Liberalism Ran Amuck: The Microaggression Theory

[I-10east]

^^^I NEVER said that professor was a victim, you once again put words into my mouth. You are the king of putting words in someone's mouth, like alphabet soup.

[I-10east]

The Microaggression Theory has it's critics (I know, all of them are racist right?) so don't go acting like it's some gospel that's blasphemous to criticize. 

[I-10east]

I 10, can you, in your own words, explain Microaggression theory and give a practical example of what its talking about?

Why? I know what it is. Stop the condescending crap.

[Adam White]

^^^Logic will not get in the way of someone taking a comment out of context (claiming a statement is a microaggression) so the KFC thing is valid. Campuses all over America are turned to eggshell walking institutions, in constant fear of offending someone just like the video; If anything, you don't 'get it' Adam.

Just because a person - a student for example - might take something out of context doesn't mean that microaggressions (or whatever you want to call them) aren't real. And it doesn't mean it's not an issue.

Me asking you if you want to go to KFC for lunch isn't a microaggression. Me assuming you want to eat chicken and watermelon because you're black is. That's the issue of context.

As I said before, I only think students should report these sorts of things if they are something the school or its staff are doing. And when it comes to staff, it depends on the situation. When dealing with individuals, the better option is to have a polite word and resolve it that way. That's assuming it's unintentional. Intentionally racist/sexist/whatever behavior probably should be reported.

[Tacachale]

The microagression *theory* isn't particularly political, and it makes a lot of sense. You'd have to be pretty dense to think that microagressions - generally unintentional slights about groups of people that are minor on their own but add up to a denigrating message - aren't real.

However, the fixation on microagressions and the rise of complaints about them is heavily driven by colleges and is driven by liberal thoughtmakers, primarily in the educational sphere. Jonathan Haidt has been writing about this for a while now. He and Greg Lukianoff wrote an interesting piece involving this and related issues in the Atlantic a few months ago, "The Coddling of the American Mind". Here's another piece discussing a new paper on "Microaggression and Moral Cultures".

This said, it does seem that some of the backlash against microagression complains is just as politically motivated on the other side. Critics (unlike Haidt) sometimes use the "political correctness run wild" trump card as a way of dismissing opponents and their arguments. But it doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate gripes about the way microagressions are discussed and handled.

[Adam White]

The microagression *theory* isn't particularly political, and it makes a lot of sense. You'd have to be pretty dense to think that microagressions - generally unintentional slights about groups of people that are minor on their own but add up to a denigrating message - aren't real.

However, the fixation on microagressions and the rise of complaints about them is heavily driven by colleges and is driven by liberal thoughtmakers, primarily in the educational sphere. Jonathan Haidt has been writing about this for a while now. He and Greg Lukianoff wrote an interesting piece involving this and related issues in the Atlantic a few months ago, "The Coddling of the American Mind". Here's another piece discussing a new paper on "Microaggression and Moral Cultures".


This said, it does seem that some of the backlash against microagression complains is just as politically motivated on the other side. Critics (unlike Haidt) sometimes use the "political correctness run wild" trump card as a way of dismissing opponents and their arguments. But it doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate gripes about the way microagressions are discussed and handled.

I agree. I think some small slights are what is going to happen in any society - learning to deal with them and address them (if necessary) in a constructive way is important.

That said, if a university student union had a fried chicken and chitlins meal in honor of MLK day, then it would be worthwhile to complain about it.

This seems to be another hot button issue that is getting way more press than it deserves. At least I've not heard anyone gripe about the evils of "common core" lately.

[Tacachale]

The microagression *theory* isn't particularly political, and it makes a lot of sense. You'd have to be pretty dense to think that microagressions - generally unintentional slights about groups of people that are minor on their own but add up to a denigrating message - aren't real.

However, the fixation on microagressions and the rise of complaints about them is heavily driven by colleges and is driven by liberal thoughtmakers, primarily in the educational sphere. Jonathan Haidt has been writing about this for a while now. He and Greg Lukianoff wrote an interesting piece involving this and related issues in the Atlantic a few months ago, "The Coddling of the American Mind". Here's another piece discussing a new paper on "Microaggression and Moral Cultures".


This said, it does seem that some of the backlash against microagression complains is just as politically motivated on the other side. Critics (unlike Haidt) sometimes use the "political correctness run wild" trump card as a way of dismissing opponents and their arguments. But it doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate gripes about the way microagressions are discussed and handled.

I agree. I think some small slights are what is going to happen in any society - learning to deal with them and address them (if necessary) in a constructive way is important.

That said, if a university student union had a fried chicken and chitlins meal in honor of MLK day, then it would be worthwhile to complain about it.

This seems to be another hot button issue that is getting way more press than it deserves. At least I've not heard anyone gripe about the evils of "common core" lately.

I hardly think that a meal like that on MLK day would be a "micro" aggression. My issue with the whole thing is that it focuses energy that could be devoted to other things on something that's really pretty trivial. Colleges have worked to become about the most open, accepting places for minorities and women in the world, but they still focus on dealing with smaller and smaller offenses on their own campuses when there are much more serious issues elsewhere. The reason certain minority groups are under-represented or under-performing at colleges compared to peers isn't because white people sometimes unintentionally say dumb things there. It's because of structural inequalities in society at large. It's another incentive for people to paint themselves as aggrieved victims, and makes it easier for critics to paint colleges as driven by silly people focused on unreasonable things.

[Adam White]

The microagression *theory* isn't particularly political, and it makes a lot of sense. You'd have to be pretty dense to think that microagressions - generally unintentional slights about groups of people that are minor on their own but add up to a denigrating message - aren't real.

However, the fixation on microagressions and the rise of complaints about them is heavily driven by colleges and is driven by liberal thoughtmakers, primarily in the educational sphere. Jonathan Haidt has been writing about this for a while now. He and Greg Lukianoff wrote an interesting piece involving this and related issues in the Atlantic a few months ago, "The Coddling of the American Mind". Here's another piece discussing a new paper on "Microaggression and Moral Cultures".


This said, it does seem that some of the backlash against microagression complains is just as politically motivated on the other side. Critics (unlike Haidt) sometimes use the "political correctness run wild" trump card as a way of dismissing opponents and their arguments. But it doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate gripes about the way microagressions are discussed and handled.

I agree. I think some small slights are what is going to happen in any society - learning to deal with them and address them (if necessary) in a constructive way is important.

That said, if a university student union had a fried chicken and chitlins meal in honor of MLK day, then it would be worthwhile to complain about it.

This seems to be another hot button issue that is getting way more press than it deserves. At least I've not heard anyone gripe about the evils of "common core" lately.

I hardly think that a meal like that on MLK day would be a "micro" aggression. My issue with the whole thing is that it focuses energy that could be devoted to other things on something that's really pretty trivial. Colleges have worked to become about the most open, accepting places for minorities and women in the world, but they still focus on dealing with smaller and smaller offenses on their own campuses when there are much more serious issues elsewhere. The reason certain minority groups are under-represented or under-performing at colleges compared to peers isn't because white people sometimes unintentionally say dumb things there. It's because of structural inequalities in society at large. It's another incentive for people to paint themselves as aggrieved victims, and makes it easier for critics to paint colleges as driven by silly people focused on unreasonable things.

I don't disagree with anything you said there.

[I-10east]

My favorite on the left Bill Maher killed it again! American liberalism would be alot better if they took some key principles from Bill Maher.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luhSVN5mgNY

[JaxNole]

As a gay Filipino, I've experienced countless microaggressions before I even knew there was a term for it.

"Hey, we're all going home, but you can finish the rest of the work for the team because you're Asian. Don't stay too late."

"You're gay? You don't seem like *those* (more effeminate) gays."

As early as 6th grade, my teacher explained the rubric for my work would be "adjusted" and my workload "balanced" because my grades were outliers and disrupted the grade distribution (diminished the curve for the rest of my classmates).

[I-10east]

This.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10B9Fc8BmR0

[Dog Walker]

"Gee! You're tall for a woman, Asian, Indian, Irish, Micronesian, little person, Mexican" ......  says something about the mind-set of the speaker.  It could be innocent-ignorant or prejudiced/racist/nationalist.

I think a lot of "micro-aggressions" fall into the innocent-ignorant category, but doesn't mean that they don't sting the listener.

I've felt the same when someone in New York told me, "You don't sound like a Southerner."  Did he mean "ignorant hick" or "no recognizable accent"?  Context matters as much as the actual words.

[I-10east]

"Gee! You're tall for a woman, Asian, Indian, Irish, Micronesian, little person, Mexican" ......  says something about the mind-set of the speaker.  It could be innocent-ignorant or prejudiced/racist/nationalist.

I think that most of those 'microaggressions' fall into the innocent-ignorant' category, then a mountain is made out of a molehill afterwards. Louis CK in his stand up act once said 'racism is silent' and that's usually the case, but most (from a certain political persuasion) is so infatuated with the 'outspoken give no 'f**ks'  racist that blurts out hate (of course only white people can be racist in this PC realm, not that I agree).

The most racist people assault or even kill you over your race (it's ignored and looked away by the lamestream media) and it's some of that going on today, not gonna go into detail.  I've been through some verbal racial crap as a black man, big freaking deal!!! I was born in the 70s, I guess that I'm too UN-PC for today's 'walking on eggshells' age.

Switching subjects dramatically, I think that for the most part Islam in America is fine; Over the pond, it's more radicalized. Those liberal policies (because they wanna feel good) with bringing those immigrants to countries over there (Belgium, Germany, France, Sweden etc) and look at the outcome? Civilized nations are being turned into extremist hellholes; Yes Europe, the continent that liberals love so much, and think is so perfect. Thank goodness for the Atlantic Ocean.

[Adam White]

"Gee! You're tall for a woman, Asian, Indian, Irish, Micronesian, little person, Mexican" ......  says something about the mind-set of the speaker.  It could be innocent-ignorant or prejudiced/racist/nationalist.

I think that most of those 'microaggressions' fall into the innocent-ignorant' category, then a mountain is made out of a molehill afterwards. Louis CK in his stand up act once said 'racism is silent' and that's usually the case, but most (from a certain political persuasion) is so infatuated with the 'outspoken give no 'f**ks'  racist that blurts out hate (of course only white people can be racist in this PC realm, not that I agree).

The most racist people assault or even kill you over your race (it's ignored and looked away by the lamestream media) and it's some of that going on today, not gonna go into detail.  I've been through some verbal racial crap as a black man, big freaking deal!!! I was born in the 70s, I guess that I'm too UN-PC for today's 'walking on eggshells' age.

Switching subjects dramatically, I think that for the most part Islam in America is fine; Over the pond, it's more radicalized. Those liberal policies (because they wanna feel good) with bringing those immigrants to countries over there (Belgium, Germany, France, Sweden etc) and look at the outcome? Civilized nations are being turned into extremist hellholes; Yes Europe, the continent that liberals love so much, and think is so perfect. Thank goodness for the Atlantic Ocean.

I wish people would give refugees a break.

Also, it's worth considering that the reason why the Muslim population in the UK is so large is due to its colonial history. The UK wouldn't have so many people of Indian, Pakistani and Bangledeshi descent if it hadn't ruled India for so long. Add to that places like Malaysia and other Commonwealth countries with majority Muslim populations. Refugees only make up a very small proportion of the Muslims in the UK.

I can't vouch for Sweden, but France is in much of the same boat, having owned pretty much the entire Maghreb and parts of sub-Saharan Africa for so long.