General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat the heck is a microaggression, anyway?
The word has popped up a couple of times here in recent days.
It apparently happened to a young woman at a music festival who saw white guys with dread locks.
And now, the Johns Hopkins student government has bravely fended off the threat of a microaggression by Chick Fil A, or a potential microaggression by Chick Fil A, or something.
Somebody? Anybody?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Response to Comrade Grumpy (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)This is the Dog's 100% honest truth.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It's really coming across as very insensitive.
You can't call racism "imaginary".You can't always prove it when it's very small ("micro"
and personal. Sometimes it's real and sometimes it isn't. Knowing that racism is there but not being able to pin it down and prove it is frustrating. Just because you aren't experiencing it personally, doesn't mean it's imaginary.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)But that is no excuse for going around actively looking for things to be outraged about. The context in which this discussion arose was the thread about the young AA woman who was outraged, seemingly because at a dance music festival, there were white kids wearing dreadlocks and smoking weed and she was outraged.
imagine that - college age kids wearing unusual hair styles and smoking weed - IOW acting like college kids. Horrors!
It isn't mentally healthy to go around looking for things to be outraged about. If someone is intentionallytreating you badly, for whatever reason, you will be able to recognize it. if it's unintentional, be a grown-up and move on. I am on the Spectrum and am very aware of slights I receive because I am Asperger's. What I DO NOT do is go around looking for trivial shit to be pissed off about. The REAL slights and problems I encounter are enough. I don't go around imagining or looking for additional ones.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)MRAs, Republicans and other privileged assholes usually dismiss them as women and racial minorities and GLBT folks being oversensitive whiners.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)and rather accommodating in example. lmfao
life is a hoot.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)1000words (4,962 posts)
1. An imagined slight or harm as a result of an ongoing personal agenda
Or as one DUer put it:
Micro-aggression = butt hurt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6563350
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
Response to 1000words (Reply #1)Mon Apr 27, 2015, 12:25 PM
hifiguy (20,586 posts)
2. Winner. The thread can end here.
This is the Dog's 100% honest truth.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 27, 2015, 10:26 PM - Edit history (1)
'Imagined.' 'Personal.' 'Agenda.'
They should try looking in the mirror for an example!
Duh, dismissive, authoritarian and *term that starts with a 'W' that must never be said on DU* man who is *looking down his nose theatrically, yeah, we get that* and refuses to understand. I apologize for the horrible run-on sentence, but it's that kind of day.
As Obama says, 'Bucket!'
The sad part of watching this is like the old adage of kids running with scissors*:
It's all fun and games until someone pokes an eye out.
*More like knives in the back, at least it feels that way to me. Of course, because of my gender, i'll be called 'hysterical' or be accused of an 'Imagined.' 'Personal.' 'Agenda.'
Bucket!
Hong Kong Cavalier
(4,572 posts)MRAs are among the first to use "sjw", too. Not surprising to see what went on in that thread.
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)
LostOne4Ever
(9,286 posts)
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)people sometimes experience from white culture or people, such as pink band-aids, peach crayons or hose being described as "flesh colored."
It's a term to describe the little things a minority population has to deal with daily, and when you pull one or two out of context, it seems like they're easy to dismiss. It's hard to imagine hearing them all the time and what the effect might be on your own self.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It's not actual physical assault. But still racist
Orrex
(63,172 posts)Or the way the default mouse configuration (including the universal "right-click-save-as" idiom" unapologetically favor the rightie?
Paper cutters, ATM keypads, gas pumps, RedBox return slots, drll presses, the primary method of manuscript teaching, fishing rods, fast food fry scoopers, manual-start lawnmowers...
The list goes on.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)
Cause leftys aren't paid less, incarcerated more, stereotyped, or ever had to fight for equal rights.
Orrex
(63,172 posts)Since a great many physical reminders exist in everyday society that lefties are a minority, the comparison isn't entirely off-base, either.
If you encounter someone who's hostile to the notion of race- or sex-based microaggressions, perhaps the more lighthearted example of lefties' "struggles" can be illustrative, after which the discussion can progress to the more serious--and in many cases life-threatening--aggressions visited upon women and minorities.
Trillo
(9,154 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)snpsmom
(670 posts)"Psychologist and Columbia University professor Derald Wing Sue defines microaggressions as "brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to certain individuals because of their group membership."[5] Sue describes microaggressions as generally happening below the level of awareness of well-intentioned members of the dominant culture. Microaggressions are considered to be different from overt, deliberate acts of bigotry, such as the use of racist epithets, because the people perpetrating microaggressions often intend no offense and are unaware they are causing harm."
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)of blacks, women, and GLBT members of the community.
Not everyone here is a progressive.
Number23
(24,544 posts)more than ever now.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Behind the Aegis
(53,919 posts)Welcome!
There are those who feel the minority experience is not important unless as dictated by the majority on how they, the minority, are to act, feel, and think, and should they complain, it is considered "whining".
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)There are those who feel the minority experience is not important unless as dictated by the majority on how they, the minority, are to act, feel, and think, and should they complain, it is considered "whining", and/so then, when the micro-aggressions, cross the line to full-blown, and obvious (to them), aggression, they can act all brand new, and/or wide-eyed, "I just don't see it." .
(See the thread from awhile ago, listing specific racist comments made on DU, by DUers, that survived numerous juries; also, search for a current thread, that might apply here.)
Behind the Aegis
(53,919 posts)I added something similar to a post below. The majority making the statement/action becomes the "real victim" and the minority becomes the "bully" for being too sensitive and not taking a compliment, as many MA are passive-aggressive or supposedly positive.
There are plenty of examples, some in this very thread, never mind the everyday ones many minorities face on a daily basis.
Number23
(24,544 posts)that conforms in every shape and form with the experiences or perspectives of the majority. The 2-3 poc/gays/wimmens that adhere to their special view are the "smart" "informed" ones while the 2-3 (or 50) dozen that see things differently are the "race baiters" or rabble rousers. They are of course the crew that screams "where??" every time a minority talks about microagressions, racism and insensitivity on this web site.
Seriously. Just look for the screams of "where??! I see NUTHINK!!" and you'll probably find the biggest sources of micro and straight up macro agressions towards all minority groups right here.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)You can shame a Bible thumping GOP, but Tea Party and Libertarians are shameless in their abuse here.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Show it, dammit!!
((someone shows them the link))
No, you just don't understaaaaaand! That doesn't say what you think it says! And as a white/straight/male person, it is my personal obligation to 'splain it so that you will put aside your decades of life experience as a minority who has been on the receiving end of this kind of shit over and over and over again and stop smearing race and gender baiting trolls with your lies accusing them of being race and gender baiting trolls.
betsuni
(25,377 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)
freshwest
(53,661 posts)BUT WE IZ REJECTIN THEIR HALP CUZ THEY IZ DUMBAS!
My Obama Bucket Is Overflowing!
betsuni
(25,377 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"You know when I *know* our teenager's up to no good?
If he gets indignant when I start asking questions about a subject, I know mischief is afoot."
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I would argue that that wouldn't be a "micro-aggression"; but rather, a plain and simple, aggression (though passive, and thinly veiled).
However, a bunch of the "What's the matter? I just don't see it" posts in support, might qualify as micros.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Really has me thinking about posting here. To open GD and read that first thing this morning. Never seen so many people trying to back something that disguisting up while attempting to look innocent. Every now and then there is a real eye opening thread here when it comes to the membership. That was one for me.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)this stuff is representative of a small (but loud) segment of DU.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)I didn't participate in the thread, but when I scanned it I didn't even notice the microaggressive twist because I oppose the TPP and welcomed any illustration of why Obama was wrong.
You are right - Manny should delete that post. It hearkens back to Ann Romney's, "Now it's time for adults to take charge of the room." (implied "boy" .
Has anyone put it to Manny this way (without making it seem like some partisan strategy to suppress criticism of the TPP)?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts) . and yes. half the thread are various people pointing this out. the other have blindly or dismissively or laughingly defend, cheer and hi five manny
Number23
(24,544 posts)and sexual orientations trying to explain to the OP that what he was saying was ignorant and/or tone deaf and/or really offensive. Not only did he not delete the OP but hunkered down further with more "jokes" with his pals. In my years on this planet, I have seen or received this type of response more times than I can count whenever someone has been told they've said something offensive. It is not new and it sure as hell isn't cute.
The problem is that for every person that challenged that really nasty, stupid OP, there were almost as many folks cheering it and the OP along -- as per usual. Calling the posters who object to that kind of language "apologists" "haters" or whatever and even chasing after the people who objected to what was at best, a meaningless nothing of an OP, and at worse, a really offensive expression from a person with a well known reputation for offending. Again, this is exactly the type of response that anyone would have expected.
You would think that if you identify as a liberal or a Democrat and you always find yourself at odds with women, with poc and with gays, that you'd take a step back and try to figure out what the problem is. The last thing you'd want to be seen doing over and over and over and over again is pissing off and dismissing minorities. But then, I don't think the ones who do that kind of thing are "liberals" or Democrats at all, and sure as hell aren't the kind of people I want on my side on any matter.
JI7
(89,239 posts)by this point and done intentionally with an ignorant fan club cheering it on.
Hekate
(90,556 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)
emulatorloo
(44,063 posts)
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)"Microaggressions are the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership. In many cases, these hidden messages may invalidate the group identity or experiential reality of target persons, demean them on a personal or group level, communicate they are lesser human beings, suggest they do not belong with the majority group, threaten and intimidate, or relegate them to inferior status and treatment."
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Or attack the research because it's not done "in a lab".
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)But don't get me wrong, not all perceived microagressions are actual microagressions, see my other post, # 67.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)By and large, most things I have seen described as microaggressions seem legit.
Your #67 raises an interesting point in that I think it's possible for a member of a discriminated against group to be so inundated with macro and micro aggressions that they start to see them where they don't exist. I think that explains the white folks with dreads issue. It's something to be aware of but its really a small point in the overall discussion. If a group is experiencing enough microaggressions and full on discrimination to get there, the problem is not the few times where they are seeing one where it doesn't exist.
Behind the Aegis
(53,919 posts)The problem I am seeing with some of the comments here is the focus on the "abuse" of microaggressions rather than the actual MAs. A similar situation is reporting of rape. Some will almost always focus on "false reports" which do occur, but they are the exception, not the rule; not as serious, are those who refuse to acknowledge that happens and refuse to address it, even to say it is uncommon. The other problem I see is the people who feel they are the "victims" because the happen to be the majority and were "just being nice." It is yet once more example of defining the experience of the minority by the experience of the majority. Another MA I see are those who "allow" minorities to express themselves. 
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)but the offended party perceives a slight. As far as I can tell 
It's another self-defeating neologism that academics take seriously but normal society mocks. People who feel offended by something will get a hell of a lot more sympathy if they can persuasively articulate why it's offensive rather rather than just labeling someone micro aggressive (not sure if that 's even a word )
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)If we do that, we think we can control it. Even though naming and measuring are as subjective as anything else we do. The more abstract academic neologism gets, much like the financial world, the more absurd it gets. The human imagination with increased time to wander can come up with all sorts of things.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)First, the anti-intellectual attitude in the first sentence of your second paragraph is not what I tend to expect from progressives.
Secondly, you're assuming that many people haven't already articulated why they find microagressions tiresome, offensive, denigrating, and insulting. Kind of a big assumption to make on your part.
Finally, it's not so much an issue of sympathy as it is about basic respect for others-in this case, for members of social groups that have historically been marginalized, and are still marginalized to a great extent -even in supposedly "progressive" circles (which I find sad).
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)before throwing it around. Denying theories like relativity and evolution is anti-intellectual because those theories have mountains of evidence supporting them. Mathematical proofs, solar observations and organic experimentation make the evidence incontrovertible.
The evidence for the existence of microaggressions isn't provable. If it were, her experience could be recreated in a lab, measured by using instruments in an observation, or at least interpreted through statistics.
Saying that anyone is anti-intellectual who disagrees with a scientifically unsupported term is actually intellectual failure. If you can prove the existence of microaggressions with evidence, then bring it to me. Otherwise it's as Noam Chomsky says:
Noam Chomsky
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/noamchomsk447270.html#GGz01sCLBR1TfRFE.99
Inventing a term and reproducing it clerically in other academic publications doesn't create a proof. It's interpretive and debatable. Meaning I'm well within in my rights to question it without being anti-intelectual.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Wow, bigotry must not exist then! Problem solved, eh. What a bunch of flippant bullshit. You should be embarrassed!
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Housing, employment, lending, etc
Microaggressions can't. That's the difference
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)History of self reporting going back for centuries is the ultimate display of white privilege- and quite deliberately, choosing to live in ignorance.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)You can't prove an interpretation is correct unless the potential offender himself tells you his intentions. Merely existing isn't an aggression.
If the white guy with the Afro-inspired hair says he doesn't mean offence, and the author says that he does, where are we? Nowhere. It's more like a transgression of vague rules than an aggression. I don't think he should have to change his hair style just because someone thinks it's a micro-aggression.
This is the nature of micro-aggression accusations. Without facts we are left solely with interpretation.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)That their life experiences are worth nothing more than dismissal. Got it!
Interesting.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)The truth is that those who use the term "micro-aggression" are a microscopically small percentage of the population. Have even one percent of people claimed to be the victims of a micro-aggression? Do even one percent of the populace support the validity of the term or even know what it means?
Please don't represent a tiny group limited largely to small academic fields and social media as all POC. You and they don't speak for anyone outside your very small group.
If you disagree with my statement, give me numbers. Otherwise it's just as meaningless as climate denial.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Until an academic gave it a name? That is completely divorced from reality. It completely ignores recorded history- so is deliberate ignorance.
And pretty fucking disgusting to boot.
Response to bettyellen (Reply #80)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)The forum and others have changed my opinion a LOT on race. The biggest one being that hair thread from several years ago. My opinion has turned 180 on that.
I'm willing to be convinced, but give me something. It's a huge hurdle for most people to accept curbing individual expression.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)something you have done hurts/offends them, do you require proof that what you did, actually hurt/offended them, or do you take them at they word?
Or, how about when you tell someone that something they have done hurts/offends you, would you expect to prove that what they did actual hurt/offended you? Or, would you rather they just stop doing whatever it was you pointed out?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)If I said something unimportant and stupid to offend them, I apologize.
I won't stop talking about wealth inequality to stop offending conservatives who are in earshot. I won't change my hair or appearance to satisfy a stranger's opinion.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Does it have to be deliberate or can it be unintentional? I think we all agree that intentional provocations are bad and shouldn't be encouraged.
The grey area falls under the unintentional slight. How do we reconcile the logical definition of aggression with an unintentional action?
And most importantly, how do we determine what is socially acceptable? Is it by the number of people offended or what? I'm not willing to say that behavior should be modified to suit one person. Under the theory of microaggression, not only should the worst interpretations be assumed, it may not even matter. As long as one person is offended, that is proof enough to socially pressure the offender to change. To me, that is the end of free personal expression. I don't think the young man in the other thread should be pressured to change his hair style by one person's offence.
That is the problem with the theory of microaggressions. You had better make a good case for something like a hairdo before people are willing to accept that criticism as valid. And just saying it's a microaggression to bridge the gap between the offended party and the overwhelmingly non-offended society doesn't work. Hence why there was near-unanimous criticism of that writer on, of all places, DU.
That's how I see it. And frankly, that's how it will play out every time.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Is the onus on the receiver to determine whether the aggression is intentional or not? The effect is precisely the same to the receiver.
The same for social acceptability. Socially acceptable to whom? Different communities have differing levels of acceptability on different behaviors. Often, what whites see as socially acceptable diverges from what blacks see as socially acceptable.
What is missing in your thesis is this: what is considered valid in the predominately white community of DU may be irrelevant to African-Americans. So, as whites as a majority on DU are not offended by a behavior that this African-American woman found offensive, this is therefore worth discarding her viewpoint and her life experience?
This seems to be what you are telling me.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)How many had to agree with that author until he should change his hair style? One author can't possibly represent an entire community, so I'm asking how many people are needed before he should change
kwassa
(23,340 posts)and she was expressing her opinion. Does she need to muster a majority to express her opinion?
I think not.
What would serve you better is to read more, and more deeply about African-American opinions on the subject of hair, which is a very fraught issue in this community.
She is one data point, speaking from her experience. If many others also express this viewpoint, this young man might pay attention, or not. He simply represents another example of white Americans appropriating black culture, an issue with a long history.
Black hair, because of the tight curl (depending on the texture) naturally dreads. Much work is done to untangle black hair, a labor-intensive process. Whites rarely have hair that curly. They need to work at it.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Does she need to muster a majority to express her opinion?
No, only if she desires to persuade others that her opinion has merit.
From the article:
However, my experience at this past summer’s Electric Forest Festival proved to me that so many white people just don’t get it.
but this was not a safe space for me to express my love of music as a black woman.
So yeah, if her purpose was to express frustration, she achieved that. If she wanted to make white people "get it" and create a safe space for herself, it won't happen with arguments like she expressed. In fact it backfired massively if that thread was any indicator.
It doesn't answer my question about the legitimacy of the term microaggression or what we should do about it.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Most white people don't get it. You don't get it.
So yeah, if her purpose was to express frustration, she achieved that. If she wanted to make white people "get it" and create a safe space for herself, it won't happen with arguments like she expressed. In fact it backfired massively if that thread was any indicator.
It doesn't answer my question about the legitimacy of the term microaggression or what we should do about it.
1) She, and any other black person, is not now or ever responsible to make any white person "get it". That is the responsibility of all white people to get it, to understand the racial context in this ongoing history of racial relations in this country, as white people created that history. The information is readily accessible, and discussed frequently here on DU. This is the vanity of DU, that it is so progressive that it understands the subtleties of the issue of racism when most here do not.
2) Microaggression as a term is completely legitimate and fluently explained in other notes in this thread, so I will not repeat it. Reading is fundamental. If you perceive it as illegitimate, you had better be prepared to defend that idea.
In other words, your education is your responsibility. Not the responsibility of anyone else.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Thing is, if white people don't accept that responsibility, it doesn't hurt them. Whites don't even feel like they're doing anything wrong by wearing dreads. So it will continue until someone makes a convincing argument to stop. It's not like anything will change in their lives if they continue to wear dreads, whereas the author will continue to feel unsafe and insulted. In fact, they can argue it's her responsibility to accept that rocking different hair styles is their right and the onus of acceptance is on the author
So yeah, where are we at? In a world where white people rock dreads at music festivals and nobody can successfully persuade then to do otherwise. Does the author want that? I'd like to hear her answer.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)White people are not obligated to accept anything, ever, that they don't personally experience. White is the default culture, so much so that whites don't recognize themselves as having a culture. Whites often avoid a true discussion of race, because there is no downside to them not discussing it. There are no repercussions. Black people have to live with the issue of race every day.
This is the chasm that these threads fail to cross. The participation in this thread is by white DUers who disagree with one black perspective. So, what else is new?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Every single person in this country has the legal right to wear the hair they want. The authorities can't stop them regardless of whether that person is white, black or any other color.
It is a privilege extended to everyone. Part of living in a free society is being legally forced to tolerate that expression.
So it is wrong to say that it's white privilege. It is a constitutional right. Just like seeing a bumper sticker that offends you. The burden is in the offended to cope with it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)every person in this nation has the right to state they are an ass, racist, misogynist and homophobic. and to educate on the why
maybe, it will connect with one. or 20. or 100.
that is a good thing.
that would be progression. moving forward.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)You can voice whatever opinions you like. But there are numerous laws against discrimination. So one's racism can manifest as speech but not as housing practices.
Hairstyles however are strictly expression and have no restrictions. Hairstyles are correctly seen as harmless by the law 
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i hadnt gone into the young womans story. i did read kwassa's post. and ya.
a voice of one can be heard and be effective.
Number23
(24,544 posts)What the HELL is wrong with you?? Get with the times, bettyellen. 
These people have simply GOT to be fucking kidding me. I can just imagine all of these people standing around Europe 500 years ago and all of these people keep dropping dead around them from some disease doctors haven't diagnosed or even understand yet.
And because the doctors don't yet know what they're dealing with, I get the very strong impression that these special folks here would be accusing those who are sick and dying of "lying" and "exaggerating" because the doctors haven't told them there's a problem yet.
"Forget what your eyes and ears and fellow countrymen are telling you. It ain't real until Authority Dude tells you it is."
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)another person might interpret every word or action is an absurdity. There is a lingua franca of common, ordinary social interaction and if you can't deal with that, provided that people are acting with basic manners and civility, you are too much of a hothouse flower to last long in the real world.
And I know whereof I speak. See my post above.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)That women and POC have reported tells me your intent is not to bother your pretty little head. Our lives do not matter. No worries, we get that message from many.
Don't scratch your head too hard trying to figure out why many couldn't give a fuck about your eroding wages. We've been doing your job for 25-55% less pay for years. And NSA spying? When they want to scope up your vagina and force you to look at images before medical treatment, get back to me.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)NO ONE has any rights that are worth a damn.
And don't you DARE lecture me. I have spent my entire life on the autism spectrum and been treated - quite openly - like shit because of it more times than you have had hot dinners.
I am done with you.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Too bad you don't see that these economic problems have a longer and deeper history for many of your fellow Dems.
Only now- that YOU are suffering, do you wish for some change. When we were the only ones suffering, where were you? Dismissing our voices.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)because I was for peace and economic justice even then. I'd STRONGLY advise you to quit digging RIGHT NOW.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)You ran with the pack to make your own life better. That's nice. I was against the war too, fought against a few of them- although I was in no way in danger of being drafted. I guess I deserve your gratitude? What have you done to earn mine?
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Not going to pretend I am shocked at all.
Not surprised you haven't done more. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a long stretch where you were making bank and politically disengaged. That appears to be quite common.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)save that I disclosed that I am on the autism spectrum.
I couldn't have been against the war as a teenager other than to save my own skin. Which doesn't even matter because few draftees were being sent to Vietnam in 1972. I was still against the war from the time I was a boy. It doesn't matter that my first boyhood hero who wasn't a baseball player was Robert Kennedy, because he wanted to bring peace and help the downtrodden. And the draft was well on its way out well before I turned 18.
You project the most cynical and self-serving motives on everyone, which is very Republican of you. Perhaps you should look in a mirror before you fling your unsubstantiated crap.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Can earn points on being other than self serving. But so far, it ain't happening. In this, you are far from alone.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and a lot of other things, that I can't even formulate a response to this ignorance.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Must be a drag not having people now down to your superior judgement, eh?
Well, you'll get used to it.
betsuni
(25,377 posts)is someone saying they are "very aware of slights I receive because I am Asperger's" but everyone else is "going around imaging or looking for ... slights." I've got to go laugh for about ten minutes now.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)but those I have not been able to classify, so to speak, I ignore. Sometimes, often, in fact, people are merely obnoxious, crude, or devoid of manners because it is their nature to be so and has nothing at all to do with me. And I do not assume that something is intentional unless I actually have a reason to make such an assumption. In the hurly-burly of everyday ordinary I seldom find myself deciding that something is in fact intentional.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)They should just steal that battle cry and be done with it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)it is truly amazing, thru out du over the months hearing the same people repeatedly say $ has precedent over social issues. yet when we call 'em on it they say, no no.... where are you hearing that. no dem would say. prove it. link it.
and then jump into another thread and there it is.
$ more important than lives.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Isnt that at least worth a small chunk of thanks?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)NO ONE has any rights that are worth a damn.
When will people understand that money is king in a capitalist country where the democratic process is run by money? What you are saying describes our reality since the trend began in the 1840s.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)we get that $ is priority.
life is for me.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)They would have more political influence. Easier access to abortion. A smaller barrier to exiting abusive relationships. Better legal representation. Better educational opportunities.
It's all connected, which is why equal pay is vital to equality in all areas.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)lost their rights and laws.
so keep you if's
i will go for the surpreme crt 2016
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Nope. That's why I am done with half-loaf candidates. HRC and friends want to finally nail the lid down on the middle class and I am not going without a fight.
The political rights that one can secure derive from the economic security one has. American history is replete with examples of people with no economic power and hence no rights the government felt like acknowledging. NO government ignores any class that has meaningful economic power, as the US middle class had as little as 25-30 years ago.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)have a chance for a decent, meaningful and peaceful life and be able to pursue the best that is within themselves. Just like FDR did. Just like LBJ did. Just like Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren do today. That is why I am a democratic socialist. Voting for candidates who will further the complete corporate takeover of every aspect of life in this country down to the commoditization of the air we breathe will not further any goal of mine, but you know that.
You are either trolling me or are one hell of a lot more obtuse than I gave you credit, wrongly, apparently, for being.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)You're acting like 2/3 of the Dem party does not exist. Wow.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Why do you presume to know who I am talking about? Your claim to omniscience makes laugh. Like ANY non-rich person, male, female, black or white, will benefit from corporate fascism? How dense can you be?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Theories about it from 50-60 years ago when US being 2-3rd class citizens was the norm. Tell us all about how it is.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Fair and equal treatment of women and racial minorities in the economic sphere - i.e., truly equal pay and truly equal opportunities for advancement - would be an unimaginably important program for progress for everyone not in the one percent, male and female, black and white alike.
Throughout history economic power has been leveraged into political power, which is a main reason the tenth-percenters want to economically disenfranchise everyone but themselves and their servants/enablers.
Any cursory reading of history shows this to be a fact and not an opinion.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Feel like it's time for women to be selfish and go for it. I'm anti war, but I'm also fed the fuck up on this war on women being allowed by the disinterest and "soft support" of all too many Dems.
I'll be asking what have they done for us. It's fair play- no?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)supreme crt has been consistently siding with corp.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Economics are universal and effect every last person. And with no economic rights, no other rights can ever be secure. I have always assumed that DUers are smart enough to figure that out. An impoverished populace is a fundamentally enslaved populace and slaves have no rights their owners do not grant them. I do not want to see one person in this country owned by the tenth-percenters.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Corporatist "Democrats" are as bent on destroying the middle class as are the Repukes.
Rights in the abstract, with no power to use them or enforce them, are MEANINGLESS. And that means some measure of economic power. The Constitution of the Soviet Union was filled with fine words guaranteeing rights. And since no Soviet citizens had the power, economic or otherwise, to stand up to their government, attempts to get those rights acknowledged and recognized got you a one way trip to Siberia for ten years.
A nation of people in economic serfdom has no rights ANYONE has to respect, regardless of what pretty words are on paper in the law books. What about this can you not understand? Economic security is the necessary predicate of meaningful rights because TPTB pay no attention to poor people, or even middle class people anymore in the US.
Read some Marx, read some Dickens, read some FDR speeches, in particular the Second Bill of Rights speech, which was an encapsulation of the very thing I am preaching here. For dog's sake listen to or read something.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4eYP532zkfo/S4l625T2KEI/AAAAAAAAAIA/GdtY60f1vuM/s400/FDR-Bill+of+Rights.png
FDR's Second Bill of Rights Speech
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)YOu are obviously not reading my posts, which repeatedly refer to "every single person in the US." What about that phraseology is unclear? I can think of no more inclusive term than "every person."
Been nice playing your silly little game, but I have better things to do. Your disingenuousness and deliberate ignoring of the actual content of my posts is rather embarrassing. To you.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i am all for a sanders or others who may decide to get in. but.... i have heard too many advocate they will not vote clinton.
so. if clinton gets in, do you vote?
i want a dem in office. 2016 is too big a deal from the SOCIAL aspect of our democratic party and it does not take a back seat. i ride in front. i will ride in front with the populist party here on du that wants to divide dems, because i too yell about this stuff, just as loudly. but...
i do not put the women, blacks and gays to the back of the bus
no more.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)the weekend before the election.
If my state, Minnesota, shows a strong lead for the Democrat, that Dem is HRC, and my vote is utterly unlikely to affect where Minnesota's electoral votes go, I will vote Green for POTUS; let me be forthright in saying I will vote for every other Democrat on the ballot even if this comes to pass. I will never pass up an opportunity to vote for my congressman, Keith Ellison.
If the polls are close, I will hold my nose, vote for Goldman's BFF and take a couple of showers. I will not be proud of myself voting for the barely lesser of two actual evils.
I voted for John Anderson in 1980 when it was clear Jimmy Carter would get crushed, and I have never regretted my vote for him. I thought he was the best candidate available from the three from which I had to choose.
And there I rest my case.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)daredtowork
(3,732 posts)you do seem to be harping on one issue and making an underlying assumption that issue will even come up.
I agree with hifiguy on basic economic security being the bedrock of human rights, including women's power to maintain choice.
@hifiguy - I think seabeyond is refusing to come to any terms with you because you blatantly refused to consider microagression, the premise of this thread - and in the process committed some drive-by offenses yourself. I'm only cutting in here since I think this should be the issue on the table rather than both seabeyond and yourself painting yourselves into increasingly narrow political corners, when the reality is your beliefs overlap a lot.
@seabeyond - please give hifiguy some wiggle room for his Aspergers.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)you almost make me want to totally back off.
lol
actually i did when hifi said he would hold his nose and vote clinton to get a dem in.
that is all i am working and striving for.
really? i am the easiest.
bring me another dem you all like better, that will win, i will be backing nad pushing them all the way. i want a dem win. no more or less.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)allI can say is "…"
Anything else might get me juried again. ( In speaking if which - why are those casual dismissals of minority experience going unreported? Or did they get a pass? I don't think I can do an Alert on my kindle. 
)
Hope hifiguy eventually realizes their "logical" argument against political correctness isn't what it seems. It's a quality of Aspergers to insist you're doing things from a place of reason, which is why its only worth arguing with him if you're going to trot out the footnotes and statistics he's demanding- i.e., too much work to bother.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)But hilarious you're advising people who have actually had their rights trampled - to "read all about it"
Do you even realize how patronizing this list is? And full of white men that have been dead for fifty years. Got it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)As well as lacking full civil rights and the autonomy bestowed upon white men.
That this has not occurred to you, is fucking mind blowing.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)will be bottom of the boat even get warren in going after wallstreet.
she will really help me. but i have the kind of portfolio that will benefit from her.
yes, the other groups will get a trickle down effect, maybe, eventually, possibly higher wage. and maybe not.
but, i am all for reigning in the big boys... just not gonna fool myself it is about the women blacks and gays.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)And your little friend kicking the shit out of me because I disagree with you. I pity you but I got toughened up at a young age by better bullies than you two.
I am almost sad for you. But not quite.
You are pathetic.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Revanchist
(1,375 posts)Actual microagressions where the offending party wasn't trying to be racist or insensitive but does so unconsciously, most of this is in the form of ignorant statements like the one posted about Michelle Obama being pretty for a black woman. It's not that the speaker of the statement is trying to be offensive it's more of an insensitivity in the thought process. Another example is making a woman change seats on an airline because a man sitting next to her won't sit by a woman due to religious beliefs. If the man is offended then he should be the one who moves but the airline attendants make the woman move instead, probably because they think she will object less, that is another subconscious decision that can be classified as a microagression.
The second form is what I would classify as perceived microagression. This is the result of dealing with actual racism and oppression for so long that they start to see microagressions everywhere. An excellent example of this is an article about graduate law students at UCLA. It's a fairly long article but they got a professor suspended because of acts that they saw as microagressions that led to a "hostile and unsafe climate" but I would be hard pressed to classify them as the actual thing. These included allowing open debates in the class room, and I quote:
After each of these debates, the self-professed “students of color” exchanged e-mails about their treatment by the class’s “whites.” (Asians are not considered “persons of color” on college campuses, presumably because they are academically successful.) Finally, on November 14, 2013, the class’s five “students of color,” accompanied by “students of color” from elsewhere at UCLA, as well as by reporters and photographers from the campus newspaper, made their surprise entrance into Rust’s class as a “collective statement of Resistance by Graduate Students of Color.” The protesters formed a circle around Rust and the remaining five students (one American, two Europeans, and two Asian nationals) and read aloud their “Day of Action Statement.” That statement suggests that Rust’s modest efforts to help students with their writing faced obstacles too great to overcome.
The also stated that correcting their grammar (remember, these are graduate students) and making them use the Chicago Manual of Style for writing papers instead of APA, and talking about self-defense tips after a robbery near campus instead of talking about the root social causes that lead to the robber to life of crime as microagressions and racism.
The article which, although long is an interesting read, can be found here:
http://www.city-journal.org/2014/24_4_racial-microaggression.html
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Like when you're a person of color waiting to pay at the store and nobody comes over to cash you out, but as soon as a white person comes along somebody rushes over to help the white person... you suspect racism but you can't prove it.
Over time thousands of these incidents lead to stress and even health problems like high blood pressure.
It's the daily racism that people of color face in commerce and relating with government authorities, but that are very small and you can't prove them. But the accumulated impact of it is very frustrating.
I think to make fun of this is very insensitive.
Edit: Not just race, but this can also be gender, etc...
phil89
(1,043 posts)involves making assumptions you can't prove. Got it. Absurd.
Behind the Aegis
(53,919 posts)"Michelle Obama is pretty for a black woman."
Conclusion: Black women aren't typically attractive; she is an exception.
"Thank you for your donation. That was very generous for someone who is Jewish."
Conclusion: Jews are stingy.
"You are so good looking. It's a pity you are gay."
Conclusion: The gay person's attractiveness is "wasted" because only same-sex people will "enjoy" it.
All three examples are easily proved to be bigoted, yet all three come across as compliments, which are usually meant to be sincere. The last two have actually been said to me. Do they rank up there with being called a "faggot" or a "kike"? Nope. However, they do chip at one's feeling of self-worth, especially when it is done repeatedly and when the minority explains how and why it is offensive, the majority speaker becomes the "victim" and the minority the "bully" for being too sensitive and not being able to take a compliment.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)very easy to understand examples.
Throd
(7,208 posts)Behind the Aegis
(53,919 posts)Most people saying them aren't meaning them to be insults, even if they are. That's what makes them microaggressions.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)How about: "You're really pretty for a heavy girl!"
No one would take that for a deliberately hurtful "compliment" ... But no empathetic person, would not see how hurtful the comment is to the recipient ... even if the recipient says, "thank you", or laughs it off.
NOLALady
(4,003 posts)"But, you are not REALLY Black."
This is said as a compliment to my white-skinned green-eyed husband. Translation... You are not like THEM.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I'm shocked by some of the attitudes and insensitivity on display here.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Almost.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)unless it can be proven with legally admissible evidence.
Ditto sexism/misogyny, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia etc.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)And for a fact it is happening sometimes.
The overall results of it are clear.
Like when you look at those studies of how people with black sounding names are less likely to get called for a job interview.
It's impossible to prove racism in any single case like that. But the people are still facing this racism on a daily basis and it has a real material impact on our lives.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Cool assumption you just made, lacking proof of course. Absurd, indeed.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)So congrats.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)learning from another's perspective or doubling down on being a dick, you chose poorly.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And wallow in ignorance, blissful ignorance.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)The guy you just enthusiastically agreed with called me a dick and you accuse me of wallowing in blissful ignorance.
And you wonder why you don't get traction.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Not fooling anyone.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I was pretty clear.
hunter
(38,302 posts)"Get out of my way, queerbait."
Thump.
There were incidents of severe "macroaggresion" too that left me crumpled up on the ground bleeding and bullies kicking me. I quickly learned how to be invisible.
I was a skinny squeaky autistic spectrum white kid living in an 99&44/100 Ivory Soap pure white community, kept that way by wink-wink unlawful redlining and police harassment. Nevertheless I was blessed to experience, in some very small and non-fatal ways, life among the excluded.
Otherwise I might have grown up to be just another clueless successful white male asshole.
All my siblings and my parents are long fled from my home town. The pod people invaded. I'm a minority white guy in my re-adopted community, where roads still carry the names of great grandparents' first cousins.
The place where my grandfather kept his horses is now a high end shopping mall, and the place where my wife's dad was born in a migrant worker's tent is owned by a homeowners association of mini-ranches, all neat and tidy, the Mexican groundskeepers and maids all going home to whatever awful places they live at the end of the day.
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)So LGBT people know that a lot (if not most) of straight people don't like us. Women and black people know that lots of white men are hostile too. When people prove that dislike with their actions and attitudes, well maybe it's not the same thing as stripping away rights or physical violence, but maybe we can call it "microaggression" to point out that yeah we know what the deal here is.
I guess I'm just being a butt hurt f****t though, time for some Straight White Christian Man (pbuh) to come swat me on the nose and tell me to get back in my place.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Codeine
(25,586 posts)on this thread.
My initial reaction was, if I may be frank, perhaps closer to some of the more obnoxious replies we see early on in the thread. But reading down, I actually learned what people mean when they say this stuff.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts) bettyellen
(47,209 posts)
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)
alp227
(32,006 posts)I wish JHU called Chick-fil-A an active funder of anti-gay discrimination instead. At least the Fox News/Campus Reform poutrage would've been a bit more justified.
And it's sad that sometimes, DU sinks to Freeper levels when discussing racial discrimination issues and mocks social justice and theories like microaggressions. I don't see the disconnect. Think about Reagan's "states' rights" speech in Mississippi. Isn't that the ultimate microaggression "trope maker"?
mike_c
(36,269 posts)...(way better than one might expect from a woman/person of color/whatever = microaggressive context).
ismnotwasm
(41,965 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)It might look a little like this:
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/fox-priest-hard-to-trust-an-atheist-president-because-they-dont-fear-eternal-damnation
It's constantly being told in many small, individually insignificant ways that add up to say, "all you really have to do to be accepted is to be more like us."
If i buy a new range or refrigerator, it will come with a "sabbath mode", every piece of money i handle says "In God We Trust"; every politician invokes god and goes to the "prayer breakfast". That "God Bless America" at the end of every speech serves to make sure, that i know, I'm not really a full member of the club.
I thank dog every day that people can't tell I'm atheist by looking.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I did not realize that, to several older, bigger kids, that was not an acceptable answer.
I wouldn't categorize that as a microaggression, more like a full blown, actual, aggression.
It would appear though, to some here, that's fiddlesticks compared to the trauma of going to a concert and seeing total strangers wearing their hair in a way that personally bugs me.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)but bigger than a nanoaggression.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)Micro-aggression
"when you type a response as hard as you can with a stern look on your face, yet only typing with one hand, and not typing too hard so as not to spill your coffee"
MEGA-aggression
"same as microaggression, but this time you spill your coffee"
King Ka Meha Meha AGRESSION
" use both hands, type furiously, until you forget you had coffee and it gets cold "
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)Revanchist
(1,375 posts)faster than reading the wiki article on a subject. I've enjoyed this topic and the interactions between those who have posted here. Sometimes you can learn more from a dialog on a subject than you can from reading an article.
romanic
(2,841 posts)Are slights that someone may feel attacks their skin color or gender or sexuality. Some microagressions are legit like a black man being followed by a security guard around a store or an openly gay couple being seated in a dark corner of a restaurant full of straight couples.
The whole article about the black woman being triggered by white people with dreads was more about the bs that passes as microagressions in the eyes of academics these days.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)daredtowork
(3,732 posts)the primary feature of microaggression isn't the particular offense - that's the aspect the dominant class always latches on to in order to diminish or belittle the complaint.
The primary feature is how it draws on a larger discourse of denigration to fuel its power to demean. For instance, calling a black man "boy"would be a mere insult if it were a one-off insult like "you're ugly!"
However, when the insult "boy" is boosted by the power of historical context - and that historical context is widely known so many peopke can reinforce the insult and make it a social fact - it becomes a microaggression in a sneaky class war. And the victims can't fight back because it is a micro attack that gains strength in being reinforced by many rather than one strong attack made by an accountable individual.
Microaggression is not a faddish neologism, it is an extremely useful concept that needs more dissemination. But it tends to be opposed by people who want to discourage any class-based analysis, and especially the notion class war exists.
Hope this sinks in for you hifiguy, because I think you're on the right track in general. Don't let those MRA guys hoodwink you.
JI7
(89,239 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)can sometimes be overused or misapplied.
To wit, I would argue that an AA person being followed around a high-end story by overly "helpful" salespeople, or being told "gee, you're so well-spoken"... those, to my mind, are "microaggressions". Maybe not actual aggressions, but clear racism with the subtext of "you might steal something" or "I'm surprised you can string together a coherent sentence".
Sometimes, however, the word IS overused or misapplied. An earlier example on DU cropped up with Adria Richards, the woman at the Python conference who had some guy thrown out (and later fired) for making jokes to his buddy about "dongles" and "forking" (not realizing, despite being at a dev conference, that those are both technical terms and not merely poorly crafted sexual slang)... She claimed that these jokes she overheard in a 3rd party conversation- whose content she herself didn't, actually, understand- were a "microagression" against her. I think her case, in that instance, was questionable.
Similarly, the term recently cropped up in a thread where someone claimed that the mere act of white people wearing dreadlocks on their own heads constitutes a "microagression". I do NOT believe that individuals exercising their own right of free choice to wear their own hair the way they want, is an inherent "aggression" against others, micro or no.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Or, 1000 nanoagressions.
TM99
(8,352 posts)is what we used to call in social psychology - passive aggressiveness.
It occurs all the time. We do it as human beings in countless ways, often unconsciously. Yes, sometimes it will involve gender, race, or sexual orientation or preference but it also involves judgements of beauty, intelligence, politics, etc.
Ironically enough even those here in this thread who are defending the theory can be rightly accused of it when they use such terms as mansplaining, MRA, etc. They are being passive aggressive, using insulting language, and acting morally and intellectually superior.
It is a pseudo academic theory, which means that it can't be empirically studied but it can be used as a cudgel in political and intellectual debates.
Sadly, whole branches of the social sciences have become this way.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)not social psychology. Perhaps you are thinking of that particularly male brand of woo, biodeterminism, that attempted to come up with academic-sounding reasons for female inferiority? Passive aggressiveness was a negative way of labeling negotiating styles primarily available to women.
Microaggression, on the other hand, is an actual term of academic currency. And I would suggest that it is microaggressive to delegitimize it as a neologism simply because it is particularly used in research dealing with minority experience, women's studies, ethnic studies, urban studies, etc.
TM99
(8,352 posts)Passive aggressiveness is another form of rage. Perhaps some training or study on the topic would enlighten you?
Post New Left semantics and feminist historical revisionism still do not make this 'academic currency' any more valuable or useful. The concept of microaggression literally does nothing for actual race relationships in this country. But it does allow for an awful lot of self-righteous judgement, victimization, and ego aggrandizement.
And I would suggest that it is microaggressive to delegitimize it as a neologism simply because it is particularly used in research dealing with minority experience, women's studies, ethnic studies, urban studies, etc.
I am sure you would, which helps illustrate my point wonderfully.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts) 
I appreciate your contribution to the discussion.
It is a pseudo academic theory, which means that it can't be empirically studied but it can be used as a cudgel in political and intellectual debates.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Microaggressions are targeted against people because of their membership in a particular group, not because of who they are as individuals. Passive aggressiveness is a different concept altogether, and targets people as individuals, or everyone in an undifferentiated way.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/microaggressions-in-everyday-life/201011/microaggressions-more-just-race
Microaggressions are the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership. In many cases, these hidden messages may invalidate the group identity or experiential reality of target persons, demean them on a personal or group level, communicate they are lesser human beings, suggest they do not belong with the majority group, threaten and intimidate, or relegate them to inferior status and treatment.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/microaggressions-in-everyday-life/201010/racial-microaggressions-in-everyday-life
This is a good article on racial microaggressions.
Racial microaggressions are the brief and everyday slights, insults, indignities and denigrating messages sent to people of color by well-intentioned White people who are unaware of the hidden messages being communicated. These messages may be sent verbally ("You speak good English."
Our research and those of many social psychologists suggest that most people like the flight attendant, harbor unconscious biases and prejudices that leak out in many interpersonal situations and decision points. In other words, the attendant was acting with bias-she just didn't know it. Getting perpetrators to realize that they are acting in a biased manner is a monumental task because (a) on a conscious level they see themselves as fair minded individuals who would never consciously discriminate, (b) they are genuinely not aware of their biases, and (c) their self image of being "a good moral human being" is assailed if they realize and acknowledge that they possess biased thoughts, attitudes and feelings that harm people of color.
TM99
(8,352 posts)I disagree with it and it usage based on what my professional experience, training & education, and personal experience.
It is a 'new' way of describing old behavior. If it is racist, it is racist. Adding mind-reading, victim worship, and narcissistic judgemental self-righteousness to the mix does not actually do anything for anyone except for those who spew the concepts.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)There is nothing new about the behavior itself. There have been better and better ways of understanding that behavior.
I think the concept of microaggressions does a good job describing a subset of racist behavior that ties in well with the understanding of white privilege.
If it is racist, it is racist. Adding mind-reading, victim worship, and narcissistic judgemental self-righteousness to the mix does not actually do anything for anyone except for those who spew the concepts.
This judgement of your really tells me that you don't understand what you are talking about.
TM99
(8,352 posts)with the usefulness of a concept that describes something that already exists but is just another mental step removed from the reality of emotion and experience.
It, like most Post New Left academic-speak, are distancing, confrontational, and very mental. They describe more about the people that use them than it does the terms themselves.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Microaggressions is a useful new tool to describe something very distinct and very real.
Labeling it "Post New Left academic speak" is simply a means on your part of avoiding the content of the concept, and instead attacking the messenger. It is essentially a smear.
TM99
(8,352 posts)Post New Left academic speak is a real thing. Do a little research on Post New Left versus New Left and the semantics of activism.
So no, it is not a smear, it is a critique of a semantic style that has weakened the civil right movements and not helped it.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)If you're objecting to the verbiage used, you are attacking style, not substance.
You are attempting to restrict speech, and obfuscate, rather than clarify.
TM99
(8,352 posts)poorly I might add.
It is beyond laughable that you would suggest that I am 'restricting speech' because I do not accept the latest academic liberal PC speak.
If I need to describe my own experiences then I will gladly describe them bluntly. But that is not the point. I am simply disagree with the term and its usage. I also have the 'free speech' to do that you know. Or is their a litmus test that I must pass.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)So we got to invent new, cooler terms to describe the same things.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)They experience all day long! How dare they!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Because that's how we got here, in this thread.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)An entire field of study. Because some don't like it when we dissect what's actually going on. Hang on to that little bit of idiocy, if it's all you have to trot out, we'll know what we're dealing with.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Fine. Sue me, arrest me, cut my feet off. I'm holding unauthorized opinions.
Just get it over with, already.
Like I said upthread, a salesperson following an AA person around the store, going "can I help youuuuuuuuu?" Yeah, that's a microaggression.
Going to an EDM show and seeing white people with dreads, not so much.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)
gollygee
(22,336 posts)It is a field of study. There's also discussion up-thread about a professor from Harvard who studies and writes about it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I said myself that the concept is valid, repeatedly. A salesperson following someone around the store, someone calling an african american "well spoken", etc.
Microaggressions? Absolutely. If i wanted to dismiss the concept, why would i agree with it?
That doesnt mean every use is valid, im sure you understand.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i did not give this young woman enough respect by dismissing her myself, so easily. i was more looking at the bigger issue of the word and the analysis of it. examples we see often, that clearly define that most can agree on. but, in my mind i was too dismissive.
i listen to kwassa patiently and respectfully explain the position.
you know what it accomplished? listening? a better understanding.
and further it took me to a time we went to mexico on holiday and my little niece got a weave. all were so excited. i wasnt thrilled with it cause innately i felt a trampling on the black culture. not enough to verbalize it. but enough, i was not comfortable with niece in the weave.
so, i am going to disagree with you on this one. i am sure you understand. and thank kwassa.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)FWIW, I certainly know white people with crazy curly hair, people who have to work to NOT grow dreads.
But I have read Kwassa's post, and respectfully, I'm still not one iota closer to agreeing that the choice of a white person - or any person, for that matter- to grow their own hair as they choose to, for themselves, qualifies as a "microaggression" to someone else.
What happened to the right of people to make their own decisions about their own bodies?
Isn't shaming people for their personal style choices a form of a microaggression in and of itself?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So do you think white people wearing dreadlocks on their own heads qualifies, or not?
gollygee
(22,336 posts)I've never thought of dreadlocks as being cultural appopriation, but I wouldn't necessarily be able to tell. I wasn't there, and I'm a 46-year-old white woman, so I don't know if I'm best qualified to determine whether the answer is yes, no, or somewhere in between. Part of privilege is not noticing how people are affected by things. Also, I don't know if there was more going on in that moment to make the writer of the blog feel that way.
I really try not to dismiss people out of hand.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)And any dismissals I do are based on that, not "out of hand".
I think that statements like "there is everything wrong with white people wearing dreadlocks" not only speak for themselves, they don't leave a lot of room for nuance. Do they?
The piece, to my reading, is a train wreck of overwrought hyperbole. (examples: Because of the trauma of seeing white pseudo-hippies with dreads and people doing drugs openly, the fest was a "nightmare", and "was not a safe space for me"-- direct quotes.) Unless other things went down at the Electronic Forest that she doesn't detail in her piece; but, given the seriousness that she attached to things like seeing white people with dreads and seeing white people doing drugs in public, one has to believe that any micgraoggressions in excess of that- like, someone actually saying something in front of or TO her, for instance, as opposed to minding their own dread-wearing, pot smoking business--- would have made it into the piece.
http://www.bupipedream.com/opinion/53740/edm-festivals-fraught-with-white-privilege/
I believe that microaggression is a legitimate awareness-raising term, but that doesn't mean everyone who ever uses it nails it accurately, or gets a free pass on misapplying it so egregiously.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)organic process.
People imitate other people (that's how things become "culture" in the first place, even among homogenous groups) people also mix and match and play off each others' ideas. Certainly a lot of rock and roll has been "appropriated" from African Americans- in the case of, say, a white singer who gets paid to sing the same songs in front of an audience, an African American isn't allowed to due to something like segregation, yeah, that's a direct example of appropriation AND, to a real degree, theft.
But other instances of cultural influence or cross-mixing are not so cut and dried. Every time one group of humans has had any contact with another- be that contact benign, oppressive, or downright hostile- nevertheless cultural cross-pollination has occurred. The Romans didn't bother to come up with their own gods, they just took the Greek ones and gave em new names. Mix country, bluegrass, and the blues, and you get rock and roll, and then punk. Animation and video games in the US are influenced by Japanese Manga. Etc.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)kwassa
(23,340 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)kwassa
(23,340 posts)Finely tuned.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Mine went right off the charts when I read the opinion piece that claimed the experience of seeing white people with dreadlocks at an EDM festival turned it into a, quote, "nightmare" for the author.
Or maybe it was just my hyperbole detector. i get them confused, at times.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)I would never stand in the way of that.
but the larger question is this:
Why did someone create that OP in the first place?
What was that agenda? what made this young woman's piece in a college newspaper so noteworthy?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Or that anyone should be able to wear their hair however they choose, no matter what color they are?
Ok, if you say so.
Personally, I'm discussing it on DU because that is what DU does. I have a lot of friends with dreads (of all colors) AND when someone attacks "pseudo-hippies" it gets my attention. That said, I could have been done with the topic a while ago, but it came up again, since the topic was a question about "microaggressions" i tried to answer it upthread, namely, that from my perspective it is a useful and potentially awareness-raising term which also can be misapplied.
Like I said, someone AA being followed around a store by overly "helpful" sales staff... Yeah, that to my mind is a definite microaggression.
I do not, however, agree that white people choosing to wear dreads on their own heads qualifies as any sort of aggression against anyone, micro or no.
Hope that clarifies. 
kwassa
(23,340 posts)I don't necessarily completely agree with this young woman, she is young, and she is also sensitive to the issue of cultural appropriation, which is a true historical issue. Whites have been appropriating the culture of blacks for a long time. Dreads is simply one more example in a historically long line.
The real issue, in my mind, is that DU always blows up over any perceived limitation on the freedom of it's members to do whatever the hell they want, be it to be free to own arsenals of guns, use massive amounts of drugs, or seek out porn wherever it can be found. This attitude extends to cultural appropriation.
If one might look at it from the viewpoint of a relatively powerless ethnic group in society whose creative genius is essentially stolen by the dominant culture, one might understand this young woman's viewpoint. It is a common African-American viewpoint.
After all, white people did not invent jazz or blues or rock 'n roll or hip-hop.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)dread.
DU isn't blowing up, DU is talking about something that not everyone sees eye to eye on, or agrees on.
I don't come here expecting everyone to agree with me on everything. That would be boring.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Hundreds have railed against this young woman, but they are not knowledgeable of the issues. Uninformed opinion is uninformed opinion.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)You impulsively deck him.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Im not sure what I've said to you that makes you feel entitled to imply or threaten violence against me, or any other member of this site. Seems a bit ...excessive.
Maybe you should put me on ignore? Hide the thread? switch to decaf?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)You actually contributed to the discussion beyond throwing spitballs? That's ANOTHER metaphor, like the one you confusedly claim was some sort of threat.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I've said it a few times, now. I think the concept of microaggressions is a valid one, to my mind, but one that can be misapplied or overused- and in the case of someone saying "there is everything wrong with white people wearing dreads", it falls under "misapplied".
I'm not sure why that is so hard to grok.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)then I stand corrected.
I still think the term is misapplied when used in the context of someone going to a show and feeling personally put upon by other peoples' hairstyles, when those people aren't doing anything to the person in question beyond existing.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)which is an exercise of privilege, but I also don't think it fits microaggression in the academic sense - unless the white kids were dressing up in dreds as a form of mockery (say, a funny Halloween costume), thus acting in concert and reinforcing the idea that a whole race which can be typified as "dred-wearing" should be mocked.
Appropriation of black culture as a form of slumming isn't cool either, though.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)There's a pretty big difference between, say, donning blackface or a native american headdress for "laughs", and choosing to wear one's hair in the style of one's choosing. Most of the dreadlocked hippies ive known havent even been consciously (or subconsciously) appropriating black culture at all, "slumming", etc. It is merely a part of their own look.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)I'm just making a general statement on what would and would not be microaggression, based on what you said.
I have zero interest in reading about the politics of fashion statements, but I do think microaggression is an important concept that has been a "missing link" for a long time, and I hope this thread contributes to the wider understanding of it.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I understand why the examples in Revanchist's link (post #7) constitute microaggression, also like I said, if an AA person walks into a store and is followed around by overly "helpful" staff, the subtext being "are you gonna steal stuff"? Hell, I've had that experience myself, wearing a shlubby coat or something. I get why that would piss someone off. That's a good example.
But yeah, the now-notorious article tended more, in my mind, towards fashion police and axe grinding. It didn't make her point very well, but it also does not negate the concept itself. Beyond that, it's not the worst thing anyone's ever written, so I'm not interested in endlessly beating on it as a dead horse.
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)was kind of asking for his ass to be handed to him, lol. nt
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)To wit, it's a valid and useful concept, but sometimes misapplied.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)to black, because he thought it cool. i told him to knock it off. that it was not his culture to play. it was offensive.
no hesitation, if, ands or butts.
so, you do not see it. isnt that part of microaggressions.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I don't. I've known plenty of white hippies with dreads, and they're not playing black. They're white people, who have dreadlocks.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Or deliberately trying to dumb down the issue.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I mean, most of the people arguing on both sides in this thread seem to agree that her point was stupid, so I'm not sure what the fight is even about.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)giving you another example, that maybe you might be able to wrap your mind around what the young woman was saying.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I agree that there are myriad other examples that would probably work better, but that doesnt really help the case for her op-ed piece. In fact, the opposite.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)hugely appreciated.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)This OP is bullshit, and speaks only to the character of the poster.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)this. i only really listened to it when i read this post of yours in this thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026575106#post173
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Freeway bookshelf, popcorn boulder.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So does that insult qualify as a microaggression?
You know what? I'll survive.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)JI7
(89,239 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)That is why it is being discussed. No one "dug it up".
kwassa
(23,340 posts)This is an op-ed from a college newspaper. Does that make this a major source of journalism? Not exactly the New York Times or the Washington Post.
How did he even find this op-ed? Why is this young woman's opinion significant?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I don't really have time to scour campus newspapers for examples of silliness by privileged college students, but this did pop up in my news search for drug policy and electronic dance music.
I posted it here because of our recent discussions about white privilege. I thought it was a perfect example of way over the top silliness posing as serious cultural commentary. I think we get a lot of that around here.
Yes, I mock this opinion piece. It is wretched.
And I admit, I find the whole "white privilege" meme counterproductive.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Or is it an idea with some merit to it, now that you have been exposed to the thought process behind it?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)It seems like we're describing small examples of racism.
Like the white lady who crosses the street to avoid the "scary" black guys. Is she aggressing on those guys? Or is she just a victim of her own (racist) fears?
Other examples, like seating a black couple near the kitchen or following black shoppers around in stores, seem more directly in-your-face. I could see how someone could call them microaggressions. But I'd just call them racist.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)and other forms of discrimination. It is the cumulative effect that is dangerous.
The white lady crossing the street has an effect on the black guys she is avoiding. Another depressing reminder of what the American society thinks of young black men. You are talking about HER fear. What about the effect on them?
This is the problem I have with this whole conversation.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)There have been some really good definitions including Revanchists #7 that make the concept clear.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Think about it. It's not just that cop beating the shit out of you for being black, or being raped, or being denied the right to marry.
Those are the big things. Absolutely worth paying attention to and fighting.
But microaggressions are also a thing. The little shit that black people, or women, or LGBTQIA+ people, or other minorites have to deal with every single fucking day.
The wait staff who makes you wait an hour for a meal just because they don't like your skin color.
The snotty remarks from relatives because you cut your hair too short, or grew it too long, or look too mannish, or too girlish.
The boss that talks around you and dismisses your input at the meeting at work.
The "loss prevention" officer that follows you around the store, even if you're wearing a suit and tie, because he doesn't like your color.
The tasteless jokes, the casual nasty remarks, the slur uttered by those who didn't know you were part of That Group, and thought you'd laugh with him.
The little stuff. Sure if it was just one little thing, you could let it slide.
But it's not one little thing. It's a million little things. And you're bombarded every day with the little shit that makes you feel like a piece of shit. It never ends.
That's microaggressions.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So quick question: Do you think that a white person wearing dreadlocks on their own head, going to an EDM festival, and being seen by a college student in attendance, not doing anything to that student other than just being at the festival wearing their own hair in dreads, likewise qualifies as a "microaggression" towards that person?
Because that was the example that got the ball rolling.
I agree it's a useful concept, and as you say, absolutely worth paying attention to and fighting. But I also would argue that the fight isn't done any favors when people egregiously misapply the concept in such silly ways.
betsuni
(25,377 posts)Apparently it is an ingredient in fancy liberal salads or something. Somebody? Anybody?
