In light of the on-going discussion about the way to determine the validity of criticisms and, as it exists in this scenario, how someone White, someone White and “anti-racist” mind you… how someone White goes about determining the validity of criticisms from POC — criticisms about what constitutes racism and what things (thoughts of White folk) qualify as an expression/extension of White Privilege, etc…
“White people, when presented with information on why something is white centric, racist, exclusionary, etc. by a person of color will expect the poc to defend their position. Rarely is the statement left to stand as valid because it is the poc’s experience. If the defense is provided and resonates with the white person they will then expect the poc to further educate them…”
Striking in its precision and amazing given how easy it elicited the rather ironic response quoted in the title. Oh but that’s not the only time this has happened. Also, I remember a statement made, pretty much in passing, that White people, unfortunately, still have a problem taking criticism from POC and accepting the critiques of POC when they make reasoned arguments for why something is racist or problematic in terms of race.
I guess that explains the need for Whites who are or claim to be anti-racist in one form or another to self-appoint themselves as “summarizers” and/or “spokespersons” for POC. In their minds, they are a necessary liason between POC and the White people who are too touchy, too full of themselves and their Whiteness, to ever actually take reasoned critiques from POC as valid unless it is White approved directly by a White person deemed credible or by a protest movement sized critical mass of POC which makes it too hard for a White person to ignore.