361
362

How Grown-Ups Deal With 'Microaggressions' (bloombergview.com)

3422g が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 259
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]itisnotatumah 86ポイント87ポイント  (178子コメント)

I really wish that articles like this would give examples. I've read a lot of articles about microaggression and I still have no idea what a solid example of one would look like.

If I have a colleague that refuses to reply to my emails is that a microaggression? It definitely irritates me and makes me feel marginalized.

[–]durable 101ポイント102ポイント  (77子コメント)

To asian kid in your math class, "Hey you must be good at math, can you help me study?"

To black kid at the lake, "Do you need a lifejacket, you probably don't know how to swim."

Those are two examples of racial microaggressions. How you differentiate between microagressions and prejudice, well I don't know. Examples of microagressions I've read or heard sound to me like diet-racisim/sexism/etc. So the statements are prejudiced but it isn't full on hate speech and often the microagressions are "unintentional".

That's how I've made sense of it at least.

[–]masamunecyrus 86ポイント87ポイント  (15子コメント)

These are something most people would probably agree fall under the purview of "microaggression"--an expression that isn't in its self meant to harm, but is indicative of ignorance and stereotyping.

We just had an article in /r/TrueReddit that suggested using the term futbol is a microaggression if you're non-Hispanic, as it's "stealing the culture of Hispanics" and "marginalizing their worth in society."

People have started to go way too fucking far with "microaggressions," to the point where I would argue many of them are truly fabricated transgressions.

[–]Son_of_Kong 25ポイント26ポイント  (3子コメント)

Can you link that futbol article? It seems particularly ludicrous, not just because of the irony of "appropriating" a Spanish word that was already appropriated from an English word, but because how can spreading the influence of a culture possibly be conceived as marginalizing them?

[–]masamunecyrus 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

Sure. It was part of the larger discussion over this article.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/3kjky7/microaggressions_and_the_rise_of_victimhood/

[–]Son_of_Kong 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

OK, that's a little different from how I imagined it. I guess the offended one thought the guy was being sarcastic when he asked if she'd rather play futbol. Still no reason to go off like she did, especially when he said he had family in Costa Rica.

[–]TheCodexx 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Let's face it: the kind of people who would seriously use a word like "microaggression" and go around calling people ignorant are probably ignorant themselves. They see the world as black and white, and divided into distinct and never-changing cultures, languages, and ethnic groups. But that's just not how it's ever worked.

[–]merrickx 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cultural appropriation, that "stealing of culture".

Funny how, historically, cultural appropriation was the idea that the indigenous people of a region would adopt the culture of their tribal or colonial invaders, oppressors etc., thereby exterminating components of their own culture.

Now, it's the opposite- The more prominent, "new" ethnicities and cultures adopting and partaking in culture of the "oppressed," or non-indigenous peoples, is what's considered appropriation.

Where it was an idea in preservation, now it's offensiveness.

[–]istara -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

We just had an article in /r/TrueReddit that suggested using the term futbol is a microaggression if you're non-Hispanic, as it's "stealing the culture of Hispanics" and "marginalizing their worth in society."

This is what I call the "culture of the offenderati". I had a rant about it the other day in /r/namenerds (regarding how it's supposedly "offensive" to certain groups to use their names, because they're "marginalised". So it's okay to call your kid a French name if you're not French, but "offensive" to use a native American/indigenous name).

My policy now is zero tolerance. I afford no respect, regard, apology, sympathy or consideration to people "getting offended" over micro aggressions.

If they are so privileged and their lives are so fucking easy that they have become so entitled and spineless that they are actually genuinely upset by some slight remark, I'm happy for them to go fuck themselves. I cannot take their complaints seriously given the atrocities people are currently suffering in Syria and elsewhere. It has put it into permanent perspective for me.

[–]I_was_serious 48ポイント49ポイント  (17子コメント)

Because I like math, I've occasionally asked people I'm getting to know if they too like math. If their answer is no, I'll change the subject so as not to bore them. If their answer is yes, I'll carry on talking to them about whatever I was about to say. I once asked this to an Asian girl I was getting to know, and she was clearly offended which sucked. I don't think my question represented a micro-aggression in any way since I was treating her no differently than anyone else. But it turned out, I should have treated her differently and not asked because she was Asian.

These things really frustrate me. It seems like everyone is so on edge and ready to be offended, we can all easily perceive slights and "micro-aggressions" where nothing of the sort was intended.

[–]savetheclocktower 29ポイント30ポイント  (9子コメント)

This article and the one from the Atlantic paint microaggressions as something you'd confront someone over. But that's not how I've historically understood them to work.

I'm rather certain that, for most people, microaggressions are those things that by definition are too slight or too ambiguous to confront people over. A hypothetical Asian girl, when asked if she likes math, may not get offended at any particular instance of that question (because she doesn't know the questioner's motive), but probably knows that on aggregate she gets asked about math a lot more than a non-Asian, and that's where the microaggression comes from. And then each instance on its own gets worse because you realize that you can't tell when someone is being a bit racist and when they aren't.

When racism and sexism were overt, there was no microaggression — there was macro-aggression. The people who were biased against you were, by and large, willing to say so to your face. No doubt most minority groups are far better off now than they were 50 years ago, but I've also read stuff that suggests that it's much harder to develop coping mechanisms when prejudice is cloaked. The gender pay gap, for instance, is likely more attributable to lots of tiny, unconscious biases on the part of many people than it is attributable to knowing misogyny, and if I were a woman I'd have a hard time coping with that. At least if it were the fault of one powerful chauvinist, I'd know what to do next. But how do you combat such an insidious problem?

If there is a trend toward confronting people about individual incidents that cause microaggressions, then that seems counterproductive. But I'm not convinced that there is such a trend. There does seem to be a trend of outgroups talking about their microaggressions in aggregate such that majority groups are now aware that they exist, but I don't really see a problem with that.

[–]I_was_serious 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Awareness is good, but I'm not sure what I need to learn from that interaction except to take pains to never ask someone of Asian descent about math. Or to never offer a black person a life jacket. I'm not trying to be thickheaded, I'm just not sure where the line is between being sensitive and being overly sensitive to the point of excluding people to some degree for fear of offending them.

[–]red_wine_and_orchids 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

To asian kid in your math class, "Hey you must be good at math, can you help me study?"

To black kid at the lake, "Do you need a lifejacket, you probably don't know how to swim."

It's actually not too hard to avoid microaggresive statements like this (in my opinion). You have to simply be aware of the initial bias and then not make a biased statement. So I would say to the Asian kid, "Are you good at math? Maybe we can study together." And to the black kid, "Do you need a lifejacket?" You just remove the assumptions and ask the original question.

[–]merrickx 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

The gender pay gap, for instance, is likely more attributable to lots of tiny, unconscious biases on the part of many people than it is attributable to knowing misogyny, and if I were a woman I'd have a hard time coping with that.

The gender pay gap is largely attributable economic factors, not social. Women aren't being paid less, they are earning less.

[–]savetheclocktower 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Based on what I've read, the pay gap narrows but does not entirely disappear once you control for those factors.

[–]merrickx 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

Narrows down to roughly 5 - 10% in most studies, which might be able to be explained away entirely by other control factors.

The fact that it's touted as some huge disparity is pretty disgusting. We could also use your workforce example to explain "microagression" from a male perspective.

[–]savetheclocktower 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Narrows down to roughly 5 - 10% in most studies, which might be able to be explained away entirely by other control factors.

I don't think we're going to get anywhere by squabbling about this. Let's just pretend I used a different example in my comment.

[–]merrickx 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

This is squabbling? You're response to me saying, essentially, that it disappears, is that we're now squabbling?

[–]savetheclocktower 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, I was trying to head off a potential derail. 5–10% is not disappearing, and the fact that the smaller gap could be explained by other control factors doesn't mean that you've proven that it "essentially" disappears.

Mainly I don't want to discuss it because it isn't the goddamn point of my original comment.

[–]StabbyPants 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

it really sounds like the notion of micro aggression is that you need to police your language to avoid the appearance of insulting people (because minorities are so sensitive, don'tchaknow) rather than avoiding actual prejudice - i'd rather tell people that not every possible statement is someone trying to fit you in a box based on how you look. only about half, and it's as often something about how you behave.

[–]Felicia_Svilling 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

I once asked this to an Asian girl I was getting to know, and she was clearly offended which sucked. I don't think my question represented a micro-aggression in any way since I was treating her no differently than anyone else. But it turned out, I should have treated her differently and not asked because she was Asian.

Thats the problem, how could she know if you asked this to everyone or just to Asians? It's possible that many others have asked her specifically because she is Asian. I mean you have done nothing wrong, but neither have she. She couldn't possibly know that your question didn't come from prejudice, and acting like she misunderstands and gets offended on purpose really gets us nowhere.

[–]eamus_catuli 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Thats the problem, how could she know if you asked this to everyone or just to Asians

She could ask the questioner, "Why do you ask?"

Why don't people just talk to each other, instead of passively making assumptions and then themselves becoming an aggressor when it is unwarranted?

Let's have micro-dialogues instead of microagressions. If she follows up his "Do you like math?" with a "No, but why do you ask?" This could start an actual dialogue instead of everybody guessing and feeling angry/hurt.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]katyne 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    see back in my day we called it "bad manners".

    [–]court12b 10ポイント11ポイント  (3子コメント)

    The vocab that I hear people trying to make happen these days has really started to bug me.

    First the whole concept of "Shaming". You can't forcibly induce shame in me. You can ridicule me for my decisions and actions but whether or not I feel a sense of shame for who I am or how I behave is 100% up to me.

    Second is this "microaggression" bullshit. It's called being either insensitive, or an asshole. If you find someone's words offensive, feel free to respond in whatever way you feel is appropriate, (either ignore it or say something).

    And lastly, using "Social Justice Warrior" ironically as an insult. It not only demeans people who literally fight real social injustice in the world while empowering the overly sensitive keyboard "warriors" you're trying to belittle. For that one I'd recommend switching it to "safe space warrior" since it seems like their main agenda (neutering all real discourse).

    [–]jmcgready 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

    "safe space" is still too legitimizing for my tastes.... maybe "mollycoddle militia" with MCM becoming the new SJW?

    [–]court12b 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Either way I feel the current term creates real problems.

    [–]gandalfblue 2ポイント3ポイント  (31子コメント)

    Are different insurance rates microagressions?

    [–]durable 16ポイント17ポイント  (20子コメント)

    I think saying, "Your insurance rates must be sky high" to an asian woman would be a microaggression. A high insurance rate for a young male would be systemic prejudice.

    But I'm just bullshitting here, you'd have to ask someone who specializes in these things, I have my own concept of what a 'fruit' is but if you ask a botanist what a fruit is they have a very specific definition and it doesn't always jive with what I think of as a fruit.

    [–]DeusExMockinYa 5ポイント6ポイント  (12子コメント)

    How can I specialize in microaggressions? Should I just loiter in the slacktivist corners of social media until I'm confident in my ability to call people racist?

    [–]UncleMeat -4ポイント-3ポイント  (11子コメント)

    I dunno. Maybe start with the piles and piles of academic papers written on the subject over the last forty years.

    [–]DeusExMockinYa 12ポイント13ポイント  (10子コメント)

    There have not been a pile of academic papers on the topic of microaggression over the last 40 years. The word was not even used a decade ago.

    [–]UncleMeat 9ポイント10ポイント  (9子コメント)

    Psychiatrist and Harvard University professor Chester M. Pierce coined the word microaggression in 1970 to describe insults and dismissals he said he had regularly witnessed non-black Americans inflict on African Americans.

    Wiki. Google Scholar is a much better source than Google Trends. You can find tons of articles about microaggressions there.

    [–]I_like_doughnuts 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

    A high insurance rate for a young male is a smart business move.

    [–]metallink11 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I'm sure an actuary could run the statistics and tell you which race is the most expensive to insure, but that doesn't mean it's okay to charge someone extra because of their skin color.

    [–]I_like_doughnuts 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I have no opinion about the race of drivers; it's their gender and age-group.

    コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

      [–]Felicia_Svilling 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

      No that is just straight up discrimination. Nothing "micro" about it.

      [–]libsmak 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      From what I've seen and heard, you don't even need to say "Hey you must be good at math" or "you probably don't know how to swim". By simply asking the asian kid, can you help me study, you are implying that he is better because of his race. Or, asking a black kid if they need a lifejacket is implying they don't know how to swim because of their race. It's at that level of ridiculousness.

      [–]StabbyPants 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

      so, the solution two both of them is to talk to people and decide not to treat it as an attack - "no, i suck at math" or "i've been swimming for 5 years".

      of course, a black kid who's poor and grew up in the city may well not know how to swim - since you're running a boat tour or whatever, you might just ask everyone adn require those 12 and under to wear one anyway

      [–]Felicia_Svilling 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      so, the solution two both of them is to talk to people and decide not to treat it as an attack

      Yeah, sure but that doesn't make you feel better when you are the victim of the microaggressions.

      [–]StabbyPants 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      realizing that the person asking you about math isn't doing it because you're asian, the guy asking where you're from is making conversation, and the one that really means 'what breed are you' is an asshole does that.

      [–]remotefixonline 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Thats just being racist... no need to call it anything other than what it is..

      [–]crusoe 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Maybe the Asian kid is good at math.

      Perhaps your example is tactless but I've seen actual swimming outreach programs targeting black youth because it is such a danger.

      [–]AceyJuan 81ポイント82ポイント  (69子コメント)

      Great question! UC has posted a very helpful list of microaggressions as part of their training material. UCOP is the headquarters of the University of California.

      Here are genuine samples:

      1. Where are you from or where were you born?
      2. Wow! How did you become so good in math?
      3. There is only one race, the human race.
      4. To a person of color: “Are you sure you were being followed in the store? I can’t believe it.”
      5. I believe the most qualified person should get the job.
      6. “Why are you always angry?” anytime race is brought up in the classroom discussion.
      7. Raising your voice or speaking slowly when addressing a blind student.
      8. Use of the pronoun “he” to refer to all people.
      9. Two options for relationship status: married or single (on a form).
      10. Shows surprise when a feminine woman turns out to be a lesbian.

      I'll remind you this is a genuine training document from people who very much care about microaggressions. The examples in the document reflect the general consensus of what a microaggression is, within the community that cares about microaggressions.

      If you think these examples are hilarious, well, so do I. If you're interested, you can follow up and see just how deep their rabbit hole goes. This is the part they're willing to publish; their real opinions are worse.

      [–]ASOOSA 66ポイント67ポイント  (42子コメント)

      I believe the most qualified person should get the job.

      This one can't be serious. This has to be a joke.

      [–]yourealwaysbe 52ポイント53ポイント  (22子コメント)

      I was surprised by that one, but the linked document states in bold "The context of the relationship and situation is critical." This is taken from a number of examples illustrating "myth of meritocracy" with the general point being that arguing society is fair implies those who don't have their desired jobs just aren't good enough. I think it could also be a way of paving over problems someone may have faced.

      [–]Kronos6948 14ポイント15ポイント  (20子コメント)

      with the general point being that arguing society is fair implies those who don't have their desired jobs just aren't good enough.

      I am not good enough to be a neurosurgeon. Should I be offended since I could not do this as my job?

      There is nothing wrong with not being good enough at something. We all can't be winners. This is what comes from coddling our children by making sure everyone gets a trophy even if they lose.

      [–]yourealwaysbe 48ポイント49ポイント  (11子コメント)

      I am not good enough to be a neurosurgeon. Should I be offended since I could not do this as my job?

      Ah, no, that's not what i'm trying to say. To paint it in extreme terms, if you said "i would have loved to be a neurosurgeon, but all the schools in my neighbourhood were bad, and we couldn't afford to pay for private tuition or college fees", it would be a bit jerkish of me to reply "nonsense, if you were smart enough you would have found a way".

      While not in the same league, arguing that society is a pure meritocracy has the same undertones, and if you're trying to encourage your class to succeed, maybe you want to avoid subtly implying able students who've faced hardship aren't up to scratch.

      That's not to say everyone should be told they're amazing all the time regardless of their actual ability.

      [–]StabbyPants 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

      if you said that and then got pissed that you couldn't get hired despite lacking qualifications, i'd probably laugh.

      [–]FenPhen 14ポイント15ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Did you open the link and read the entire "Myth of Meritocracy" row?

      The example statement "I believe the most qualified person should get the job" is a microaggression in disapproval of a new hire that is a minority, particularly in the context of faculty demographics (because the publication is for Univeristy of California employees).

      Neurosurgeons probably don't benefit as much from diversity and should be about blind merit, but the study of neurology and the study of anything really can benefit from diversity because of different perspectives and ideas. Minorities often do have significant life disadvantages for certain kinds of tests of merit or qualification judgements.

      [–]raze2012 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

      The example statement "I believe the most qualified person should get the job" is a microaggression in disapproval of a new hire that is a minority, particularly in the context of faculty demographics (because the publication is for Univeristy of California employees).

      To put it informally, examples like these just make microagressions seem like a kafkatrapping technique. going against the statement puts you in the open for affirmative action accusations, and going for it now apparently means that you are insentive to the personal struggles other go through.

      And it can just get grey at points too. Should you pick up a new hire that is maybe 80% that of your "most qualified" candidate because of their non-qualification triats? They may typically be used as tie-breakers (candidate 2 worked harder and conquered more barriers to get to the same point as candidate 1, therefore 2), but how much more "signifigant" is this quality in comparison to the job skills?

      EDIT: changed to affirmative action, since that term better describes the situation

      [–]StabbyPants 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

      for example, at RPI, they started admitting any woman who applied (so the rumour goes). the women who were there got incredibly hostile to anyone they thought to be a diversity hire, mostly because that behavior impacted the value of their degree.

      [–]EatATaco 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

      Saying that qualifications should not be the only factor in determining who gets a job is not the same as saying we should give the job to someone unqualified.

      [–]Kronos6948 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

      How else would you decide on who gets a job? Qualifications and abilities are the best ways to get what you're looking for.

      [–]raze2012 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

      In the assumption of 2 equally skilled candidates, personal effort involved to reach that point (I went through personal event A and expiereinced and overcame discrimination B).

      At least, that's what the common arguement is in these cases.

      [–]RedAero 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Yeah, the problem with that is that if you take subjective difficulties into account you have to take all possible difficulties into account, not just the ones that are the controversy du jour. In other words, rich black guy or poor white guy?

      [–]EatATaco 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

      In an ideal world, you can tell exactly who is the more qualified candidate. However, in the real world, it is often much murkier who is and who is not really "the best": the interview process isn't perfect, we have internal biases, you don't know how someone will work with other people, etc...

      Assuming that we always make the best decision as to who is "the best" ignores all of these imperfections. Even worse, it ignores the outright the fault most of us have when it comes to outright biases.

      By accounting for these, in an imperfect way, we aren't saying give the job to some unqualified... Only that we should consider our own imperfections in the process as well.

      [–]ZeroHex 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

      This is taken from a number of examples illustrating "myth of meritocracy" with the general point being that arguing society is fair implies those who don't have their desired jobs just aren't good enough.

      I'd actually say there's a good argument that the US (and most other "Industrialized" and/or democratic nations) is not a meritocracy. There are honest people who work hard and still get shit on and there are complete scumbags who succeed, and both of these things occur because the deck is stacked one person's favor over another. Why that might be is less important than recognizing that it's true.

      The problem is that the section on the "Myth of Meritocracy" has this as it's message implied by that statement:

      People of color are given extra unfair benefits because of their race.

      Let's not pretend that affirmative action (where it still exists) isn't exactly that - extra, unfair benefits given to someone for no reason other than their race. Affirmative actions is supposed to offset unfair treatment based on race, however that's so hard to quantify even on a case by case basis that there's mounting evidence that it doesn't actually help those who need it most and instead only serves to create "quotas" that need to be met, especially in higher education. It's for PR, not actually helping people who need the leg up because they grew up in a bad area.

      [–]craiggers 33ポイント34ポイント  (4子コメント)

      The issue comes with subtext and context.

      I've heard this spoken in contexts where it is very clear that any person who's a minority is going to be instantly suspect as a token hire, as if they can't possibly be the most qualified candidate and that someone must have skipped over {white, straight male} "more qualified candidates" to choose them.

      Especially, when spoken in a not-quite-accusing-but-maybe-kind-of-accusing way to a new {not straight&white&male} hire whose qualifications are immediately considered suspect.

      [–]joakv 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

      I've also heard that phrase used to explain why the last dozen hires at an employer were of non-diverse candidates. It was troubling to me as some of the hires had been made after only one or two candidates were interviewed. It's used as an excuse for lazy recruiting, and implies that diverse candidates are not qualified.

      [–]raze2012 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

      That's the context I usually hear it in, to. I've never heard it in the context that the UC page describes, since it's usually

      1. a PR statement, and not to any one particular individual
      2. directed towards someone who would be considered "more priveledged" in reaction to them feeling like they were unfaily overlooked, not at the minorities being hired.

      [–]RedAero 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Ironically that attitude is caused precisely by tokenism and Affirmative Action.

      [–]brantyr 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

      In the right context it could be an implication someone gained their position over a better qualified candidate because of affirmative action.

      [–]EatATaco 20ポイント21ポイント  (10子コメント)

      I hate the idea of "microaggressions" and believe it is mostly a matter of PC gone too far. But, honestly, I find that to be one of the most ignorant on the list.

      It's the same problem with responding to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter." Well, duh. The vast majority of people using that phrase do not mean it to say that only black lives matter, but more that black lives matter too.

      The example I read that was very good was say you are at a dinner. They are passing around the food and everyone gets to take some. When it gets to you, they hand the food to the next person and you get little or even nothing. You speak up and say "Hey! I deserve my fair share!" And your father responds "We all deserve our fair share" and then everyone just goes about their business. It's basically ignoring your legitimate grievance: you aren't getting your fair share but everyone else is. Disagree with them or not, when people say that black lives matter, they are saying that the treatment of black people is below that of a non-black. When you say "all lives matter" you are ignoring their (legitimate or not) grievance.

      And it is a similar thing to saying "the most qualified person should get the job." I think most people want the most qualified person to get the job. The problem is that the "most qualified" person is often overlooked because of their sex or race or religion or whatever (and no, that race religion or whatever is not usually of the majority). Which makes them slightly less qualified the next time around, which they might be passed over again and also further entrenches the subconscious belief that people of that race/religions/sex/whatever are less qualified. So it is a compounding effect. Affirmative action, and other such programs, look to counteract this compounding bias. Are they perfect? Absolutely not. But saying "the most qualified person should get the job" just ignores the fact that this has never really been the case and usually an argument used to dismantle the very systems intended to counteract that this doesn't actually happen.

      [–]RedAero 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Affirmative action, and other such programs, look to counteract this compounding bias.

      No they don't... If they did, all Affirmative Action would be is a blind application process. Instead it's just tokenism, a two-wrongs-make-a-right approach.

      [–]EatATaco 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

      You're (I believe) incorrectly assuming no part of that compounding bias took place before the selection process. AA is accepting the reality that it probably did.

      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

        [–]StezzerLolz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I... really don't understand your argument. I don't think the two phrases are used in the same way.

        [–]Ifuckinglovepron -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

        Lol, whenever I hear that black lives matter or all lives matter, I laugh to myself at the fairytale dreamworld the speaker is living in where he convinced himself of the lie that any lives matter.

        [–]RedErin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        It's an obvious dig at Affirmative Action.

        [–]CC440 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I think calling that one a microaggression is bs 99.99% of the time but I have experienced a situation where it could be construed as offensive. I interviewed for a position where the manager literally opened with "we already have an internal candidate for this position but we brought you in because we believe the best person should get the job" (emphasis mine).

        No, they weren't interviewing me out of an altruistic sense of fairness, they already made their choice. They just had to publicly post a job opening to meet their "job creation" quota. That quota is one of the conditions of the tax credit package provided by my state for building their new factory here.

        The manager said it with good intentions (he felt bad that HR brought me in) but if he hadn't delivered it in an apologetic tone it could easily be construed as "we'd prefer you to think it's your fault for not being good enough".

        [–]xavierdc 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Some of these are incredibly stupid and just grasping at straws.

        [–]superkamiokande 7ポイント8ポイント  (7子コメント)

        Something I've been wondering for a while, please don't take this question as disingenuous, but:

        Where are you from or where were you born?

        Is it a microaggression to ask this of a white person?

        [–]craiggers 27ポイント28ポイント  (5子コメント)

        I'd say not usually - but as a white guy I did have once where this old Russian-accented guy walked up to me and goes "You- where are you from," and I said "...this city," and he goes 'No no, where are your parents from," and I said, "same," and he goes "no, no, your family, where are they from, and I said, "well....way back, immigrants from England, Germany, a few others, I don't know."

        And he goes "Mixed blood eh? HaHA!" and walks away. For me it was kind of just a weird and uncommon experience. But a lot of people I know who are, say, Asian, are used to the whole awkward sequence unfolding: "No, where are you FROM," as if it's not a weird and passive aggressive way to try to guess someone's ethnicity.

        If you're used to that happening over and over again, even an innocent "where are you from" can make you sort of tense up and prematurely cringe in anticipation.

        [–]itisnotatumah 8ポイント9ポイント  (3子コメント)

        Yeah I've learned to see that one coming from 100 miles away. Now i won't answer anything beyond "American". It is my only culture and the only one I identify with. Where the people came from 100 years ago doesn't matter anymore.

        I am, however, guilty of always wanting to know what flavor of Asian a person is. But I've learned to restrain the impulse to ask because I've noticed they're as reluctant to answer that question as I am.

        [–]graphictruth 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I tend to ask out of genuine curiosity, but I restrain myself until I know people well enough that it will be taken in the right way. Again, context matters. And you can usually avoid this sort of problem entirely if you give the context of intent.

        EG, "where are you from" coming from a linguist or an anthropologist, or even an artist is not likely to be coming from a questionable space.

        [–]RedAero 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

        I am, however, guilty of always wanting to know what flavor of Asian a person is.

        Weird... You phrase your own curiosity as nothing but curiosity, but the curiosity of others as being somewhat malicious and disrespectful.

        [–]savetheclocktower 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

        The point isn't to shame people who say the things in the list. The point is to say, "hey, think twice before you say these things to someone, because if they're a person of color (or blind, or gay, or whatever) then they probably hear shit like this all the time, and it gets annoying in the aggregate."

        [–]Regina_George_Victim 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Sounds like this skit.

        Edit: Surprisingly relevant follow up.

        [–]recursion 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

        "Where are you from?" Isn't a micro aggression.

        "Where are you really from" is

        [–]topcat512 11ポイント12ポイント  (10子コメント)

        There is only one race, the human race.

        What's wrong with this exactly? Have they kicked out the entire anthropology department yet?

        [–]rangda 8ポイント9ポイント  (9子コメント)

        It's easy to ignore race when you own is very well represented and understood. I think that white people that say stuff like that feel like they're doing non-white people a great service, as though they're elevating them to the level of default/whiteness by ignoring all the 'problems" of the non-white person's cultural background.
        They're not saying "there is only the human race, so we'll all learn to speak Mandarin or Spanish".

        [–]topcat512 8ポイント9ポイント  (8子コメント)

        I'm not white though. I'm Asian. Maybe it's naive but I feel like our concept of race is outdated. If we dropped the notion, including the idea of some kind of default whiteness, I think humanity would be a lot better off. Continuing to acknowledge race, even in a positive way just breeds resentment and bitterness.

        [–]rangda 3ポイント4ポイント  (7子コメント)

        I didn't say or assume you were white. In my experience it is usually well-meaning, advantaged people from white-majority places that say stuff like that, though. Along with "I don't even see race, I'm colour blind!". OK, so you also choose not to acknowledge all the challenges and negativity that a lot of people face due to their race. The problem with eradicating race as a concept is deciding which cultures to cut loose. Whenever you assimilate and integrate, you're choosing one over the other. Not blending them perfectly. When you talk about moving beyond race, you're talking about destroying people's culture.

        [–]topcat512 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

        When you talk about moving beyond race, you're talking about destroying people's culture.

        Ummmm, no I'm not? Have your culture, just don't use it as a reason to pick on someone else. Culture is not some permanent thing which can be destroyed permanently. It's a part of us and continues to evolve. No one is purposely deciding to lose certain aspects of a culture. That happens through the free market of ideas. We can acknowledge the difficulties people face and at the same time put effort into moving towards a society where we don't see race.

        In my experience it is usually well-meaning, advantaged people from white-majority places that say stuff like that, though.

        Your personal bigotry is irrelevant though.

        [–]xavierdc 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

        When you talk about moving beyond race, you're talking about destroying people's culture.

        Race =/= Culture.

        [–]rangda 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Do you think the harm of xenophobia and racism that goes on today is based on fear and prejudice against someone's skin colour and facial features alone?

        Or is it more based on fear and prejudice against cultural, religious, class differences that just happen to align with race?
        Most racists aren't the supremacist kind. With many generations of non white immigrants fully assimilated into white culture, fewer people judge on race alone. They wait until they hear an accent to start judging.

        [–]xavierdc 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

        In my experience it is usually well-meaning, advantaged people from white-majority places that say stuff like that, though.

        Isn't this a microagression?

        [–]itisnotatumah 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Non-white people rarely understand how difficult it is to be white in a culture that consistently blames your whiteness for everything that is bad.

        [–]sweetleef 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        summary: it's just the latest in the endless stream of invented offenses for the perpetually-outraged to use for attention.

        [–]Orphic_Thrench 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Because people seem to be struggling with what this list is getting at - context is very important for a lot of these.

        Taken in a vacuum, many of these statements would be fine; "there's only one race, the human race" - well yeah, but functionally our society just doesn't work that way yet. So if you say this as a general statement of how things should be that's alright,but a lot of people use this to brush off concerns about how things are, and to minimize what other people are still dealing with.

        This is not to say that talk of microagressions can't be abused; obviously pretty much anything can. But if you're struggling to see why someone considers these types of statements problematic it might be helpful to look a bit deeper into why instead of the knee-jerk response of "that's ridiculous"

        [–]sarcbastard 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        At what point do the people behind these ideas just admit they are incapable of seeing people as something other than indistinguishable homunculi unless provided with a profit motive?

        [–]SilasX 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Helpful at making me lose hope for humanity, maybe.

        [–]RagdollFizzixx 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Don't bring your microdrama up in here.

        [–]CC440 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        1. Wow! How did you become so good in math?

        How is that a microaggression? Does it only apply if asked to a member of a race that is stereotypically "dumber"? I ask because that's the inverse (I.e. what is appropriate to say) of microaggressions centered around the "Asians are good at math" stereotype.

        [–]atomfullerene 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

        I thought the article did a very good job (probably the best I've seen) of defining the term--relevant quotes:

        We used to call this "rudeness," "slights" or "ignorant remarks."

        the small slights by which any majority group subtly establishes its difference from its minority members.

        The stream of petty slights, laughable misunderstandings and smug assumptions are not just a perpetual irritant. They are also experienced by members of the targeted group as a message: "You don't quite belong here, and therefore, you are under constant, if low-level risk, that the majority will not protect you if something goes wrong, or perhaps, will take steps to expel the outsider."

        Don't get too hung up on the word "microaggressions"...it's a new word for an old concept of insult, thoughtlessness, snub, oversight, or slight. Even ones that (to a dignity culture member) should rightly be regarded as totally insignificant and ignored. To tie all this together, the important characteristics are as follows:

        a) it's performed by a member of one group to a member of another group

        b) it emphasizes to the receiver that they are on some level "out of the group" (note: what the sender means by it is not relevant

        c) It's not blatantly pushing someone out of the group or attacking them (that wouldn't be very "micro")

        Your collegue's refusal to answer your emails counts as a microaggression if you think he's doing it because you are in group a and he's in group b, and this bothers you. It's not the action itself, it's the perception. Surely you must have experienced this, if you've ever spent time in a group of people not exactly like you. Practically every social interaction between different cliques in high school, for example :P

        [–]crusoe 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Every group can insult any other group. Minorities can insult, snub, etc. Like the Chinese people who talk terrible about a white girl until she lets them know she understands mandarin.

        The poisonous ideology that only majorities can insult and minorities can only be insulted.

        [–]LET-7 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

        You're missing that part where the Chinese speakers form an ingroup with a majority of Chinese speaking, Chinese people. If a white person comes along who also speaks Chinese, that white person, in the local context, is a minority.

        We're parts of minorities and majorities, many times over, all at once.

        [–]RIGHT-IS-RIGHT 12ポイント13ポイント  (18子コメント)

        If I have a colleague that refuses to reply to my emails is that a microaggression?

        Theme:

        Pathologizing cultural values/communication styles:

        The notion that the values and communication styles of the dominant culture are idea.

        Microagression:

        "Why do you not reply to my e-mails? Why are you so quiet? I want to know what you think. Be more verbal." "Speak up more."

        Message:

        Assimilate to dominant culture.

        Even if you don't consciously express those sentiments they can have a passive effect on how you treat them, maybe you'll even be prejudiced against working with them at all in the future.

        You don't have to outright call someone a slur to make them feel unwelcome, that's pretty much what microaggressions are.

        [–]Kronos6948 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

        If my boss sends me an email asking for a reply and I don't reply, then I'm failing to do my job. If my boss is asking me to speak up more, it's because he knows I have ambition and he's telling me things that will give me a leg up to get a better position.

        Or is your example of a more personal nature?

        [–]itisnotatumah 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

        For me? It's colleagues who don't answer emails, or voicemails for that matter. And it's not like I'm asking about the weather...it's work related stuff. The complaints about this I've made have gone up and down the chain with no resolution.

        It feels like a microaggression to me.

        [–]Kronos6948 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        According to the post I responded to, the microagression is if you ask them "why don't you respond?" "You should speak up more", etc., not the other way around.

        [–]crusoe 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Or just communicate better especially if it's a job.

        [–]ASOOSA 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Why are you so quiet?

        I get this occasionally, and usually I just say "because I have nothing to say".

        I think I had a microaggression myself once. Used to work with a guy that constantly fucking talked (much more so than the average person). Finally snapped and said, "You know my father once told me that people who constantly talk all the fucking time, all day long, usually never say anything of importance. Usually they just talk about trivial shit. As a result, other people around them often never take them seriously about anything they say."

        コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)

          [–]ctindel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          That's a subclass called a passive microaggression.

          [–]hoyfkd 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          This title is a perfect example, actually.

          The subtle insinuation that people who don't deal with them in the way it prescribes are not grown-ups is a not-so-micro aggression.

          [–]CC440 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          The example I've heard the most is referring to a black person as "well spoken" or "articulate". That's a positive affirmation of an individual's intelligence but it serves as a microaggression due to the manner in which it's commonly used. Those terms are used by the media to describe black celebrities and athletes on a daily basis but are rarely if ever used to describe whites.

          That overuse lends those terms an air of racism because they are too frequently used to describe someone of average rhetorical skill. If society is using exceptional language to describe an individual with average skill there's an implication that the individual's group/class/race below average as a whole.

          I don't think I use those terms in that manner but I can see how black people, especially black athletes, could be offended by that description. I hear and read sports journalists use "well spoken" to describe any black athlete that doesn't conform to "black" cultural stereotypes while never using it to describe articulate white athletes. There's an undercurrent of low expectations surrounding the conversational aptitude of black athletes, otherwise you wouldn't see unexceptional (as equally intelligent as your average college grad) athletes like RG III constantly referred to as "well spoken".

          [–]QueerandLoathinginTO 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Your sister-in-law saying, "You haven't donated blood? Omg do it! Don't be so chicken and selfish!"

          Your grandma saying, "So, have you met a nice girlfriend yet? I won't be happy until you've found a nice wife!"

          Your uber driver explaining that he doesn't like pop music because "it's gay."

          These are things which are not said to be acts of aggression, but which nonetheless add up to a culture which is aggressive against a marginalized class. They're raindrops in a flood.

          コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

            [–]No_Fence 141ポイント142ポイント  (43子コメント)

            Despite the juvenile title this is a very good, relatively neutral article about a topic usually fraught with anger, subjectivity, and ignorance. It outlines both sides; why microagressions are a problem, and why current mechanisms to deal with them are dangerous. Ignorance is bad, but at the same time we're all going to be ignorant of some things, so assuming there's fault for all ignorance is setting up all of society to be perpetrators in the crime of thoughtlessness. Without checks and balances such a system collapses quickly.

            I especially liked this part:

            Complaints about microaggressions can be used to stop complaints about microaggressions. There is no logical resting place for these disputes; it's microaggressions all the way down. And in the process, they make impossible demands on members of the ever-shrinking majority: to know everything about every possible victim group, to never inadvertently appropriate any part of any culture in ways a member doesn't like, or misunderstand something, or make an innocent remark that reads very differently to someone with a different experience. Which will, of course, only hasten the scramble for members of the majority to gain themselves some sort of victim status that can protect them from sanction.

            [–]RedAero 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Which will, of course, only hasten the scramble for members of the majority to gain themselves some sort of victim status that can protect them from sanction.

            Hence the Oppression Olympics.

            [–]KaliYugaz 55ポイント56ポイント  (30子コメント)

            I also like that it touched on a fact rarely acknowledged by the left, which is how their ideas are easily appropriated by the right to mess with or even undo the progress they make.

            Every person has certainly felt a bit excluded or treated strangely at some point in their lives. This left wing focus on micro-aggressions and interpersonal slights allows for literally anybody to selectively interpret their experience in a way that forms a plausible narrative of persecution, no matter how privileged they are. It's just begging to be used against them.

            [–]stop_the_broats 49ポイント50ポイント  (18子コメント)

            It already is. Feminism is an important movement that should give a voice to women who might not otherwise be heard. Poor women raising children alone, women in domestic violence situations who don't have the resources to escape, women who have lived their whole lives amid drug and alcohol abuse and poverty, women who immigrate to our developed countries but still live under the control of their home countries attitudes and expectations of women.

            Instead it is being used to wage a pointless war between middle class and above women and primarily poor men. Catcalling and manspreading and other street harrassment that is generally committed by poor men, and is generally the only experience of sexism by wealthy women. These may be real issues, and theyre horrible things to have to deal with, but they are not representative of oppression or systemic sexism, theyre representative of the widening class divide and how people from either side of that divide are raised with opposing values.

            Remember that video of the woman walking through New York demonstrating the street harrassment she experienced. That was all black, poor, panhandlers. It sickens me to see these wealthy people who claim to be victimised by people who are so much more disadvantaged than they are. Its the same thing with "rape culture", a term appropriated from the US prison system where rape and violence between men is epidemic, and instead used to somehow demonstrate that the women who attend Ivy League schools are the most oppressed people in the country, despite the fact that the number of rapes in these environments is as low as it ever has been. Gloss over the problems of the poor, and focus on the imagined problems of the wealthy, all justified with high minded, college level cultural analysis that has little relevance to the real world.

            [–]The_Law_of_Pizza -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

            I feel like you could have brought up a thousand better examples of Feminism being misapplied than insisting that catcalling isn't systemic sexism. Especially while in the same breath referencing the woman who walked through NYC and ended up with an entire video of catcalls. That's pretty systemic, IMO, and it's definitely a form of sexism even if it's not oppression.

            Further, your connecting it to classism betrays (in my opinion) an underlying political agenda that you may or may not have been trying to push.

            To me, it sounds like you're just dismissing the problems of anybody with money simply because they have money.

            [–]stop_the_broats 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            See my Donald Trump example in the other comment. You can't view each kind of "privilege" in isolation. Any given person can be more or less privileged than any other given person, but not simultaneously more and less privileged.

            [–]meeeow -4ポイント-3ポイント  (6子コメント)

            I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean by your example. The woman was showinf one of the many faces of sexism. You c an belong to privileged groups and get hassle because yogurt belong to other underprivileged one I.e. the woman in the video.

            [–]stop_the_broats 13ポイント14ポイント  (5子コメント)

            Thats true, and I'm not saying that its good that women get catcalled, what I'm saying is that if youre going to try and paint one group as "oppressors" and another as "oppressed", then the "oppressors" better be more privileged than the "oppressed". Poor men can be sexist, but they can't systemically oppress rich women.

            [–]meeeow 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

            Ah ok that makes more sense now. I think that's what I tried to explain above, privilege is not a black and white thing, you can belong to various groups with various degrees of privilege. The woman herself was an example, yes she had class privilege but that meant nothing to her lack of gender privilege. I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself clearly?

            So they can't systematically oppress someone who's rich, but they can contribute to the oppression of women.

            [–]stop_the_broats 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

            sorry, I know we're both sort of on the same team, but your comment is a prime example of the "high minded, college level cultural analysis that has little relevance to the real world" that I mentioned in my first comment. Individuals cannot be categorised into oppression groups, and if they can then it all becomes largely irrelevant, as almost everybody fits into some catagory that indicates oppression. Donald Trump could claim that I have youth privilege, and that because society has negative associations with the elderly (they smell, dementia, they steal, "angry old man" stereotype), that he has the right to call himself "oppressed", despite being the exemplar of every other "oppressive" catagory. Its just a stupid way of looking at things.

            [–]meeeow 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

            It could help by not being condescending if you want to have a chat :) I know you didn't mean it but theres a reason arguments that you call high minded college cultural analysis exist in the first place and dismissing them off hand because you dont like them achieves nothing.

            I do agree that it becomes largely irrelevant once you categorise, it's oppression categories all the way down. From my experience there are three categories that do make a big difference: your gender, your race and your social class.

            [–]stop_the_broats 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

            What about disability? That has huge implications in your success in life, and is very stigmatising.

            What about English skills? That may be tied to race, but it is its own issue.

            What about old age? Like I mentioned, hugely stigmatising. Old people have more to fear walking alone at night than women do.

            Also, I agree that there's a reason the college level cultural analysis exists. I think it's important to discuss and builds our understanding of the world, but taking those first year sociology ideas and trying to apply them to every facet of life in the real world is as overly simplistic as taking first year economics and trying to apply that universally.

            [–]meeeow 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            You're falling into your own trap and creating a slippery slope argument where needent be one. You're also being overly aggressive when you needent be either, 1st year sociology? C'mon you know nothing about me.

            [–]veninvillifishy -5ポイント-4ポイント  (8子コメント)

            You're missing the point then.

            If there is any group currently existing with more resources and publicity and time spent in blind obsession over their wellbeing, it is women -- especially poor single mothers.

            [–]stop_the_broats 3ポイント4ポイント  (7子コメント)

            time, resources, and publicity

            poor single mother

            poor = well resourced?

            single mother = too much free time?

            [–]veninvillifishy 3ポイント4ポイント  (6子コメント)

            That is not what I said.

            I said those things were being redirected for the sake of that group. And they are. Where are the shelters for single men? The sexual assault hotlines for men? The sexual harassment awareness posters for men? The news stories begging for tears for single fathers?

            There aren't any.

            [–]meeeow 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

            It's a little unfair to expect groups focused on women to create these spaces. I hear this complaint often but female crisis centres and hotlines exist Because ofthere was a huge amount of demand for the and women created them. I'm not staying there isn't a demand from the male side, I think the innstering question here is why are no men dealing with this issue? To point the finger at the women's movement who battled for decades to get these resource strikes me as a misguided blame game.

            I.e. a group requested my university created a male safe space for victims of rape and sexsexu assault like women have access too. They were given it, no Ii issues.

            [–]veninvillifishy 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

            It's a little unfair to expect groups focused on women to create these spaces.

            You don't understand. Why do those groups exist at all?! The very fact that there are groups focused exclusively on the plight of women -- while there remain none for anyone else, namely, men -- is the very demonstration of the point.

            Males can be victims too. But only women are allowed to be victims in public or to seek / receive aid or to talk about it. The very fact that no one is talking about male victims is exactly the point I'm making.

            I.e. a group requested my university created a male safe space for victims of rape and sexsexu assault like women have access too. They were given it, no Ii issues.

            I'm not holding my breath until such organizations reach parity with the number and sanctity of no-boys-allowed clubs.

            [–]pmethenys_gay_lover 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

            "Left wing?!?!?" You have to be shitting me. Fox News is the biggest victim culture ever created.

            [–]jimmyharbrah 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

            For sure. Everything--literally everything--is about "traditional" or "christian" values "under attack".

            [–]eaturbrainz 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Leftist here. We're not focused on microaggressions. We're focused on seizing the means of production. Tumblr != the Left. Wannabe-edgy college students != the Left.

            [–]itisnotatumah 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            I tend to agree that microaggression is a rabbit hole that is just too deep. It is something that, I think, should remain the province of informal social cues and dialog. Trying to formalize and/or punish microaggressions will lead to an ever increasing victimhood war of attrition where no one wants to be the majority left standing, everyone's pissed, and nothing got solved because people are terrified to speak to each other.

            [–]graphictruth -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

            And it will be - but that's not really a problem. Getting people to think about things like this at all, even with a disingenuous goal, is a big win. It's a good, solid, new word that makes a fuzzy concept concrete. And yeah, that means people get to play with it. Even Conservatives.

            [–]KaliYugaz 24ポイント25ポイント  (5子コメント)

            And it will be - but that's not really a problem.

            Well personally I think it is a problem because it serves as a massive distraction from taking on the actual systemic causes of marginalization and oppression.

            Instead of changing the way we structure employment and home life to reconcile womens' pregnancies and early childcare with their career productivity (and thus closing the gross gender wage gap and winning some rights for workers at the same time), we get drawn into stupid lawsuits about gendered workplace feuds.

            Instead of an organized movement amongst blacks to end the War on Drugs and the mass incarceration and getting investment into inner cities, we get young people without an ounce of practical sense wasting their rage on internet rants and leaderless, impotent Twitter hashtag mobs.

            The 21st century Left is too inwards looking, too balkanized, too addicted to the Internet, and doesn't pose even a remote threat to the powers that be.

            [–]crusoe 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

            People are still gonna flub because they can't know everything about everyone.

            In the old days this was called a faux paux and considered gauche.

            So weird its now wrapped in all this meta analysis.

            [–]StabbyPants 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

            this is what happens when even rebellion happens in prescribed ways. 3rd wave feminism is, ironically, a tool of control: you funnel all the outrage and energy for change into approved targets, while avoiding a chance at actual progress. so, as you say, we get whinging about trifles instead of pushing the employment model to be more like austria, or that BLM idiot being famous instead of continuing the debate on why cops are so eager to shoot dark people.

            [–]jpowerj 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            You just put so many of my nebulous thoughts into words. Thank you.

            [–]eaturbrainz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The 21st century Left is too inwards looking, too balkanized, too addicted to the Internet, and doesn't pose even a remote threat to the powers that be.

            And that is why Bernie Sanders is leading in the early primary states?

            [–]graphictruth -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            If I had a nickel for every person on the left who greeted a minor sign of progress as a A Distraction From The Cause....

            I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I understand your frustration with people Who Are Doing Things Wrong - but unless you want to do that thing yourself, tend to your own teaspoons. :)

            [–]CydeWeys 29ポイント30ポイント  (0子コメント)

            It's also ripe for exploitation by people of privilege who really, really just don't give a shit about any of it. We're creating a culture in which more reasonable, nuanced people are caused to feel lots of guilt and anguish over small slights they may not even be aware they're committing, and then you have Donald Trump steamroll through, completely immune to it all, and he's bulletproof. The message there is to not even try to accommodate the requests in any way because it's a completely losing proposition, but rather, to reject it all.

            After about the fifth time or so that someone is lectured at for being a bad "ally", for being a bad "feminist", yadda yadda, they start thinking to themselves, why am I even subjecting myself to this? Why am I even bothering to try to reason or come to terms with this people? The Donald Trumps of the world came to that conclusion a long time ago.

            [–]paul_miner 66ポイント67ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Despite the juvenile title

            You mean a microaggression against teenagers.

            [–]atomfullerene 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Agreed--I mean dignity culture isn't perfect (it probably means disliked groups have to put up with more crap than they ought to, since a larger proportion of dealing with it falls on their shoulders) but it's got some big advantages in that it encourages social friction to damp down instead of escalate. That's really important when you have diverse groups around. The problem with "victim culture" is the same as with "Honor culture" in that it encourages escalation and mutual recrimination over social frictions. That's problematic.

            Why can't we all just get along, eh?

            [–]xavierdc 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            And in the process, they make impossible demands on members of the ever-shrinking majority: to know everything about every possible victim group

            That part is spot on.

            [–]TheCodexx 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Even that assumes that these "microaggressions" are earned in some way. That they're actually "ignorant". People are going to have different views on what is or isn't acceptable to say. Simple as that. One person being upset or offended by something doesn't have to be anything more than that: one person taking issue with another.

            [–]crusoe 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

            How long til Christians claim microaggressions?

            [–]karma_morghulis 15ポイント16ポイント  (3子コメント)

            They have been for decades, just not with that specific word.

            As part of the GOP's southern strategy after the civil rights act, there has been a cult of persecution in the religious right that has manifested itself in month-long propaganda about the War on Christmas and the recent "Restoring Religious Freedom" laws being photocopied by political operatives and handed to state legislators.

            It's the exact same victimhood act with big money backing it, and the probability of "microaggression" not having been already appropriated by someone performing it is zero.

            [–]wearetheone321 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

            As part of the GOP's southern strategy after the civil rights act. . .

            I'm confused. Are you saying the "civil rights act" as a reference to a time period (like the year, etc) or are you saying dsomething like "as a result of/due to the CRA passing...the GOP did xyz"?

            [–]karma_morghulis 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

            After the Civil Rights Acts, the GOP enacted a long term strategy to use the racism and various other craziness of the south as a wedge to break, and eventually destroy, the historically Democrat "Solid South" that had persisted since before the Civil War. This was a deliberate move by Nixon and what would become his administration.

            Unfortunately this moved the southern crazies from being a minor element of a coalition party that contained them to driving a major change in the significantly more unified Republican platform.

            [–]atomfullerene 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

            About -30 years?

            [–]Halfawake 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Looking at the context of microagressions leads into an exploration of your whole philosophy of life.

            The author describes an analysis of what is wrong, of problems, and of conflict, and finds that the further she looks into these things, the more she finds and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight. All she can end with is an injunction, "don't be a jerk". In the end, that isn't a way to live. It's a thing not to do.

            This brings me back to the philosophy of life thing that I mentioned earlier. Whatever we put our attention and energy into tends to grow, expand, and become more detailed. Looking for microagressions expands awareness of these unpleasant moments to fill more and more of your waking awareness, which is after all limited.

            I think the real solution to this is to put your thoughts and effort into looking for the good in people, and trying to do good or show love to fellow people. "Show love to people" is really completely different than "don't be a jerk" even though they're compatible. If your goal is to show love, it's your awareness of good moments and the good in people that expands to fill the time you have. Trying not to be a jerk leaves your attention centered on negative shit.

            It's not a subtle difference. Having mental habits that train you to bring people together (though of course you'll face adversity) points your whole life in an entirely different direction than habits that look for divisions and problems.

            [–]rangda 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

            What a great article. It seems very fair and understanding of all sides.

            "victim status is actively sought in the new culture, because victimhood is a prerequisite for getting redress."

            This is a really excellent statement. It helps explain why dismissing people as indulging their own "victim complex" is an insanely simplistic view.

            [–]AceyJuan 29ポイント30ポイント  (11子コメント)

            On the other hand, in a diverse group, the other thing you have to say about microaggressions is that they are unavoidable. And that a culture that tries to avoid them is setting up to tear itself apart.

            The most important truth in the article. Since microaggressions are utterly unavoidable, the only possible solution is for people to grow a normal thickness skin and stop seeking victimhood. These are the most pathetic victims in all of history and the only rational response is to blacklist them.

            [–]MoopleDoople 5ポイント6ポイント  (10子コメント)

            I would think that the accused simply admitting they were slightly ignorant, then redacting or editing their statement would be a completely viable solution.

            [–]atomfullerene 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The problem is that in a diverse culture it's impossible to edit many statements to avoid giving microaggression to somebody, and you can't just avoid a topic because that itself may be seen as a microaggression.

            You can decide that microaggressions only matter if they are towards certain groups, but that's problematic and anyway in a diverse culture not everyone is going to agree on who those groups are.

            It's got to be a give and take...it's on both speaker and receiver to be reasonable, more on one or the other depending on the circumstance.

            [–]TheLobotomizer 21ポイント22ポイント  (3子コメント)

            Unfortunately, that allows for professional victims to flourish. And in the worst case this can be used to censor speech.

            [–]MoopleDoople 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Can you elaborate? These sound like canned responses to a different argument and I'd rather give you the benefit of the doubt, because it seems to me that people ought to be censoring themselves for racist/ignorant behavior out of decency. And, I really don't understand how victims could flourish, it isn't like the accused is under an obligation to publicly cite who convinced them to change their mind. Obviously, if it is an unjust claim, it's a different story.

            [–]ba1018 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

            I would think that the accused simply admitting they were slightly ignorant, then redacting or editing their statement would be a completely viable solution.

            The question is where the line is and who draws it. At what point is something I say no longer worthy of standing on its own? When do I need to change it? When one person complains? When 10 do? When an entire, obscure minority finds it obliquely insulting because they are reading into nonexistent intentions/attitudes of mine?

            A blanket policy of retract and redact is not only spineless, it teaches anyone who has the slightest problem with anything that complaining over an exaggerated grievance will get them what they want.

            [–]MoopleDoople 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

            I'm not suggesting that this should be the only solution, the poster I responded to claimed that the ONLY solution was to blacklist people if they made loud concerns that they were offended, and I gave a viable alternative to be used in appropriate cases. A rigid, blanket policy is obviously ignorant and is exactly what is getting universities into trouble, where they often become more offensive than the things they are trying to avoid. It's something I often see missing in this debate- that there are legitimate cases where the accused are doubling down on their truly ignorant statements, rather than be seen with egg on their face.

            [–]woeskies 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

            The problem is that micro aggressions can occur from circumstance. For example I like it to ask everyone where they are from, and I have encountered situations of having to press where their family is from. Is it a micro aggression to ask a Dutch Turkish person where their family is from if I speak Turkish? Because while the person did not care I got torn a new asshole by some other folks. The problem with micro aggressions is assuming ignorance, and that it is specific to that person

            [–]joe_navark 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

            This only works if the sort of passive-aggressive victimhood described in the article doesn't exist

            [–]MoopleDoople 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The other solution only works if that sort of unwarranted passive-aggressive victimhood was the ONLY way victimhood existed.

            [–]IStillSurf 19ポイント20ポイント  (6子コメント)

            I find it really bizarre that she describes institutionalized victims conditioned to remain silent in the face of attacks due to an ineffective justice system as the "Dignity Society" and the people who stand up for themselves and expect to be heard and taken seriously as the "Victim-hood Society".

            [–]atomfullerene 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

            I'd say you are half-right...but only half right.

            The problem is that you are making two assumptions here: first, that "dignity society" and "victim-hood society" apply only to institutionally marginalized groups, and second, that the problems that individuals are responding to are always legitimate.

            It's absolutely true that these terms can be applied to how institutionally oppressed groups respond to legitimate greivances. But what the article is talking about here is a society-wide shift in the way that all groups respond to all kinds of grievances.

            In fact, the latest well-known example of an obvious 'victim-hood society" style response I can think of is that clerk in Kentucky who went to jail over issuing gay marriage licences. A dignity-society clerk would have either followed the law or would have simply quit without raising a fuss. Instead the clerk made herself out to be a victim of religious oppression and draw in support and sympathy from other like-minded individuals. That's a classic "victimhood" response...define yourself as oppressed, draw in support from a wider audience to influence your oppressor give in to your demands.

            I think either approach has its benefits and negatives (heck, I could probably even find something good to say about honor society if I thought hard enough) but the point is that if society shifts in favor of one strategy or the other it won't only be the groups and causes you approve of using those tactics, it will be everybody.

            [–]daturkel 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

            These terms are from the cited study. She didn't come up with them.

            [–]superkamiokande 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

            The west has a long tradition of considering it dignified to accept your suffering, and undignified to do otherwise. From a cultural standpoint, the categorization makes sense.

            [–]rangda 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            'Grin and bear it." "Take the high road", etc. That whole "Dignity in Suffering" thing has a very Pious, Catholic air about it.

            [–]Saricorn 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

            Thanks for putting into words my main complaint with this article/mindset. Do people really believe society was a better place when we just swept all of this under the rug?

            [–]RedAero 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            No, but perhaps there's a middle ground to be had?

            [–]AceyJuan 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

            The University of California has published example Microaggressions here as training material on how to recognize Microaggressions. I encourage everyone to read the list to better understand the discussion.

            [–]CatnipFarmer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            That idiocy makes me strive to commit as many microaggressions as possible in my daily life.

            [–]3422g[S] 19ポイント20ポイント  (2子コメント)

            The authors talks about how we have changed from an "honor society" to a "victim-hood society". This new found praise for over-sensitivity is getting out of hand, people should learn to toughen-up a little more.

            [–]Cronus6 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

            We've done this shit to ourselves.

            When I was a kid back in the early-mid 70's I played pop warner football where we not only kept score (I know right?!) but had playoffs and championships. I still have a 2nd place trophy around here somewhere for when we lost the championship game.

            Only 1st-3rd got trophies. (I think 3rd got a plaque actually...) and those 3 teams went to a swanky ass banquet!

            The rest of the teams got a pat on the head and "better luck next season".

            We learned how to lose and how to win. We did a whole lot of losing too...

            No way something like this would fly today. Parents started whining that little Jimmy's "feelings" were hurt.

            It happens in schools too. Try reading a report card from 3rd grade. All sorts of weird codes a shit. the 'A-F' thing has disappeared there. You can't tell a kid they suck at math! Oh no, their "feelings"!

            So now everyone thinks they should be praised for being mediocre. When your boss rips you a new asshole you suddenly are a victim, rather than realizing you are probably just doing a shitty job.

            There's winners and losers in life. Some people are better than others!

            [–]leetdood_shadowban 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Parents started whining that little Jimmy's "feelings" were hurt.

            You've effectively pointed out the problem. Little Jimmy's feelings were hurt but that's normal for little Jimmy. The problem is little Jimmy's parents sucked his dick and told him no little jimmy you're the best!!!! You can be president of the united states of america if you want!!! Fuck anybody who tells you otherwise!

            These awards, codes, grades, whatever, they're not the problem. The problem is the parents who constantly inflate the ego of their kids and then try to bring the school down when you expect their kid to behave.

            [–]i_start_fires -4ポイント-3ポイント  (3子コメント)

            How dare they use the term "grown ups" and implying that I'm not as mature as them! That's a micro-agression and I'm being triggered! /s

            [–]revisionist 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

            What a stupid comment, it's pretty pathetic that the conversation about this topic has devolved into basically making up stuff that other people say.

            [–]itsbitsbits 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

            GOT EM

            oh you straight TOLD the truth, no holding back. Damn it must feel good to put that sarcastic asshole in their place. Pathetic is exactly the word I was thinking when I read I_start_fires' filth. UGH, thank you for laying down the law, dick.

            [–]anarchistica 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            r/2edgy4me

            [–]rottyrantsail 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Just frustrating is all. It happens all the time i just never complained before.

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)