If I had been in your shoes, I probably would have not used the term “microagression”. I just would have let him know that I am tired of hearing people badmouthing girls
“Microaggression” has the same problem as “privilege”, IMHO. The word makes sense to people who are familiar with the discourse. But to everyone else, it sounds like yet another overwrought PC term invented by the offenderati.
For the same reason, I rarely say something offends me. I say I disagree with it or that it troubles me.
I’d argue that, like privilege, it’s a term that only works with people who are on board with the concept. Shodan is right about what the term sounds like it means–a small amount of aggression, as if he was intending to be slightly offensive.
I really wish the people coming up with these words would have thought about the implications to those not familiar with it. Just like “privilege” implies something that I shouldn’t have if I haven’t earned it, when it in fact refers to something everyone should have.
Reminds me of something else I experienced in grad school. I had just given my very first presentation, and a professor came up to me afterwards and said “I can tell your parents really value education.” It was a compliment I can’t imagine her giving a white person.
It is like you think you’re all on the same level, then something shows you you’re not and everyone else sees you way differently. Digging into usually just gets uglier.
My youngest is adopted from China. My wife and I (and our three older, biological, children) are not of Asian descent. On a beach on vacation in Florida when my daughter was two or three a woman asked me “Where is she from?” Now I knew that she was assuming the adoption and asking about her country of origin; my playing dumb and stating our home town was in fact a (passive-) micro-aggression of sorts on my part … which made this woman, who as turns out was asking because her daughter and son-in-law were on a wait list for adoption, feel awful, when she in fact meant no harm.
monstro, that professor’s comment clearly revealed a stereotype she had playing inside her head that she very likely was not consciously aware of. Seeing evidence of those negative stereotypes and biases … constantly … well you are clear about how shitty it is. At the same time until there is enough other than the stereotype experienced by the people who hold them they will experience the stutter step moment of the dissonance between what actually is and what there internal tape states. The argument FOR the social warriors’ side is that they raise awareness enough that some will catch themselves in process of that stutter step moment and edit themselves before they let the stupid out. We cannot help having the stupid inside of us; we can learn to stop ourselves before sharing our stupid though.
A friend of mine uses, “Nope, rented him for the day.” as his stock response when he’s out with his son. (My friend is a white dude, his wife is Japanese, and his son looks, to most Americans, “Asian”.)
The difference is that everybody on planet earth has to deal with jerk behavior from time to time. However, only the coalition of the oppressed can suffer a microagression. I have a french name that is rather unique and have spent my whole life telling people how to pronounce and spell it. However, people mispronouncing my name is not a microagression like it would be if I were an Indian.
Labeling behavior as a microaggression serves two purposes on campus. First it puts people on the defensive. It means anyone acting or talking a way you disapprove of is a sexist or racist. Since having either label is a career killer in academia then everyone around you must conform to what you think is politically correct. It gives the people who brandish it power and is so subjective everyone must be afraid at all times.
Secondly, it is an excuse. Affirmative action takes unqualified minorities and puts them on campus with people whose academic background and abilities are far more advanced and expects everyone to succeed at the same level. This causes the minorities who do not have the academic background as every one else on campus to fall behind. Since acknowledging this is forbidden, another reason must be found that the minorities have fallen behind academically. Thus microagressions have been created as the reason that the minorities are not doing as well as affirmative action proponents wanted. Thus it protects the self esteem of the minorities and those created the problem by shifting the responsibilities for their failures to other people.
I don’t like the term because its (apparent) meaning is not intuitive. Non-black people asking to touch black peoples’ hair? Yeah, that seems to fit. A form that doesn’t have an appropriate option for your race/gender/whatever? That’s not “aggression”, micro- or otherwise. It’s just bureaucratic laziness. As an ethnically-Indian person it never ceases to feel weird when I check the “Asian or Pacific Islander” box, but calling it “aggression” just waters down actual racism.
Of course, being from the UK I never have trouble with the “where are you really from?” question. I just say England and watch their heads explode. Of course, then they ask whether I know their friends Sally and Ed from Manchester.
It depends what behaviour you’re referring to. “Aggression” is not defined by what you have to deal with that you don’t enjoy, or else my going bald is a microaggression against me. It’s defined by what someone attempts to do to you (and I’d argue this applies even if the person does so out of ignorance; being ignorant isn’t a good excuse for being a jerk.) Aggression is, by definition, the deliberate infliction of physical or emotional damage. If someone honestly does not know how to pronounce your name and politely asks how to do so, that does not constitute “aggression.” If they say “you have a weird name,” that does.
I dislike the term, too, but mainly because it blurs the line between being a jerk and being ignorant. Your example is of someone being a jerk. And being unable to pronounce someone’s name? Holy mountain out of a mole hill. We’re a country of immigrants, and I can’t count the number of times I’ve come across a name I can’t figure out how to pronounce. In fact, it seems that these days, parents often go out of their way to make sure their precious snowflakes have names people won’t be able to pronounce without asking.
Until reading this thread, every time I’ve seen someone complain of microaggressions, it’s been ridiculous situations like pregnancy warnings on boxes or a man having the nerve to just… be alive nearby. It’s been interesting and educational to hear from people with complaints that make sense.
Here’s another warm and fuzzy observation that I think is a positive sign of the time.
If the year was 2005 instead of 2015, it unlikely we would be having a relatively calm and open-minded conversation about microaggressions on the SDMB. Knee jerk defensiveness and denial about these things was* much more common *ten years ago. monstro’s anecdote about being complimented by a racially biased professor? That would have immediately elicited an attack on her perception and rationality by a slew of posters hellbent on portraying her as a self-victimizing race-baiter. And it wouldn’t just be “bot” posters either.
At least now, because we’re so used to talking about things like this, internet conversations are less tense and acrimonious. It is not a given they will always descend into fights and character assassinations. While it used to be normal for the minority speaking on their bad experiences to be grilled like someone on the witness stand, I’ve noticed more of an attempt to actually listen and talk without judgement. Even when perspectives disagree (like whether screwing up someone’s name truly represents a microaggression), it’s not disrespectful disagreement.
I distinctly remember things being different years ago. That’s a sign of progress to me.
Of course, the thread is still young and there’s still plenty of time for the fights to break out.
