Well, from MY point of view setting up official tribunals for something that IF people are doing it, they are doing it unknowingly, and even if knowingly, having no idea of the impact, and with the impact at best being somebody being mildly offended, is a bad fracking idea.
Sometimes “mmkay…this might be kinda bad…mmmkay…try not to do this…mmkay” is more than enough.
What sort of punishment do you have in mind?
I’m saying it’s a term that is too broad to be useful.
Who defines who is privileged and unprivileged? Many people think of themselves as the underdog.
So:
1- Microggreassions don’t exist
2- Even if they do it is your first amendment right to use them
1- IDK what the solution is but we already have direct/indirect censorship of derogatory statements and actions. I don’t think people should go to jail for being racist or sexist but I do think it is appropriate to put enough social pressure on them to stop.
2- So, you admit there are racist/sexist/homophobic elements of society but instead of actually trying to reduce that, you are more concerned with examples of Microaggressions that - you - personally don’y consider racist/sexist/homophobic.
Try again sparky.
What next, you’re gonna ask me about some new version of beer pong that’s set up? My statement is not in favor of or against it, because it’s beneath my notice. College kids do dumb things, it’s part of the college experience. What’s different is the adults who are pretending to be super-upset about this particular dumb thing college kids are doing, but really are using it as a way to fight a rear-guard action in favor of their old-school supremacy.
If you really need me to say it: this system sounds pretty dumb to me, but more harmless than it is dumb. The chittering and hand-waving about it is way dumber and way more malicious.
IDK. I am more concerned with making society a better place than I am with squabbling over labels and getting into a big debate about “where to draw the line”.
Well, from MY point of view setting up official tribunals
for something that IF people are doing it, they are doing it unknowingly, and even if knowingly, having no idea of the impact, and with the impact at best being somebody being mildly offended, is a bad fracking idea.
In other words, “Forget the details, even though they’re where most of the problems are.”
No the details are important. But please don’t pretend that you actually care about making society less sexist/racist/homophobic when all you do is complain about attempts to make it less problematic in that regard.
No as I said, as you stated it I could not see a problem. People are allowed to give out compliments and people are allowed to clutch their purse if they wish.
However as I stated it, the way to tackle the problem is not to bully people to think like you. If I’m honest though if in a working environment if someone did the 1st thing I said (i.e. you are good at X… for a girl") I would probably tell them they shouldn’t say that sort of thing and there would only be a sanction if they ignored what I said and/or it was part of a repeated pattern of behaviour.
In the second instance I wouldn’t take action against someone who clutched their purse because someone who was black approached. This is because, as I said, people are perfectly free to clutch their purse and I do not have sufficient psychic abilities to know why they are doing it and I am should not try to police or second guess people’s private thoughts. Of course if they said they were clutching their purse because someone black was approaching that would be something I would have to come down on straight away, possibly resulting in a sanction. If it became obvious what they were doing either due to repeated patterns of behaviour and/or exaggerated actions I would talk to them to let them know how their actions were coming across.
That said though these are not general standards I would apply outside of work when people are representing themselves rather than an organization as I believe people have the freedom to be twats within reason. That’s not to say people shouldn’t have to live with the consequences of their actions, but the idea that official sanctions should be invoked is chilling.
It’s not just students doing this, although that was the particular example given. And if it were really beneath your notice, you wouldn’t have felt the need for the ad hominem attack against the OP. Nor the straw man characterization of what he wrote.
I think your alarm that we are soon going to be living in a politcally correct police state is a bit exaggerated.
Ok, this bizarre.
You think a woman clutching her purse when a white man gets on an elevator is guilty of a “microaggression”?
As defined in the OP the people guilty of it have to be from a privileged group and those targeted have to be underprivileged?
Are you truly going to insist that white men are “underprivileged”?
Beyond that, do so understand so little about day to day life you can’t understand why women tend to be more concerned for their safety than men?
We do? Although I have to admit that “indirect censorship” sounds like one of those weasel terms to me. Something is either censored or not.
Yeah, that’s what we do now.
No. I’m saying it’s a term that is too broad to be useful. Period. There is no need to paraphrase what I said to make it sound like something different.
I just want all people to be treated with respect and to be treated fairly. And I do realize women have more to be concerned about in regards to violence and crime.
I have never, in my life, heard anyone say “You are a credit to your race.” I’d be surprised if anyone has said it in this country this century, except for satirical/ironic purposes. Perhaps that was common in the 19th century.
And the same could be said for many other things on that handout. Mixed in with the censorship is a vigorous attempt to stamp out Victorian-era phrases and attitudes.
As I said, I’m not completely sure the form isn’t a parody.
People ask me that all the time. I try to answer. I don’t see why anyone would be offended by it.
I didn’t say that at all. I am noticing a pattern here of you paraphrasing quotes here into a caricature of what the view actually expressed. this is not a good way of trying to persuade people to your point of view. But I think you are probably aware that the point of views you have expressed would be considered a little too “out-there” by most people anyway.
Well, what I am aware of is there is a chorus of posters on this board who all consistently reply with a blanket of denial to any topic of Affirmative Action, Microaggressions or Privilege. Surely my use of sarcasm and caricature is no worse than their outright assertion that none of these problems exist.
Except men are significently more likely to be victims of violent crime than women. Way past my bedtime here and I haven’t been able to find a cite for US crime rates but I have found one for Canada, I don’t imagine its significently different.