BOOK REVIEW: White Fragility

This book is being recommended like mad at the moment! 🤯

It has been #1 on the New York Times Bestseller List for 12 weeks straight and #1 on Amazon Charts for 3 weeks straight. I decided to buy a copy on Kindle and was genuinely expecting to learn something new.

First, let me share what I wholeheartedly agree with in the book. ❤️

📌 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲, 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐨 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭.

We’ve all had different lives, different life experiences, so everyone has the potential to teach us something. Some of us have had privileges and opportunities others have never had. Some of us have experienced forms of suffering others cannot even begin to fathom.

Therefore, it is so important we continue to develop our emotional intelligence so we can stay aware how our actions and ignorance can unintentionally influence and affect how we treat other people.

📌 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥.

We all carry unconscious prejudices and biases, even when we think we don’t. When we’re not aware of these things, we will project them out onto the world without even being consciously aware we’re doing so.

A fantastic book that discusses these concepts more in-depth using psychology experiments is “Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)” by Carol Tavris.

𝐍𝐨𝐰, 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝…

This book notes from the beginning it is going to be “unapologetically rooted in identity politics”.

(In the same tradition, I should note to you I am reviewing this book as a Liberal, Hispanic, Gay Male with 3 clinically diagnosed mental disorders: Depression, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and High-Functioning Autism. I am also reviewing this book as someone who enjoys long walks on the beach and…)

𝘛𝘰 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘵, 𝘐 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.

It begins with a Red Pill trope in which the author shares a growing realization she’s had about white people over the course of her career when it comes to talking about racial issues. 😲

For every white person she’s spoken with, she’s noticed some white people get particularly defensive with her. 😠

She wanted to understand why, and with this book she without a doubt believes she’s found the answer: 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘴 “𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺”.

DiAngelo presents the following arguments:

📖 White people are defensive about being called “racist” because they cannot accept their “whiteness”, their repressed feelings of “white superiority and entitlement”.

📖 “Racism” is not the Dictionary’s definition. In her definition, it is not limited to discriminatory acts towards people based on the color of their skin.

In her definition, racism is like a disease, ingrained and embedded in everything: our society, our cultures, our institutions, and our souls. (Look up “concept creep” to understand more about expanded word definitions)

📖 We are ALL racist as the result of living under an inherently white supremacist society. White people need to especially be taught about this because they were also born into privilege. They need to come to terms with how blind they are to their whiteness and their racism, even if they don’t think they are.

📖 The ideals of individualism, objectivity, and MLK’s Dream to choose not seeing others based on the color of their skin but on the content of their character…are all racist. They are the reasons people have failed to see how deep racism goes.

In the author’s defense, she justifies these broad and sweeping generalizations with little to no evidence based on her being a sociologist. 🛡️

That said, I honestly sympathize with any sociologists who do their very best to remain objective and evidence-based in their observations about society. 😢

What surprised me the most reading this book was how the author doesn’t even consider alternate possibilities about the reasoning of white people she sees as having “white fragility”. 😕

Did the author even consider the possibility that some white people may have gotten angry with her not because of their “white fragility” but because they strongly disagree with the basic premise of her newly expanded definition on what it means to be “racist”? 🤔

Did the author even consider the possibility that her insistence on white people needing to accept their inherent racism and privilege, needing to accept her vast assumptions about mass groups of people based on the color of their skin, not only is hypocritical but fits the very definition of what being “racist” is (at least according to the Dictionary)? 🤔

I’m reminded of the psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud and his obsession with seeing every problem his patients had through the lens of some unconscious sexual repression. Everything had to be seen as somehow relating to sex. 😅

In the same way, everything in DiAngelo’s eyes has to be seen as somehow relating to “racism” and “white supremacy”. ✊

I cannot even imagine how a woman would react today if Freud told them they had “penis envy”. Women are not aware of their penis envy, Freud would say, of their enviousness to possess a penis because it is unconscious.

What if we applied this same logic to the author’s main premise?

*𝘐 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘢 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘧 𝘋𝘪𝘈𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘥 “𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺”. 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘋𝘪𝘈𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘭𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺, 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴.*

For those already familiar with Woke Culture, I soon realized THIS is one of those books. 😔

Being “woke” has to do with individuals who have experienced emotional feelings of awakening when it comes to social injustice. It’s these same feelings of awakening that make a person think they’re far more “woke” or self-aware than they actually are. 🙌

Compare these same spiritual feelings of realization to the conspiracy theorist who believes they’ve “taken the Red Pill” and is now aware of the corruption of the world. 💊

𝐈𝐧 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲’𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞, 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐲𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭. 😠

I sympathize, as these individuals are not as “conscious” as they think they are. Unfortunately, I’m afraid the same thing has happened with the author here too.

While she promotes skepticism and self-awareness in the book, as well as noting that racial issues are “complex”, at the same time she doesn’t apply these same principles to the conclusions she’s making in the book.

With this book, I am supposed to simply accept the author’s premise about white fragility. In her circular logic, any counterargument against the idea of it (especially when it’s a white person) is only more proof of a white supremacist society. 🔄

This is the same logic as me presenting contrasting evidence to a conspiracy theorist and them saying that’s just proof there’s a conspiracy. (This logical fallacy is also known as “Kafkatrapping”.) 🔄

Simply put, the book takes itself way too seriously in its absolutist claims of racial essentialism. It doesn’t critically consider the possibility that racism is not as rampant as it is made out to be (There’s strong empirical and statistical data which speaks to the contrary, and again, I consider myself Liberal).

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝, 𝐚𝐛𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 “𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦” 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐞’𝐬 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 “𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦” 𝐚𝐬 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬. 🙌

Similar to conspiracy theories, I agree with the idea of practicing skepticism. But that’s as far as I agree, especially when the “skepticism” is used to justify an absolute, nonsensical worldview. 👍

Similar to white fragility, I agree with the idea of practicing empathy. But that’s as far as I agree, especially when the “empathy” is used to justify an absolute, nonsensical worldview. 👍

Sigmund Freud got the idea of the unconscious correct. But his circular logic to relate everything back to sex is where his claims falter. 👎

Robin DeAngelo got the idea of empathy correct. But her circular logic to relate everything back to racism and white supremacy is where her claims falter. 👎

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐲 𝐰𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐫. 𝐖𝐞 𝐝𝐨. 💯

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐲 𝐰𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧’𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟. 𝐖𝐞 𝐝𝐨. 💯

But the Catch-22 in these areas of study is that any of these virtues can turn into a vice. 💥

For the psychoanalyst, sometimes a cigar…is just a cigar. There’s not always a variable of unconscious sexual repression. 🙌

For the critical race theorist, sometimes a power structure…is just a power structure. There’s not always a variable of oppression. 🙌

Let me add: 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐯𝐞𝐬. 👍

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥, 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐥-𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲, 𝐚 “𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠”.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐞, 𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐥𝐲, 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐢𝐧 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐚𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠. 🌎

My biggest concern is how popular this book currently is on Amazon, as well as with other books focused on Antiracism.

𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘹𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘺, 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘺. 𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘊𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴. 😨

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤-𝐚𝐧𝐝-𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞.

My concern is books like these are not going to be critically analyzed or questioned because of our current times, despite their many flaws and overly simplistic lens in which to see ourselves and other people. 😨

If you embrace critical race theory and/or the basic premise we live in a society which is systemically and institutionally racist, this book will be right up your alley. 👍

But if you’re looking for a book that’s intellectually honest, thoughtful in its arguments, contains nuance, and complexity, I suggest steering very clear of this one. 💯

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡. 𝐈𝐭 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲. 𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐲 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬.

Racism is a problem I will continue to address and combat through empathy, compassion, and understanding of us as a common humanity. ❤️

If that makes me “racist”, according to DiAngelo’s definition, than apparently I am! 😝

Unfortunately this book, which as of late is being praised to the highest of heavens as some masterpiece, I predict is going to add far more to the problem than it will to the solution. 𝐀𝐭 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐭, 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐞𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐞. 😔

Or maybe, that’s just my “white fragility” talking…🤷‍♂️

.

1 1/2 STARS OUT OF 5 STARS

Leave a Reply