Okay, first of all, this was extraordinarily tiresome. It took you forever to get through the introduction, with all the silly caveats and preambles, to finally get to the point. (I know. I know. You'll see this as an attack and I'm sure I'll be blocked before you even complete this sentence.)

Now, here's my observation on "White Fragility" (at least as it's explained by Robin DiAngelo (a professional grifter, who despite her supposed support of Black people who wish to speak about their grievances, commands a greater speaking fee than any Black person on this topic; evidently, Black people and her are the only ones allowed to speak on this). When a Black person or any non-White person tells a White person about what that White person is supposedly doing wrong, the White person is not allowed to respond in any way, except to say they're sorry and resolve to do better. If a White person believes their intentions are misconstrued, they are maligned, or their actions have been unfairly or inaccurately depicted, they are not allowed to address this at all.

So, essentially, a White person has to admit their guilt, even if they believe they are not guilty. They're not allowed even an opportunity to defend themselves in any way.

Yet, despite non-Whites insisting that Whites must be totally disarmed in this conversation, somehow, it's White people who are fragile?