Using racial affinity groups provides benefits to different racial identities. BIPOC members don't have to worry about White members' sensitivities & White participants focus less on performing allyship or saying the wrong thing. We explain the rationale behind this practice, consider resistance to it, & explore its dynamics.

This session explores the use of racial affinity groups. These groups are based on the assumption White and BIPOC group members are respectively at arithmetic and calculus levels of understanding of the dynamics of structural racism. These groups are designed to facilitate conversation around overcoming racism by removing some of the barriers to participating in that dialogue. In BIPOC affinity groups, members worry less about having their testimony of racism discounted or diminished. They don't have to ""take care"" of White group members, nor are they constantly consulted for answers & directions intended to guide White people's actions. Additionally, they do not have to witness White members' attempts to earn a 'Good White Medal' by showing their 'wokeness' to BIPOC participants or declaring themselves allies. In White affinity groups the fear of saying the wrong thing in front of BIPOC and being accused of racism is removed, allowing for Whites to enter the conversation by owning up to insecurity and fear around how to become antiracist.
 
 However, it’s sometimes hard to justify the use of racial affinity groups when people are chomping at the bit for discussions across racial identities. We discuss when the use of affinity groups is strategically justified and some of the most common dynamics we have encountered as we run these. We share ideas for protocols that can be used to guide discussion in such groups, how we turn these deliberations into community property and how we encourage critique of our actions as a multiracial team.