I must say I'm not too keen on both interviewers because they have this almost-sneering manner in a way to show "See, a black woman saying something different. This is what everyone should think".
I don't agree.
As far as I'm concerned, Inaya would have said all she said alone and it'll still bear the same weight. That she's being interviewed (by them) is neither here nor there.
Personally, I agree with nearly everything she said but I have a few opinions about a few points she made.
On white privilege, it exists just as there are other kinds of privilege. I would say her example incorrectly/inadvertently cuts through ethnicity, class and education which doesn't disprove white privilege, just shows that sometimes there is more to it than just "race" and there is also always more to a person than just their ethnicity. But I cannot deny that some have experienced disadvantages due to the colour of their skin alone. If I did, I would be no different to some people who say everything someone faces is because of the colour of their skin. It can't be all or nothing.
On what she said about friendship and having the racial talk being divisive, I wouldn't say it is so completely. It depends. I would say the first question one could ask a friend of any minority class (not just race) is first and foremost, how do you feel about this or that?" and go from there. Or perhaps "How would you like me to treat you based on this or your opinion about it?"
It doesn't have to cause division or make someone feel like they have to treat someone else a certain way - good or bad. I would always ask first. People have different views and you can't treat someone based on how you think they should be or want to be treated. I know even that is a problem for some. To them, some questions are "uneducated" and deserve mockery. I mean, what is the very nature of questions? But you can't please all and shouldn't have to either.
Another thing I'll add is that I don't completely buy the "you can shape your world to your liking. If you only think it and work hard, you can be it". Yes, some can but some can't. I don't think this necessarily always has something to do with race but more some factors of life that may be working against someone. So no, I don't think everyone can be what they want to be but I also agree that 'having the talk' before a child can discover their potential is defeatist at best. Of course make them aware of what is happening in the world but not from a victim perspective.
Can you imagine having the talk with your daughter about how she is and will always be a victim because male privilege? How the patriarchy is stacked against her and she must work twice as hard to get to where boys do?
To quote a comment: "Such a great interview! I haven't had 'the race talk' with my two young black sons. I don't want to convince them that they are oppressed and therefore have no control over their destinies. I work hard and try to treat everyone with mutual respect and that's put me in good stead educationally and career wise".
Another one: Some people DO need safe spaces. I will not argue that some don't go through untold acts of racism and any other crime and that some aren't affected more deeply than others too so it isn't fair to invalidate safe spaces.
Lastly, this one isn't so much against what she said as it's a word I find a bit problematic and she reminded me of it: Tolerance. I would rather have a more accepting society than a tolerant one. We seem to be proud of our tolerance but the word 'Tolerance' infers: "I can't stand you but I'll endure it. I'll tolerate your presence. I'll be polite and smile through clenched teeth".
Acceptance is a more positive word. I know I may be overthinking it but that's how I feel about it.