Kid you not, they've got a 'Style' column with some woman writing as 'Whitey' into a Dear Abby-style personal problem-solving column asking a panel of leftists (of color) what she can do about all her 'white-skin privilege.'

Oh, the crazy, crawly things you can find on the 'style' pages of the New York Times where they apparently think no one is looking.

You can't make this stuff up:

Dear Sugars, I’m riddled with shame. White shame. This isn’t helpful to me or to anyone, especially people of color. I feel like there is no “me” outside of my white/upper middle class/cisgender identity. I feel like my literal existence hurts people, like I’m always taking up space that should belong to someone else. I consider myself an ally. I research proper etiquette, read writers of color, vote in a way that will not harm P.O.C. (and other vulnerable people). I engage in conversations about privilege with other white people. I take courses that will further educate me. I donated to Black Lives Matter. Yet I fear that nothing is enough. Part of my fear comes from the fact that privilege is invisible to itself. What if I’m doing or saying insensitive things without realizing it? Another part of it is that I’m currently immersed in the whitest environment I’ve ever been in.

Apparently, this is real, and not some joke put on by rightwing satirists. No satirist could make up something this bizarre in its minute self-loathing and expect to be believed.

The panel of lefty columnists answer her with stereotypical soothingness -- there, there, dear -- and advise her to pick up the torch for social justice warrior-hood - to relieve herself of her white skin privilege affliction. Only by becoming a SJW will she be redeemed.

It's about the most retch-inducing column of advice I've ever read.

Obviously, Sarah Jeong will feel right at home at a place like the Times. I recall one columnist (can't remember who) who wrote that the Times should continue to keep the rabidly anti-white racist Jeong on staff because her tweets "are what they think."

Which sounds extreme.

Until you start looking at what's going on in the Times's back pages.