I think you can understand it. It is usually the Left that prescribes very specific language adamantly. That ranges from everything from the he/she pronouns to objection to the term ‘illegal alien’ and much more. The people that invented this term did it for specific reasons and they were not good ones. I know you aren’t part of the Far Left yourself but I think it is only fair when other groups object to a hostile and divisive term that is also disingenuous.
I think the point is that pretty much anyone under the age or 50, and many over the age of 50, realize we are living in a “modern” world in a cultural sense. It really doesn’t take a lot to educate yourself on these issues. In fact, they have become quite prevalent. 10 years ago or 20 years ago you could say, “well, I just didn’t know any better.” Well, today most people do know better. Or at least they are starting too.
And what is so wrong with using gender neutral pronouns? Is it really that big a deal to say undocumented worker instead of illegal alien? I mean really, is it that bad???
I don’t care about the pronouns. ‘Undocumented worker’ isn’t good because it isn’t accurate (most of them have plenty of documents of some sort) but that is for a different thread. The point was that the people that support this theory claim to be genuinely surprised when people to object to an inaccurate term when that is a top priority for the Left when it comes to terms that are even more innocuous. I am an Independent and call out bullshit when I see it from both extremes. I am calling a foul on this one because the dishonest terminology is so blatant that it distracts from the larger conversation.
nm
So given the choice between using incredibly precise language that also happens to be derogatory (illegal alien) and using slightly less precise language (undocumented worker) but is not derogatory, you go for precision???
BTW- I don’t think simply having documents is what undocumented worker entails
An undocumented worker is an individual that is working off the payroll OR an individual that has not furnished to their employer the necessary identification to verify their legal status or authorization to work.
I told you explicitly that was just an example and I am offended that you didn’t listen to my direct suggestion that you take this topic to another thread if you want to discuss it further. Please stop violating basic board courtesy and committing micro-aggressions when they are not welcome or warranted.
From what I’ve seen, HR lives for reports of “I told him to stop, but he didn’t.” Then the rest of us get to watch a video! 
But that’s really a last resort, along with telling his wife, calling the cops, or provocatively testing the sharpness of a knife, and it’s unlikely to get that far. What we are talking about are micro-aggressions, and as can be seen in this thread, lots of folks, black, white, male, female, or any other variation of the human condition, can be utterly clueless, especially if they see their behavior as normal, or even laudable, like holding a door for someone. The “victim” in some of these cases cannot see the “aggressor”'s mind, does not know he holds the door for everybody or calls everybody “sir” or “ma’am.”
You (the general you) might hold others to your own standards of intelligence, self-awareness, and self-control, and assume that any deviation is purposeful. It’s hard to remember that most people are not real quick on the uptake and take forever to retrain, but they are basically nice, interested in getting along, and not being being purposely obtuse, being genuinely obtuse. As a Classic American Liberal I believe that there are no problems that cannot be solved if people talk about them long enough.*
But what I want to get across is that, if you have a problem with someone’s annoying behavior, TELL HIM! Don’t hold it in, but remember they are clueless idiots so take a gentle approach. I know it might stick in ones craw after a lifetime of pinpricks, but hold your temper, be reasonable, and try to make them think it’s their idea that they shouldn’t do this anymore. You are going for the “I think what you are saying is” reaction, where they repeat back your words but as their own. This might require some planning on your part, but you’ll be ready the next time it happens. And it’s going to happen.
-
- Watch as DSeid, monstro, You With the Face, etc work this out the Classic American Liberal way in this thread. Yes, they’re talking past each other endlessly and tediously at this point, and no, I didn’t say it always works, but if all you have is a hammer…
- Watch as DSeid, monstro, You With the Face, etc work this out the Classic American Liberal way in this thread. Yes, they’re talking past each other endlessly and tediously at this point, and no, I didn’t say it always works, but if all you have is a hammer…
Oh, and I apologize for my lecturing tone in my last post. Before you take it personally, remember that I’m like that with everybody.
People assume they are nice and so react defensively if you point out to them–gently or otherwise–when they aren’t. You can be patient. You can point out unintentional rudeness with humor and kindness. And people will still argue with you and give you a headache.
Sure, people should be honest with their feelings. But people are rarely receptive to honesty. A lot of times it just isn’t worth it to get in it with someone.
The next time someone asks me where I’m really from, I’m going to say “I’m an American. I’m from America. That’s where I am really from.” That will be how I will show them how I feel about that question. If they feel frustrated by that response, well, as bump said that’s their choice to make.
You seem to be confusing microaggressions with individual pet peeves or something. I’m sure there are people out there throwing the term around pretty casually, but a microaggression isn’t simply anything one happens to dislike. It’s a relatively subtle, often unconscious or unintended insult or discrimination rooted in stereotypes about a group. While it may be impossible to completely avoid ever inadvertently offending anyone in any way, one doesn’t need to be psychic to be aware of stereotypes or realize that people generally do not like being stereotyped.
Just yesterday I was a bit annoyed when the TSA agent directing me through the body scanner addressed me as “sweetie”, but somehow I don’t think it would have gone well for me if I’d stopped to explain to him that I do not like it when strange men address me with diminutive endearments. Even had I been certain that speaking up wasn’t going to get me pulled aside for special screening, I barely had time to make it to my gate as it was.
That’s where passive-aggression comes in handy.
So matter-of-fact. So indignant. But indignation can be fun. Can’t play with your boss like that, but some idiot stranger? He’s saying, “Please troll me,” so take it up a notch!
(sigh) I can’t let out my real, trollish self here. I can only tell how fun it is IRL. Here, I have to be honest and sincere, limiting myself to insincerity fig-leafed by a wink.
I have a few questions for you then:
-
Why is it labeled an aggression in the first place if it really isn’t one?
-
Can it ever be a useful construct? (i.e. if you are hosting a lunch for a bunch of little old white ladies can you assume that they are more likely to prefer certain foods and activities unless explicitly told otherwise.)
-
Why does the exceptional individual get the benefit of the doubt and not the person trying honestly to accommodate them?
I am seeing this as a game you cannot win by design if you aren’t a minority and I am not willing to play a game like that.
I am a senior consultant for mega-corps. We let people bitch in general about what they feel for a few minutes and then cut them off. General feelings with no clear goals or action points aren’t workable. You have to break it down into actionable steps. What are those in this case at a detailed level? I am not interested in hearing people complain about something that can never be fixed. However, if it can, please outline in detail how that could happen. I am not a dumb person and all I have really heard so far is random bitching that cannot be fixed.
I don’t think you do, actually. That is, they’re not really questions and they’re not really for me.
It’s funny you should say that, because I’m not interested in the game you’re playing here.
There is no game. I am completely sincere. They were all very honest questions. I would be happy if anyone could answer them in any coherent and actionable way that could improve the world.
I don’t know much about this area, and haven’t read the whole thread, but this line of argument seems quite odd to me:
Because the dude who coined the theory in 1970 thought that the victims view this conduct as an aggression, an unwarranted entry into their safe mental space. Lots of English words work this way. “Insult” is similar. It is often viewed from the perspective of the aggrieved. So too “battery”. Or “nuisance.”
It may well be bad marketing, or a silly concept, or whatever. But there’s nothing at all out of the ordinary in labeling a negligent sleight or injury based on the victim’s perspective.
Because right there it both points an accusatory finger and comes to a verdict, as you continue to do, of minimally “negligence” against a “victim.”
Which creates the circumstance that shuts down actual dialogue.
It fosters a circumstance in which multiple “somes” come off as demanding that everyone else, of every other cultural group within our highly pluralistic society including other “somes”, be exquisitely mindful of how what they themselves think of as benign and innocent actions and speech (which is the sort of speech and actions we are talking about here) is taken by them, while claiming the ground that they need show no mindfulness about offense to others, no need to try to listen and understand the experience of others.
You want to dismiss that impact as merely “bad marketing”? Well maybe that is what it is but if the goal is to actually have a positive impact on behaviors then that bad marketing is counterproductive.
As I continue to do? WTF? My post explained why microaggression was named that way, and why it’s not semantically odd. You’ve decided to make me some kind of straw man to try to beat up.
I didn’t dismiss anything. Seriously, you’re reading a ton into my post that just isn’t there. Very strange.
This is a game some people like to play. Trying to explain things to them is, unfortunately, a waste of time.
I agree that this is a waste of time.
If you, RP do not understand why stating a priori that there is “negligence” and a “victim” poisons the well … if you Lamia (and monstro) want to respond to others with honest different takes on issues with accusations of playing “games”, instead of attempting to discuss in good faith … yes discussion is shut down and it is a waste of effort to try.
What 'evs. There is a reason that this very liberally biased board is (before reading or after reading the thread, either way) is responding to the poll the way it does … and why most who are thinking that way are not bothering to speak up.