Microaggressions

Or, Has the World Gone Stark Raving Mad?

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Microaggressions

#481  Postby proudfootz » Jul 18, 2015 12:09 pm

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I don't think you have to belong to a hideously marginalised group either to realise when someone IS being unreasonably sensitive and taking offense where it just isn't called for.

Shutting up and listening does go a long way though and, yeah, shit that totes wouldn't offend you may well have implications for others that it doesn't for you hence it is offensive to them and they're not being unreasonable.



There seems to be a number of people who don't realize (or pretend not to realize) that the 'isms' - sexism, racism, homophobia, etc - are very much alive and well on campus and off. Even people who are not consciously prejudiced can still say and do things which are demeaning and offensive.

Those who are harmed by these attitudes are going to be a little more perceptive to indicators than someone who's not experienced them.

It's an extremely ignorant IMO for someone to write that because they have never personally been aware that people say this kind of shit, that anyone who does testify that it does happen must be deluded or they are a liar. Or that there is some vast Left Wing conspiracy to turn people into self-diagnosed 'victims'. That's just crazy talk.

If anyone was sincerely interested in the scientific basis of microaggressions they would be looking at the academics studying the issues involved, and refrain from taking their cues from columnists looking for the latest in 'faux outrage' fashions.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#482  Postby proudfootz » Jul 18, 2015 12:13 pm

Oldskeptic wrote:

Maybe you should check out the Historical Jesus thread. There's a pretty good circle jerk going on there. You should feel right at home.


Are you upset this thread hasn't turned into an ant-PC circle jerk? :lol:
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#483  Postby proudfootz » Jul 18, 2015 12:29 pm

People who are subjected to prejudice because they don't fit the 'norm' get tired of the bullshit day in and day out, and being treated with suspicion when they push back.

Critical Race Theorist Daniel G. Solórzano visited UC Davis on May 7th to give his talk "Using the Tools of Critical Race Theory and Racial Microaggressions to Examine Everyday Racism" as part of the Distinguished Educational Thinkers and the Critical Consciousness Speaker Series. Dr. Solorzano's talk examined racial microaggresions and engaged the audience in a dialogue about improving the learning environment for the increasingly diverse community.


"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#484  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 18, 2015 12:41 pm

proudfootz wrote:
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I don't think you have to belong to a hideously marginalised group either to realise when someone IS being unreasonably sensitive and taking offense where it just isn't called for.

Shutting up and listening does go a long way though and, yeah, shit that totes wouldn't offend you may well have implications for others that it doesn't for you hence it is offensive to them and they're not being unreasonable.



There seems to be a number of people who don't realize (or pretend not to realize) that the 'isms' - sexism, racism, homophobia, etc - are very much alive and well on campus and off. Even people who are not consciously prejudiced can still say and do things which are demeaning and offensive.

Those who are harmed by these attitudes are going to be a little more perceptive to indicators than someone who's not experienced them.

It's an extremely ignorant IMO for someone to write that because they have never personally been aware that people say this kind of shit, that anyone who does testify that it does happen must be deluded or they are a liar. Or that there is some vast Left Wing conspiracy to turn people into self-diagnosed 'victims'. That's just crazy talk.

If anyone was sincerely interested in the scientific basis of microaggressions they would be looking at the academics studying the issues involved, and refrain from taking their cues from columnists looking for the latest in 'faux outrage' fashions.


Academia... another left wing one world conspiracy!
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#485  Postby proudfootz » Jul 18, 2015 12:48 pm

matthewharrison wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I don't think you have to belong to a hideously marginalised group either to realise when someone IS being unreasonably sensitive and taking offense where it just isn't called for.

Shutting up and listening does go a long way though and, yeah, shit that totes wouldn't offend you may well have implications for others that it doesn't for you hence it is offensive to them and they're not being unreasonable.



There seems to be a number of people who don't realize (or pretend not to realize) that the 'isms' - sexism, racism, homophobia, etc - are very much alive and well on campus and off. Even people who are not consciously prejudiced can still say and do things which are demeaning and offensive.

Those who are harmed by these attitudes are going to be a little more perceptive to indicators than someone who's not experienced them.

It's an extremely ignorant IMO for someone to write that because they have never personally been aware that people say this kind of shit, that anyone who does testify that it does happen must be deluded or they are a liar. Or that there is some vast Left Wing conspiracy to turn people into self-diagnosed 'victims'. That's just crazy talk.

If anyone was sincerely interested in the scientific basis of microaggressions they would be looking at the academics studying the issues involved, and refrain from taking their cues from columnists looking for the latest in 'faux outrage' fashions.


Academia... another left wing one world conspiracy!


Noted social scientist Dr Glenn Beck agrees:

Glenn Beck voiced his outrage over reports that the University of California had supposedly banned phrases such as "America is the land of opportunity" and "America is a melting pot" on the grounds that they are "microaggressions" that could potentially offend others.

In reality, the university had simply held "seminars to make people aware of how their words or actions may be interpreted when used in certain contexts." Nobody was required to attend these seminars and "no one at the University of California is prohibited from making [these sorts of] statements."

But that basic detail was lost on Beck, who decided to react to this phony story like he always does: by warning that it will end with beatings in the street and a bullet to the head.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/b ... ullet-head
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#486  Postby igorfrankensteen » Jul 18, 2015 12:52 pm

I am getting the distinct overall impression, that the thread starter here

a) is posting over-elaborate "arguments" and other peoples' cut and paste political rants, primarily because he wants to pretend this ISN'T entirely political for him, even though it clearly is. Otherwise, it wouldn't be entirely and narrowly focused on Universities.

b) more importantly, refuses to recognize the possibility that ANYONE has the right to try to address the real problems of socially institutionalized human mistreatment of other humans.

Thus the entire thread, seems to be a VERY long and sneaky attempt to claim that prejudiced persecutors and those who ignorantly trample on other people as they rush about in pursuit of their own selfish goals, should NEVER told to stop doing so.

There's nothing MORE political than that, in this subject area.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 67
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#487  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 18, 2015 1:09 pm

proudfootz wrote:
matthewharrison wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Rachel Bronwyn wrote:I don't think you have to belong to a hideously marginalised group either to realise when someone IS being unreasonably sensitive and taking offense where it just isn't called for.

Shutting up and listening does go a long way though and, yeah, shit that totes wouldn't offend you may well have implications for others that it doesn't for you hence it is offensive to them and they're not being unreasonable.



There seems to be a number of people who don't realize (or pretend not to realize) that the 'isms' - sexism, racism, homophobia, etc - are very much alive and well on campus and off. Even people who are not consciously prejudiced can still say and do things which are demeaning and offensive.

Those who are harmed by these attitudes are going to be a little more perceptive to indicators than someone who's not experienced them.

It's an extremely ignorant IMO for someone to write that because they have never personally been aware that people say this kind of shit, that anyone who does testify that it does happen must be deluded or they are a liar. Or that there is some vast Left Wing conspiracy to turn people into self-diagnosed 'victims'. That's just crazy talk.

If anyone was sincerely interested in the scientific basis of microaggressions they would be looking at the academics studying the issues involved, and refrain from taking their cues from columnists looking for the latest in 'faux outrage' fashions.


Academia... another left wing one world conspiracy!


Noted social scientist Dr Glenn Beck agrees:

Glenn Beck voiced his outrage over reports that the University of California had supposedly banned phrases such as "America is the land of opportunity" and "America is a melting pot" on the grounds that they are "microaggressions" that could potentially offend others.

In reality, the university had simply held "seminars to make people aware of how their words or actions may be interpreted when used in certain contexts." Nobody was required to attend these seminars and "no one at the University of California is prohibited from making [these sorts of] statements."

But that basic detail was lost on Beck, who decided to react to this phony story like he always does: by warning that it will end with beatings in the street and a bullet to the head.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/b ... ullet-head


Glen Beck is such an idiot.

He forgot about FEMA camps!
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#488  Postby proudfootz » Jul 18, 2015 10:40 pm

igorfrankensteen wrote:I am getting the distinct overall impression, that the thread starter here

a) is posting over-elaborate "arguments" and other peoples' cut and paste political rants, primarily because he wants to pretend this ISN'T entirely political for him, even though it clearly is. Otherwise, it wouldn't be entirely and narrowly focused on Universities.

b) more importantly, refuses to recognize the possibility that ANYONE has the right to try to address the real problems of socially institutionalized human mistreatment of other humans.

Thus the entire thread, seems to be a VERY long and sneaky attempt to claim that prejudiced persecutors and those who ignorantly trample on other people as they rush about in pursuit of their own selfish goals, should NEVER told to stop doing so.

There's nothing MORE political than that, in this subject area.


I think that prejudice does indeed always come down to a political struggle - privileged people protect their position with all sorts of rules and regulations. Thus social progress will always end up combating unjust laws and the unjust consequences of generation after generation of unjust practices against marginalized people.

Those who benefit from privilege always seem to perceive equality as a personal threat - I think because they derive their self-image from their position in the hierarchy.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#489  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 18, 2015 11:42 pm

That's a good way to put it.

Interestingly, despite holding the general privileged position in society, the majority of people are politically (and therefore largely socially) powerless. So I think your last sentence there holds even stronger.
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#490  Postby proudfootz » Jul 19, 2015 12:00 am

matthewharrison wrote:That's a good way to put it.

Interestingly, despite holding the general privileged position in society, the majority of people are politically (and therefore largely socially) powerless. So I think your last sentence there holds even stronger.


It's true that I enjoy some privileges due to my place in the social hierarchy.

My political power is nearly nil, however. :o
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#491  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 19, 2015 12:25 am

To be clear, I mean the idea of personal political power. The idea that most individuals in political systems are largely powerless to the dictates of an elite minority.

I think it's a bit like a child-abuse/bullying paradigm. An abusive father (or mother) can often lead to the child lashing out at those that they feel they can. When you take most of the feeling of political power from people and they feel powerless, they feel even more threatened by those less powerful than them than they would/should. They need to belittle others to maintain the sense of self empowerment in a system that generally disempowers everyone (other than a small elite) to a degree.
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#492  Postby Briton » Jul 19, 2015 12:03 pm

laklak wrote:I'd add a few to the list.

"Old cisgendered white patriarchial male" - assumes that because I'm white, retired, happy to have a dick, and only stick it in women that I'm unable to understand the issues and problems faced by people who are not exactly like me. Assumes I'm stupid, lack empathy, and exploit my status to the detriment of others.

"Gun Nut" - implies that because I own firearms I am a knuckle-dragging moron with a small penis.

"Libertoonian" - A slur based entirely on the fact that my political philosophy includes a large degree of self-reliance. Assumes I'm a selfish moron who cannot understand 101 level economics and I'm probably a "Gun Nut" (see above) and/or a "Rethuglican" (see below).

"Rethuglican" - Akin to "Libertoonian", this slur assumes I (though I am not and never have been a member of the GOP) am a racist, homophobic, Christian fundamentalist and probably fuck rent boys.

My response to these slurs, as well as most of those in the original article, is "Go fuck yourself". This is not an example of microaggression, BTW, it's more like plain, old-fashioned aggression, something I'm happy to engage in if necessary.


You're confused; let me explain. Calling someone a rethuglican, libertoonian or a gun nut are not examples of micro-aggression either; they are also examples plain old-fashioned aggression in the way 'go fuck yourself' is. A micro-aggression would be more like my patronising opening sentence.
User avatar
Briton
 
Posts: 4022

Country: UK
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#493  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 19, 2015 1:05 pm

aggression
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#494  Postby laklak » Jul 19, 2015 3:13 pm

Hang on, Briton, YOU don't get to tell me what microaggresses against me! That's microaggressive! You're not validating my pain! I think you need to check your privilege, mate.

Hoist on their own micro-petard, Democratic candidate forced to apologize to protesters. Demonstrators took over town hall event in Phoenix, where Democratic candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley were speaking to Netroots Nation (bonus points to whoever figures out their political leanings). The Black Alliance for Just Immigration took over the stage, shouting the usual slogans. At one point O'Malley said "Black lives matter. White lives matter. All lives matter". He was immediately shouted down, of course, and felt it necessary to apologize on The Week In Blackness, a web news site, saying he "meant no disrespect" to the black community.

That was a mistake on my part and I meant no disrespect," O'Malley told the outlet. "I did not understand the tremendous passion, commitment and feeling and depth of feeling that all of us should be attaching to this issue.


Lol.



http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/18/politics/bernie-sanders-netroots-nation-black-lives-matter/index.html
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20878
Age: 67
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#495  Postby proudfootz » Jul 19, 2015 9:49 pm

matthewharrison wrote:aggression


People culling their ideas about what microaggressions are from the likes of Glenn Beck and company are rather like those who attack evolution after reading some shit from the Discovery Institute.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Microaggressions

#496  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 20, 2015 1:05 am

proudfootz wrote:
matthewharrison wrote:aggression


People culling their ideas about what microaggressions are from the likes of Glenn Beck and company are rather like those who attack evolution after reading some shit from the Discovery Institute.


Well, I guess then, that it's a good thing no one on this thread has been quoting Beck.

Beck is wrong that these certain phrases have been officially banned, but anyone arguing that they haven't been effectively banned might not be as mistaken as Beck, but they're still wrong. And what makes them so wrong that they need to be called on it is that many of them are bans on ideas and opinions being expressed.

I find it a matter of concern when certain ideas that are still being debated in the courts and even at the supreme court level are effectively banned on campuses. Whether the US is a land of opportunity or whether anyone that tries hard enough can succeed are matters of opinion and debatable. Or at least they should be debatable, but won't be on campuses if the current administration of the California University system has it's way.

I find it disingenuous for some to keep saying that nothing has been banned because of these voluntary seminars and handouts when tenured professors have faced accusations and investigations because of those seminars and handouts. It's rather convenient to call them tools and not rules, recommendations not restrictions, but that too is disingenuous if not deceitful. Maybe they haven't codified these tools into rules, but that hasn't stopped them from being used to try to silence unwanted discussions. Hell, these microaggression "tools" have even been used to silence discussions and demonstrations trying to bring awareness of microaggressions.

The Brandeis Asian American Students Association was forced to apologize to Asian students for putting up a display of examples of microaggressions aimed at Asian students.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#497  Postby proudfootz » Jul 20, 2015 2:10 am

What I find disingenuous (if not deceitful) is when a document which bans nothing, censors nothing, and censures no one is misrepresented as doing any or all of those things.

Can a good thing be misused? Sure they can - look at guns, cars, medicine, and alcohol.

Does it make any sense to forbid good things because a few douchenozzles abuse them? No.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10981

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#498  Postby matthewharrison » Jul 20, 2015 2:15 am

This ^

It's all faux-outrage, as best as I can tell.
User avatar
matthewharrison
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 376

Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#499  Postby Forty Two » Jul 20, 2015 3:15 pm

matthewharrison wrote:To add...
I've stated a number of times in the thread that I think much of these policies are silly. But as a white hetero male, I try not to state definitively that a minority person shouldn't feel offended by this or that. In some cases I might think "that's patently absurd" (say, for example, 42's example of the idea that someone should/could be offended by someone complimenting them on their English). But without having walked in the shoes of a racial/cultural minority, there might be something I am missing. Basically the privilege argument. You've just got to be careful. Personally think what you want, but when you start openly declaring that person X shouldn't feel offended at this 'because I can't imagine being offended at that', I think people start losing some rationality.


I don't declare what others should and shouldn't feel. I do openly declare what kind of written policies, guidelines or tools the State or a State university should have that impact speech and expression.
Forty Two
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Harcourt Mudd
Posts: 1431

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Microaggressions

#500  Postby Oldskeptic » Jul 21, 2015 6:34 am

proudfootz wrote:What I find disingenuous (if not deceitful) is when a document which bans nothing, censors nothing, and censures no one is misrepresented as doing any or all of those things.


Why continue reciting something that is not true? Do you dispute that professor Rust was made to agree not to come onto the campus of the education department for the remainder of the academic year or face charges? Do you dispute that professor Sander was subjected to ridicule and investigation for writing a criticism of affirmative action? Do you dispute that professor Kipnis was investigated for writing a criticism of Northwester's new sexual conduct rules? Do you dispute that an Asian student organization at Brandeis was made to take down and apologize for a display of examples of microaggressions by other Asians citing microaggression triggering by the display? Vending machines and Sabra brand hummus have come under attack as microaggressive triggers by Middle Eastern students at Harvard and Wesleyan universities.

But of course, there's no banning going on, no censorship or censure because nothing has been codified. It's all completely voluntary, right? Wrong! Recommendations from on high are to be ignored at your own peril.

Can a good thing be misused? Sure they can - look at guns, cars, medicine, and alcohol.


And we as a society try as hard as possible to see that those things are abused as little as possible.

Does it make any sense to forbid good things because a few douchenozzles abuse them? No.


Something of a false analogy here. In the cases of guns, cars, medicine, and alcohol it's individuals doing the abusing not government organizations.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.

Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Oldskeptic
 
Posts: 7395
Age: 64
Male

Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest