In this article, I address the inadequacies in how we currently conceptualize spaces for dialogue and debate around issues involving race and religion. Even in a climate where many organizations now acknowledge equity, diversity, and inclusion requirements, there are still numerous challenges, particularly for racialized individuals, including those who may experience overlapping forms of oppression. Drawing on concepts such as intersectionality, muted group theory, and the public sphere, I suggest that many existing channels and approaches are especially inadequate for academics and activists who are racialized or belong to religions that are marginalized in Western societies, such as Islam. These avenues do not allow for an articulation of the complex, sometimes contradictory realities lived by these individuals, where choosing a seemingly progressive side consistently and publicly may mean disowning or disadvantaging one’s own family or community members. Ultimately, I argue both that we must reconsider the potential for education and dialogue enabled by seemingly one-way platforms, such as film and television, and that the platform is less important than the approach we bring to using it, since increasingly we must prioritize windows for empathy within any mediated spaces we employ for learning or dialogue.