Last week, a white guy wanted white solidarity to undermine a minoritized group's access to a safe space. I was in the group he approached.

Afterthoughts now collected.

It's story time 🧵!

Comment if you'd like with any favorite readings on safe spaces by minoritized writers.

Some quick terminology!
White solidarity - the tacit agreement that we will protect white privilege and not hold each other accountable for our racism.

This is the definition white sociologist Robin DiAngelo uses.
Safe space.

SAFE SPACES FOR BLACK FOLKS ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE; THEY ARE NECESSARY AND VITAL TO PROTECT THE MENTAL HEALTH AND SUPPORT THE MULTI-FACETED WELL-BEING OF BLACK PEOPLE. 

This and more on safe space by Black writer Cameron Glover:

https://t.co/0wYUQQrvbS
White Guy (WG) approached a white-majority community I'm part of. They were upset and distressed. Being one of the group insomniacs, I was, y'know, up.
Upon inquiring I soon learned they were upset because they were white and had been excluded because they were white from a safe space for BIPOC being used to discuss an intra-community situation.

intra- = within, inside of;
inter- = between

(I often confuse these)
BUT I'M NOT BAD WHITE PEOPLE (paraphrased from memory; it's a common white-people-shenanigans theme)

We as white & anti-racist white people have caused & do cause harm.

We get trapped trying to prove we're "good" because intentions.

📢 Focus on impact, not intent. 📢
Even if we are that white person who has miraculously never caused harm (this is mythical, but let's roll with it) we look like the white people who HAVE harmed non-white people.
It takes a long time of ongoing rock solid anti-racist praxis and plenty of mistakes to truly reduce harm.

By the time we as anti-racist white people get to a place where we're consistently reducing or avoiding harm, we already understand why we may sometimes be excluded.
I struggled then & now to articulate this. I know this is true from lived experience. I've caused harm with my whiteness while: not knowing it, being called in/out & denying it, & while catching myself in the act. 😬

Nobody needs any of that in an already stressful situation.
Having made my clumsy attempt to articulate this, WG's next point was that they are in solidarity with the community and therefore deserved solidarity in return from the community, including the non-white subset of that community.
(TBH, I'm still processing how i could've handled this part better. EXPERIENCED advice appreciated!)

Did my best to make the point that being excluded because we are white isn't personal, & that we CAN be in solidarity by respecting boundaries AND it helps build community trust.
By morning, others had chimed in with similar but better articulated responses.

I don't think any of it landed for WG because not long after this conversation, they felt the need to share themself rapping. Were they trying to prove they weren't white? (they're white.) 😬
In the following days, they undermined requests from and talked over BIPOC leadership and were eventually removed from the community.

Several of us shared additional anti-racist resources.

I always try to leave room for folks to grow.

We shall see.
About that white solidarity: when a WG approaches your white-majority group with anything that sounds even remotely like a reference to reverse racism, right then is a GREAT time to review what white solidarity is, how it functions to uphold racism, and GIVE NO QUARTER.

More from Society

Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause


I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.

I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views

I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.

I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.

You May Also Like