That would be impossible because the concept of oppression is both subjective and multi-faceted. You can feel oppressed without being oppressed, the assertion of subjective feelings bear little relevance to meaningful discussion. Instead you end up in a reductive circle, ergo white women and black men. Who oppresses whom? The truth is complicated contextual and depends on the situation. Rather than discuss this like adults adherents of identity ideology simply assert their feelings of oppression as valid and questioning the validity of those feelings to the discussion is itself deemed an act of oppression. How can discussions move forward under these circumstances.

If human beings are going to communicate effectively then both people need to be able to speak freely without assigning guilt or playing postmodernist games with the concept of truth. Meaningful change doesn’t come from playing into ‘feelings’ – it comes from enacting structural change based on a clear understanding of the psychology of human beings.

We’re getting it wrong. We’re listening to the loudest and angriest people. We’re monetising echo chambers and group think and then holding our hands up and wondering why we aren’t making progress. The intentions are honourable, the execution is childish.