repeats herself in others. She also comes up with her own definitions for things, but also says those definitions are only applicable in this particular situation, not generally. She's also incredibly patronizing at times, and not against the people I'd have thought. I disagree with that there can never be a positive white identity, but... whatever. Reacting at all is also apparently racist, but at least I cry in the right way. Intent apparently never matters, and past personal history either.

Look, I don't deny that living in our society has repercussions that can be inherently racist. I think that's good to remember! But I disagree that just being white in the society makes you a racist. (But there I go again, just proving her point I guess.)

I'll read other books on the topic - I've already borrowed So You Want to Talk About Race from the library. I'm receptive to learning (especially given the current climate), but this book just didn't do it for me.

I was a few chapters in when I read that some people labeled this “problematic.” At that point, I scoffed a bit, because I was finding it really valuable.

Now that I'm done, I understand better, and I had to really think about how to rate this.

The TL:DR version - it explores some vital concepts for white people who consider themselves against racism. But it undermines its own effectiveness by ignoring empathy and nuance in favor of punitive repetition.

Pros:

A white person talking to other white people. Yeah, it would be great if more white people would listen to BIPOC writers and educators, but if the point is to break down defensiveness, a white author may have more success with certain people.

Pointing out that we white people are able to move through life unconsciously thinking of ourselves as the “default.” This really rang true to me as a feminist who notices the “men are people, women are women” phenomenon.

Calling out the problem of “colorblindness.” I was raised with this point of view, and it can definitely stymie racial progress. For instance . . .

THE CRITICAL FAILURE OF WELL-MEANING WHITES - believing that you don't have racist thoughts and behaviors because You're A Good Person. The narrative that racism is ONLY expressed by KKK types really hampers progress on so many levels. You can't correct for unconscious bias if you don't think you have it! If you think “racist action” = “evil incarnate” of course you will be defensive all over the place when someone points out a problematic behavior of yours.

The idea of preparing to hear feedback with openness, gratitude, and “racial stamina” by reminding yourself that we're all soaking in it and you can be unintentionally racist. Also, how risky it is for people (especially BIPOC) to give you that feedback.

The idea to frame comments to other white people in terms of our own personal understanding - it's harder to be defensive and discount something when it's presented as a personal experience being shared rather than a “You are being racist . . . statement”

Cons:

Explicitly acknowledges that “racist” and “white supremacy” are monumentally emotionally loaded and have ambiguous meanings, and then proceeds to use them.

Hamstrings its own revolutionary unpacking of “I'm a good person” as a blocker by using charged language that denotes malicious, conscious choice: “strategy,” “choose,” “I use the system to my advantage” “aggressor” “target” “Our institutions were designed to reproduce racial inequality.” “I believe that white progressives cause the most daily damage to people of color.”

Flat out discounts intent as having ANY relevance. Only impact is relevant. I get that DiAngelo is trying to get people to stop deflecting valid feedback by talking about their intent, but acting like it's totally irrelevant is crazy. We even take intent into account in homicide cases!

Doesn't say much at all about what an individual can DO to compensate for being a product of a racist system with baked-in biases. Seems to call more for self-flagellation by individuals than any action that could dismantle the system.

By the end, the tone definitely feels like, “You're a racist. You perpetrate racism against your colleagues, friends, spouses, and your own children. Nothing you can do can fix it. Your positive traits around race are irrelevant. Focus only on how much of an irredeemable racist you are.” Wait, I thought the point was to get people over their defensiveness?

I think this is best expressed in mark monday's review:

“It's like she perfectly understands white privilege but has no actual comprehension about how to reach people. Does she not understand that gathering people in a room and telling them all how wrong they are, and will always be, is not an effective mechanism for genuine change or understanding?”

Av de seks bøkene jeg har lest om rasisme i høst, er dette den mest uinteressante selv om den ser ut til å være den mest uttalte og den store bestselgeren. Det er ikke det at jeg ikke kjøper premissene, jeg innser at selv om jeg egentlig vil nekte for det, så er jeg som del av et rasistisk system medskyldig, så betyr det ikke at jeg liker innpakningen kritikken får. Torkjell Brekke beskylte i Morgenbladet sammenligner CRT-bevegelsen med religiøse bevegelser, noe jeg har vanskelig for å forstå, men når jeg leser DiAngelo får jeg samme følelsen som når jeg leser Ole Hallesbys “Fra Bønnens verden”. Sistnevnte bok tar fra meg all lyst til å be, på grunn av sin stereotypifisering i et unødvendig tungt språk der jeg tvinges inni båser jeg ikke kjenner meg hjemme.
Og da kan man jo si at nettopp dette bekrefter DiAngelos påstand, hvite er for sårbare til å innse at vi er rasister. Men dette premisset kjøper jeg ikke. Kanskje, og sikkert ganske sannsynlig i USA, men ikke for min egen del - og da handler boken likevel ikke om meg, og det skulle jeg ønske at den gjorde i langt større grad.
Det er pussig, av de seks bøkene jeg har lest, er det de personlige historiene som får meg til å åpne øynene, det er Coates, Sibeko, Shanmugaratnam og Joof som får meg til å akseptere min fram til nå snevre måte å se tingene på, ikke pekefingermoralismen hos DiAngelo og Eddo-Lodge som først og fremst snakker til sin egen menighet i forsøket på å overbevise alle andre som virkelig trenger å bli overbevist. Og slik tror jeg som regel det er: Det er de personlige historiene som forandrer lytterne og leserne.
Hva jeg egentlig prøver å si: Rasisme er et alt for alvorlig problem til at man forenkler mennesker og virkeligheter på den måten DiAngel gjør. Jeg tror det virker mot sin hensikt.

Robin DiAngelo writes about White Fragility, a term coined by her. DiAngelo is a diversity and racism consultant for businesses and individuals. The book is largely told through her experiences and what she has learned through her work. Wonderfully written and a great place to start recognizing racist behaviors and the reality of living in a racist system.

Quotes:

“If we block out other realities by not discussing them, we can pretend that they don't exist.”

“Stopping our racist patterns must be more important than working to convince others that we don't have them. We do have them.”

Book wasn't bad, but I think I had different expectations. It seemed repetitive, and maybe we need that to get the message to sink in. Answers and “How to” seemed vague to me. I found “So You Want to Talk about Race?” to be more informative. BUT I still think more people need to read this one ‘cause it's written to make people realize how race is present in every interaction we have.

“If, however, I understand racism as a system into which I was socialized, I can receive feedback on my problematic racial patterns as a helpful way to support my learning and growth. One of the greatest social fears for a white person is being told that something that we have said or done is racially problematic. Yet when someone lets us know that we have just done such a thing, rather than respond with gratitude and relief (after all, now that we are informed, we won't do it again), we often respond with anger and denial.”

This book was hard to rate. It is not without its value; there are many white people who would read this and not be familiar with some of the things addressed and there are many of us that NEED our bullshit to be called on. I'm sure I do, too. But based on my arbitrary rating method- “two stars=I struggled to finish/wouldn't recommend”...two stars it is.

The author uses ALOT of ancedotal evidence, which while isn't ideal, could still illustrate her point, but most of her ancedotal evidence involves her detailing a white person screaming/crying at her for calling them on their racism, and always has an air of “I am one of the GOOD whites” smugness about it. Then she generalizes that experience into how all white people react to any criticism. White people: incapable of handling criticism. A tad ironic. She also doesn't seem to understand how human psychology works-it seems she tries to purposefully get the white person (and indeed, the white audience) on the defensive because being defensive makes one “question their beliefs”. It can, sure. But often it just makes them reinforce whatever belief they're holding, because it makes you “the enemy” and “the enemy” can't be “right”. It's faulty logic, but people are faulty, and so it's much more effective to engage them while understanding that. It's a hard line to walk, though. White people have been operating on such an ignorant brainwave for so long that we need and deserve to be wrenched out of our comfort zones. So I don't know where the line is between hindering your cause or educating the masses that have refused to see how their actions effect others. But her examples didn't strike me as particularly productive.

And on any subject, dismissing any criticism against what you're saying as “but then you're ___” is a disengenous way of engaging. I'm sure there are a vast amount of ways in which the default answers that white people give about why they are not racist is inadequate or facilitating the systems that hold racism in place. But dismissing literally any person that tries to discuss with you as “ah, but that's racist” is just a poor way of going about your business. But I guess that makes me racist. Le sigh.

I will say that I appreciate the hard position the author has to walk with this book. Trying to educate without seeming like virtue signaling. Trying to relay the black experience while being white, trying not to be labeled a “white savior” while also trying to engage in what I hope was good faith.

Overall, I think the book offers a starting point but there are a plethora of books from POC authors that have much more value.

This book is rudimentary racism education for white people by white people. That being said, I need many of my white friends and family to read it. While I appreciate that this book is meant for white people that deny their inherent racism, I do not see very many of them picking it up.
The anecdotal aspects of this book where the author described situations she had been confronted with as a diversity trainer were my favorite parts. This book is very small and still had quite a bit of repetition throughout. I will say that it is a good reminder that just because I have sought out education on race it does not mean I am ever going to know everything or be done learning. It is a life-long endeavor to reprogram my learned societal understanding and racism is an oppression that is adaptable and will continue changing.
I will be honest that this did book not give me any new information nor did it give me any new perspectives, though I agreed with all of the points. Unfortunately, one of my friends was forced to educate me about the majority of the contents of this book back in 2013 when BLM first started. I remember responding defensively and immediately tried to argue that they had to have it wrong because I was definitely not racist. It was not okay that I put my friend in that situation, but I recognize how impactful that conversation has been on my understanding of racism and how it affects me, but more importantly how I affect it. I am racist. And I will continue to work on it as I grow and seek out my own education on the ways racism evolves in society. I do appreciate the collection of more resources in the back of this book.

This was an amazing book. I am a bit further along in the journey of self-reflection on my own racism than the book intends me to be, but it does eventually catch up to the gaps I've overlooked on my journey.

This book itself does make me look closer at the “discrete” ways white people talk about race, some I already knew (anti-immigration, urban vs suburban), and others I hadn't truly noticed before (test scores, good vs. bad neighbourhoods, good vs. bad schools).

This book helped provide pathing on “okay, so I am aware I have implicit bias about races; now what?” and start to question just what I am missing out on in my life because I am so surrounded by white people & white culture. Even the foods I consume that I think of as not-white are considered either white (Italian, French) or ‘honorary' white (Mexican).

This book has helped me further question the ‘agenda' that is unintentionally passed on: Why are black neighbourhoods considered more dangerous? Yes, they're poor, thanks to redlining. Yes, poverty and crime go hand in hand, but if an entire neighbourhood were poor & white, we wouldn't think that neighbourhood unsafe, even if the crime statistics matched a poor & black neighbourhood.

Definitely a lot of things to work on & fix in my own worldview.

While this book has a lot of truth to it, it's not helpful for de-escalating anything currently happening in our culture. It's hard to see the intensity at first as the writer has come to a matter of fact attitude about the ignorance and impatience she sees in her daily interactions. Uncomfortable and distasteful interactions we all share. However, the way she talks about this particular group of white, ignorant, and unhelpful population of individuals that helps perpetuate systemic racism is almost equally unhelpful to change the tides in this discussion. It seems to single out a group of white people who are angry and unsure how to change the racial problems they see others perpetuate in their ignorance and laziness. These people are given inside information in how to guide the ignorant individuals in a “gentle” way of revealing their harmful behaviors that keep racial tensions alive. It seems manipulative and dishonest towards the people who are actually the most harmful in the discussion of racism. And while I'm not all too concerned about the feelings of those contributing to racism, I do believe that real societal change comes from real individual heart change. I did enjoy experiencing a cathartic release of frustrations toward white people who refuse to change their beliefs or see that they are the problem of systemic racism. It just does not help toward any actual change.

A really great book for folks to understand part of the current conversation on equity and equality.

The first 90% of the book is definitions and examples, hang in there because the last 10% are next steps to get one moving towards new ways of thinking and speaking. Worth it to cut back n forth from the 90% to 10% and back, as well as reread the whole book every few months to revisit topics and make changes.

A very important subject, sadly marred by having been written by a sociologist.

I read the book because I knew that I am the target audience, a white, middle-class American who holds many progressive social values dear. I know I need some help sorting out my thinking on race, so I turned to DiAngelo for that help. Unfortunately, she is an academician, and so her ability to connect with me as an actual human being is severely limited.

Here is why I hate academic writing, using the subject of this book as an example. They took the word “racism,” which everybody has been using forever, with a commonly understood meaning. They redefined it so they could use it to talk about a social phenomenon they wanted to study. Then they say, “No, you're using the word wrong. We changed the meaning; get on board.” They use the power of their position to commit acts of intellectual violence against speakers of the language.

These people literally get paid to study things like racism and talk about them. It's their job to come up with ways to talk about the fact that our entire system is built from the ground up to favor whites and disfavor blacks. It is literally what they do for a living. And yet the best they can do is redefine “racism” so that, perfectly predictably, hoards of people will protest, rightly, “But I'm not a racist. I've been using that word my whole life and I know what it means, and it doesn't mean me.” And then the conversation–the very important conversation which must happen–gets shut down. All because the incompetent academicians can't do their job and come up with a new word or whatever it would take (don't ask me; it's not my job) to have that conversation.

I wish they would do it right, because we can't not talk about this; we can't not make huge changes as individuals and as a society. We have to end racism (in both the normal and academic definitions) and white supremacy. We have to talk about it without putting people off because of badly defined words. Please, sociologists, help us out!

Having said all that, and with reservations put aside, DiAngelo has written a good book and raised many good points and I am glad I read it, difficult though it was.

Well overdue, and very revealing of my unconscious bias as a white person. It's complex and it's real, and this has been a useful foundation to support my future learning. Recommended.

‘White progressives can be the most difficult for people of colour because, to the degree that we think we have arrived, we put our energy into making sure that others see us as having arrived. None of our energy will go into what we need to be doing for the rest of our lives'.

White navel gazing targeting the woke liberal ally and arming them with the right words to announce to the world that they “get it” without the need for further action or smartly researched treatise on white fragility that deserves its place on any anti-racist syllabus? Yes.

For the Karens in your life that “don't see colour”, value “all lives”, has a cousin who married a black man, and “would have voted Obama for a third term if they could!” - this book is their anti-racism starter kit. The thing that gets them to examine their own privilege, but in the soothing tones of a white lady educator. And really, that's what some folks need.

If only so we can stop with the arguments that start with variations on the theme of “you're being too sensitive” “can't you take a joke”, “that was never my intent”, “the PC-police and cancel culture are getting out of hand” etc. We've turned the term racist into something that an individual does consciously with malicious intent, directed at another based on their race. So essentially a bad person. And it's gotten to the point being called a racist is somehow worse than being the victim of racism. It should carry all the weight of being called an asshole. Maybe you did something asshole-like. Maybe you should apologize and not do that asshole thing again instead of spending all your time invalidating the person who called you an asshole and whining about how your asshole behaviour was all a big mistake. People are not protesting for the right to call you an asshole.

So if you come out of this with the understanding that we are living within a complex racist system that permeates all aspects of our lives and that we're part of an enduring social dynamic that has privileged whites in regards to education, health-care, housing, banking, representation, policing etc for centuries that's good. And then maybe we can stop being such little snowflakes when we're called out on our racist behaviours. And then maybe we can start having productive conversations about this because I get the feeling Blacks are frankly done calling us out and trying to teach us to be better.

It's a start and hopefully one that leads to deeper reading and an invitation to actual anti-racist action and change instead of just checking off a box on your #blacklivesmatter bingo card.

Wow!
What a difficult book for me to read. But so informative. I have tried to reduce my racism and I can see from this book how I have failed. I can also see a way to proceed forward. So many good ideas. But first recognizing that the problem with racism is my problem not theirs or those other people, you know who I'm talking about. I'm the one in control of myself.
For me to get a better understanding of what is going on, I shifted the problem to alcohol. Imagine you have a drink get in your car and hurt someone. Clearly you weren't drunk. You aren't one of those people, alcoholics. But you did hurt someone. Your reaction time is slowed by alcohol. So maybe you aren't legally responsible but if you were sober you would have been paying more attention to your driving, not getting into the song on the radio and could have avoided that accident. Now you are not a bad person but still what to you call someone who hurts someone else and doesn't try and correct their mistake? Just watch any TV and you can see lots of affirmations about the benefits of drinking. The media is responsible for how we see the world. If anyone was to suggest that your drinking led to the accident you would vehemently deny it. You were not drunk!
Similarly, we live in a world of white privilege. We run over people without thinking and will then feel distress once this is pointed out to us. It wasn't our intention to do harm. But it is not the responsibility of the pedestrian to comfort the driver who has just run them down. Maybe we should all take a “White” test before we are allowed to get behind the wheel in our current society. Since that is not possible, it behooves us to check the mirrors before we back over someone.
This book is a good instruction manual in how we drive through our life as a white person in a racially constructed society. Again a hard book to read but worth the effort.