Scotticus answers “Why is the term 'White Fragility' is not...”

A Goodreads user asked this question about White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism:

Why is the term 'White Fragility' is not equally as offensive and unjust as a coloured person being accused of 'playing the race card' or 'victim card?' The defensive moves include: 'anger, fear, guilt, argumentation and silence (The whimsical contradiction of the last two is staggering) What is your average, non-racist white person to do when they are accused of being racist? I'm not white nor am I black.

Scotticus I’m not sure I can really give you an answer on the first question. I don't think the two are necessarily that comparable other than applying more to …moreI’m not sure I can really give you an answer on the first question. I don't think the two are necessarily that comparable other than applying more to certain groups than others.

Well, as for the "race/victim card," "victim card" could be applied more broadly, though it may often lead back to race. In the U.S., "race card" would be referring to an excuse based on race by a person who isn't white, not always of a criminal nature. A black person might say they only got arrested because they're black. That is "playing the race card." It may be true in some cases that it was JUST because they were black, but it often includes actual crimes committed, probable cause, etc. Maybe the phrase sounds tacky or offensive, but it does indeed happen. That's not to say every instance of someone being accused of "playing the race/victim card" is correct. But let's say an actual criminal is arrested for committing a crime and uses this as an excuse. Can you really deny that he's "playing the race card?" If a white is a minority in a non-white country, and there are activists spinning a narrative of racial oppression, then that white person could possibly play the “race card,” by the way.

A big difference here is that "race/victim card" is very selectively applied to many groups and is situational, while white fragility essentially applies to all whites in the U.S. (and possibly outside of it) to varying degrees. Probably, Dr. DiAngelo might say she sometimes struggles with it herself, even now. It’s presented as a bunch of symptoms to be treated, that’s always a work in progress. So she thinks whites will sometimes either see themselves as being individuals or ignorant of race, and, therefore, not properly acknowledging race; or that they have a white identity that’s protecting the white majorities’ hold on power. It’s essentially about fomenting guilt in whites and curbing any dissent in the already dwindling white majority and to get them more concerned with issues of race and to fight against what she deems as racial oppression. Essentially going from stable white identity or lack of concern with race -> acknowledging white fragility -> white guilt. Dr. DiAngelo—I'm sure—wouldn't put it that way, but having "white guilt" is certainly helpful for her cause.

As for what a non-racist (eh, it’s not necessarily an on/off switch of racist/non-racist, but we’ll go with that) white person can do when they’re accused of being racist: It’s not like it’s the end of the world if someone calls you that. Depending on the narrative they’re pushing, you’re either racist or not racist in their eyes. The word racist has been expanded more and more overtime to include more people for critique. Essentially no one is free from this critique, because the meaning of it has become so very fluid—and that fluidity is because it’s another weapon to force people to shut up, to kowtow. You must use an appropriate means of attack to get your way, and if it’s no longer working, you repackage it so the people who weren’t racist under the old meaning become racist under the new one. You want meritocracy? Racist. You want limits on immigration? Racist. You want to deport people who are illegally in the country? Racist. That word is used to shut down debate with all of those issues and many, many more. I can’t even take the word seriously from a political perspective anymore. I think the same of phrases like white privilege, white guilt, and white fragility, of course.

Now, I will openly admit that I don’t agree with much of what Dr. DiAngelo says, and I think her voice is destructive, just like the rest of the diversity industry. You can take my biased opinions and compare them with the biased opinions of the people who like the book. (less)

flag

View 1 comment

About Goodreads Q&A

Ask and answer questions about books!

You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.

See Featured Authors Answering Questions

Learn more