Race, Risk, and Reality: Why "Leave Race Out of It" Is Not a Serious Analysis
Before I even begin to break down the Karmelo Anthony case, I want to say (or perhaps reiterate) that I do not move at the speed of headlines.
I have never believed that every tragedy requires an immediate opinion.
Some things deserve space.
Space for processing.
Space for grief.
Space for truth to emerge beneath speculation.
Space for the nervous system to settle enough that we can think critically instead of merely reacting.
There are already many people having powerful conversations surrounding this case and the broader issues it raises. Black scholars. Black organizers. Black journalists. Black attorneys. Black educators. Black content creators.
People who have spent countless hours researching, teaching, grieving, fact-checking, and helping others make sense of what they are witnessing.
I am deeply grateful for that work.
In particular, I am grateful for Black women.
Because if we’re honest, much of the intellectual labor that helps this country understand itself is carried on the backs of Black women who are rarely compensated, rarely protected, and far too often expected to educate while simultaneously carrying the weight of collective grief.
Their advocacy, brilliance, research, and generosity create space for others to find their own voice and contribute from their own lane.
That is what I mean when I talk about collective work.
No single person carries the entire conversation.
No single person carries the entire movement.
We each bring what we have.
We each contribute where we are called.
So before we go any further, I want to pause and offer gratitude for the countless Black advocates whose labor often goes unseen while their impact ripples through every conversation we are able to have.
In particular, I want to take a moment to specifically acknowledge Dr Stacey Patton
Her work surrounding this case has been deeply impactful, not simply because of the analysis she has offered, but because of the courage required to continue offering it.
As so often happens when Black women refuse to make themselves smaller for the comfort of others, she has been met with a barrage of online criticism, harassment, death threats, coordinated attacks, and attempts by media outlets and commentators to discredit, intimidate, and silence her.
And yet she remains.
Still researching.
Still writing.
Still speaking.
Still standing firmly in her convictions.
Still doing the work.
Whether one agrees with every conclusion she reaches is beside the point.
Because none of us arrive at understanding alone.
Now, with that said, let’s talk about something that has been showing up repeatedly in the conversations surrounding this case.
The insistence that race be removed from the analysis.
And I think that tells us far more than many people realize.
Every time a case involving race enters public conversation, there is a predictable response:
“Leave race out of it.”
“This isn’t about race.”
“Why does everything have to be about race?”
The problem is that race is not being inserted into these conversations.
Race is already there.
Race is embedded in the history, laws, institutions, narratives, and social realities that shape how people experience danger in the United States.
When people demand that race be removed from the analysis, what they are often asking is that we ignore the context that helps explain why people perceive threats the way they do.
And context matters.
Especially when the conversation is about fear, safety, self-defense, and survival.
Somatic Pause
When conversations touch race, violence, fear, innocence, and identity, many of us leave our bodies and move immediately into defense, justification, agreement, disagreement, or debate.
So before we go any further, I want to invite you to slow down.
Take a breath.
Notice your feet against the floor.
Notice where your shoulders are.
Notice your jaw.
Notice your chest.
Notice what is happening in your body as you read.
Not what you think about what I’ve written.
What you feel.
Are you tense?
Angry?
Defensive?
Curious?
Afraid?
Validated?
Exhausted?
Relieved?
Do you feel the need to prove something?
Do you feel the need to protect something?
Do you feel the need to dismiss something?
Just notice.
No judgment.
No story.
No immediate action required.
Just breath and awareness 🌬️
One of the challenges of discussing race in America is that many of us have been conditioned to treat discomfort as evidence that something is wrong.
But discomfort is not always a signal that we are under attack.
Sometimes discomfort is simply what it feels like when our worldview encounters information it has not fully integrated.
Sometimes discomfort is what happens when two things we believe to be true collide with one another.
And sometimes discomfort is grief.
The grief of realizing that the world may be more complicated, more painful, and more unequal than we wanted to believe.
So as you continue reading, I want to invite you to stay curious about your reactions.
Not just the reactions you have to this case.
The reactions you have to yourself.
Because what follows is not simply a conversation about one young man, one family, one verdict, or one tragedy.
It is a conversation about the stories we tell ourselves about race, danger, innocence, fear, and whose experiences we are willing to accept as legitimate evidence.
Take one more breath. 🌬️
And let’s continue.
The Only Demographic We Are Asked To Ignore
One of the most fascinating things about American conversations around race is that race is the only demographic category we are routinely asked to remove from analysis.
We don’t remove gender.
We don’t remove age.
We don’t remove class.
We don’t remove religion.
We don’t remove ability.
In fact, we understand instinctively that demographics provide context.
When a woman says she fears a man she does not know, society may debate whether that fear is fair, but very few people argue that gender is irrelevant.
We understand that patterns of male violence influence how many women move through the world.
When an elderly person is assaulted by a teenager, we acknowledge that age matters.
When a child is abused by an adult, we acknowledge that age matters.
When a disabled person is harmed by a caretaker, we acknowledge that ability and power matter.
Likewise, when women abuse men, children abuse parents, or members of any group harm those around them, we do not pretend demographics, power, or social realities suddenly become irrelevant. We examine the context to better understand what happened.
We recognize that human beings do not experience danger in a vacuum.
History, patterns, power, and lived experience all shape how people assess risk.
Until whiteness enters the conversation.
Then suddenly context becomes prejudice.
History becomes bias.
Pattern recognition becomes racism.
And demographics become irrelevant.
The question is why.
Why is race the only demographic category Americans are expected to ignore?
I would argue that the answer is because race is not merely an identity category in the United States.
Race is also a power structure.
And examining power structures makes people (white-bodied people) uncomfortable.
Because once we acknowledge that demographics can matter, we are forced to confront what history teaches us, and the implications of whiteness and how you represent that history.
Women are not cautious around unfamiliar men because they hate men.
They are cautious because enough violence has occurred that caution became adaptive.
The caution is not born from imagination.
It is born from experience.
Likewise, Black people are not cautious around racial hostility because we hate white people.
We are cautious because American history repeatedly demonstrates that white hostility toward Black people can escalate into violence.
The distinction matters.
One is prejudice.
The other is a response shaped by experience.
What people often call “racial paranoia” is frequently historical memory.
A memory carried not just individually but collectively.
A memory that remembers enslaved people hunted by patrols.
A memory that remembers lynchings advertised in newspapers.
A memory that remembers entire towns destroyed.
A memory that remembers churches bombed.
A memory that remembers children murdered.
A memory that remembers civil rights leaders assassinated.
A memory that remembers police dogs, fire hoses, cross burnings, and white mobs.
This is what many people fail to understand.
Black fear did not emerge from nowhere.
It emerged from evidence.
And evidence changes behavior.
It is why people lock their doors.
It is why parents teach children stranger danger.
It is why women text their friends when they get home safely.
It is why we wear seatbelts.
We alter behavior based on perceived risk.
Yet when Black people acknowledge racial risk, we are often told to ignore the evidence that informed that concern.
We are asked to become the only people in America expected to navigate danger without historical memory.
Imagine asking women to forget every statistic on sexual violence before assessing a situation.
Imagine asking elderly people to forget every scam targeting seniors before answering the phone.
Imagine asking Jewish people to forget antisemitism before evaluating a threat.
Imagine asking LGBTQ people to forget hate crimes before deciding whether a space feels safe.
The request sounds absurd because it is absurd.
And yet this is exactly what many Americans ask of Black people every day.
Forget history.
Forget patterns.
Forget evidence.
Forget experience.
Then make your assessment.
That is not objectivity.
It is denial.
The truth is that race remains relevant because race continues to shape outcomes.
The truth is that Black people often assess danger differently because history has taught us different lessons.
The truth is that there are moments when recognizing racial reality is not only reasonable but life-preserving.
Not because every white person is dangerous.
But because pretending racial violence is impossible has never protected Black people.
Historically, it has often done the opposite.
Perhaps the real question is not why Black people consider race when evaluating risk.
The real question is why so many white people become uncomfortable when whiteness is analyzed the same way every other demographic category is.
Take another breath 🌬️
What we’ve explored so far is not actually about Karmelo Anthony.
Not yet.
It is about the framework.
The lens.
The historical and cultural context that informs how Black people understand danger, safety, fear, and survival in a country where race has never stopped shaping outcomes.
Because before we can talk honestly about this case, we have to talk honestly about the conditions that surround it.
In the paid portion of this article, I want to go deeper.
If Liberation Education has helped you think more critically, feel more deeply, or understand these conversations with greater nuance, I invite you to become a paid subscriber.
Your subscription doesn’t just support this work.
It helps create equity access for those who cannot afford it and sustains the ongoing labor of research, writing, education, and community building.
Because liberation has always been collective work.
Liberation Education Subscription Options
Free Subscriber — Access to selected essays and community updates
Paid Subscriber — $10/month or $100/year
Equity Partner — $150 a yearChoose your own contribution to help expand equity access
Scholarship Access — Email Scholarships@DesireeBStephens.com
Continue reading below.
