I do not understand

People who have never done any anti-racism work (and I know this because if they had, they would know what affinity groups are) feel like they're greater experts on anti-racism education than actual professionals in anti-racism education who set up affinity groups.

And they've comfortable with the most simplistic argument . . . "segregation is bad." That's as simplistic as the anti-abortion "babies are good" argument. It doesn't allow for any complexity at all. Or the experience and expertise of the people who have used affinity groups and who have found them to be effective.

I'm baffled by this. It's almost like they don't want anti-racism work to be effective. It feels that way anyway, like they're arguing against it because they don't want it to exist. If they really wanted effective anti-racism work, then they'd listen to the professionals and listen to what has worked and take that into account. "You know, I'm not used to groups segregating and that gives me a weird feeling, but if this has worked so well, then I'll have to re-think it."

Or they have such a huge sense of entitlement that they think they must be experts at everything, and greater experts than people who have studied this and who do it for a living.