Someone help me understand this phenomenon: white guys critiquing White Fragility with borderline ad hominem attacks without much textual engagement.

I think there are real critiques to be made, but mostly I'm seeing dudes dunking on DiAngelo right now.

I would like to have a better (and more critically informed) understanding of the book White Fragility. Same with How to Be an Anti-Racist. Same with lots (probably all!) of the books on my reading list.

I just don't get this open-season mentality on the authors.

The tone, delivery, audience, author are so similar from piece to piece that I feel like there are coded messages in the takedowns that I don't know how to decode. Especially since none of them seem to engage with the book very much aside from a few passages out of context.

Anyway, it all leaves me scratching my head trying to understand the moment.