White fragility: An emotion regulation perspective.

Abstract

To address anti-Black racism, systemic change across many domains in American life will be necessary. There are many barriers to change, however, and progress requires identifying these barriers and developing tools to overcome them. Given that White individuals disproportionately occupy 'gatekeeping' positions of power, one key barrier to systemic change is rooted in White individuals' emotional (and emotion-regulatory) responses when considering their own role in racism (e.g., involvement in racist systems, biased actions). White people often experience such moments as a jeopardy to their valued goals and are consequently highly motivated to reduce the negative emotions they feel by denying or avoiding the issue -a multi-faceted response known as a White fragility response. When White individuals enact a White fragility response, they can further damage the well-being of Black members of their community and weaken their own motivation for systemic change. Given its stark costs, it is critical to understand White fragility responses. In this article, we argue that White fragility can be usefully viewed through the lens of emotion and emotion regulation theory. In particular, we describe the emotion and emotion regulation responses that characterize White fragility, summarize the wide-ranging consequences of White fragility responses, highlight more sustainable ways forward, and end by considering a broader fragility framework that acknowledges multiple dimensions of power. Although emotion regulation lies at the heart of White fragility, emotion regulation is also a tool that can be leveraged for greater justice.

Investing in Black LGBTQ+ liberation as white people: A call to action for community psychology

“…Due to structures of power in our society, White people hold “gatekeeping” roles to systemic and institutional change (Ford et al, 2022), and thus it requires the investment of and actions by White people to dismantle white supremacy. Guilty feelings, particularly when accompanied by fear, can stymie White people's engagement in antiracist work (Helms, 1992; Spanierman et al, 2006).…”

“…White people are often “gatekeepers” to systemic and institutional change (Ford et al, 2022). To advance LGBTQ+ equality, it is necessary for White LGBTQ+ people to gain skills to create movements that are fully inclusive of Black LGBTQ+ people.…”

Prototypicality threat drives support for nativist politics in U.S. and U.K. elections

“…A key goal of the current work is to test the prediction that for members of dominant groups, the experience of prototypicality threat (in response to possible loss of their group's claim to the national identity) predicts support for political candidates who run on a nativist platform (e.g., Donald Trump and other America First candidates) and nativist referenda (e.g., Brexit). Identity threat, of any form, is psychologically discomforting, but it may be of particular distress to dominant group members, who are generally unaccustomed to such feelings ( Ford et al, 2022 ;Knowles et al, 2014 ). Thus, we also examine whether perceptions of an electoral win for nativism may be associated with emotional relief among those who report experiencing prototypicality threat.…”

No more nice mentors

“…When mentors attempt to address inequitable practices in the debrief, teachers may try to avoid or escape, redirect or distract, minimize the severity and deny responsibility, or become emotional (Ford, Green, & Gross, 2022). This can include behaviors such as:…”

“…When mentors attempt to address inequitable practices in the debrief, teachers may try to avoid or escape, redirect or distract, minimize the severity and deny responsibility, or become emotional (Ford, Green, & Gross, 2022). This can include behaviors such as: Using coded language to avoid saying certain words (e.g., “those” in “Those kids can’t handle it” or “Those kids’ levels are so low they can’t possibly do the work”). Claiming to be “color-blind” or “not see difference.” Claiming innocence: “That’s not what I mean; I’m not [racist, ableist].” Joking to minimize the issue. Changing the topic when inequities are addressed. Crying, getting angry, or otherwise deflecting. …”