Microaggressions

[Siúil a Rúin]

This is a concept that I encountered in a multi-cultural counseling course in which we studied racism on a deep level. It also applies to sexism and all other forms of societal power imbalances. Reasonable people readily reject the overt forms of racism and sexism in which bodily harm and violation occurs at the hands of individuals we readily reject morally. Another dimension to these social issues are the countless incidences of microaggressions. Taken individually these are insignificant and easily dismissed, but the issue is that for the oppressed demographic they occur countless times on a daily basis, so these are like the river that erodes the landscape into the grand canyon. Because these individually lack the catastrophic nature of overt oppression, they are more easily accepted and practiced by ourselves and others we respect. When an individual from an oppressed demographic speaks out against any one microaggression, they are seen as being overly sensitive and fixating on minutia. Microaggression have a cumulative effect that makes it possible for more overt forms of aggression to take place. How should these incidences be approached when encountered in ourselves and others?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression
http://www.microaggressions.com
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/microaggressions-in-everyday-life

 

[Randomnity]

I don't have an answer, but it's an interesting and complicated problem. It's a hard problem because those who are not the targets tend to not see these things happening (both because they're subtle and because they're often not done when there's an audience), and it's hard to believe things without personal experience or concrete evidence. So as a white person (in a fairly racially tolerant area), I'm not aware of the racial microaggressions that no doubt occur. Most men are not aware of microaggressions that many women experience.

It's hard to accept another person's experiences without any independent evidence, and it's tempting to assume it's oversensitivity so we can pretend the world isn't sexist, racist, etc - and sometimes it might be! But I think it's important not to dismiss these experiences automatically, particularly when the same ones are reported over and over by many people, just because we haven't seen it ourselves. Different people are often treated very differently, particularly in private.

 

[Aquarelle]

It's a really interesting topic, and really difficult. No one wants to think of themselves as racist, but the sad reality is that racism is built into the system, and permeates (US) culture. So while the best solution- maybe the only solution- would be for us to point out incidents of microaggression to each other when we see them... it's sticky because accusing someone-- whether it be a stranger, friend, family member-- of racism is a really big deal. I almost want to say that it'd be better if being racist wasn't seen as such a taboo... I mean, of course we want racism to be taboo, but I think we all need to realize that most of us probably engage in some sort of racist behavior, even if it's very subtle, just by nature of acting out our White culture.

(Of course I'm talking about US society, from the perspective of a white person. )

EDIT: Just checked out microaggressions.com and wow, what a cool site!

 

[Rasofy]

Personally, I think people accusing others of racism and/or misogynism for reasons classified as micro reasons is a considerably bigger concern.

 

[Randomnity]

Personally, I think people accusing others of racism and/or misogynism for reasons classified as micro reasons is a considerably bigger concern.

If you actually read the articles about microaggression before blindly reacting to the word, you might avoid illustrating the point of the articles so perfectly. It is pretty amusing to watch, though.

 

[Coriolis]

"Microagressions" seems like just a fancy term for expressions of the subconscious biases all of us have. Our behavior toward everyone is colored by all our past experiences, and everything we have learned and absorbed. Not all of this has to do with stereotypes. We might be uncomfortable around conservatively-dressed, middle-aged white ladies and respond defensively to their polite inquiries because they remind us of our aunts who have been very nosy and judgmental toward us growing up. The remedy is the same however: to view each person as the individual they are, and not an embodiment of some stereotype, or a carbon copy of Aunt Shirley.

At the same time, some people are determined to see bias behind every bush. If they don't get the job, it is because they are black rather than less qualified. If they get a poor grade, it is because the professor doesn't like women students, not because their paper was poorly written. The fact that discrimination like this has happened and continues to happen, does not mean that it always happens, or has happened in a specific case. It seems people in the examples you linked look at the world through the filter of bias, trying to see how every remark, every encounter can be viewed as an example of that bias. This is part conspiracy theory and part victim mentality, and about as rational and productive as either.

Because these remarks and actions are rooted in our subconscious biases, they are like a bad habit. We have internalized them and they are second nature, and as such can be very hard to break. Accusing someone who commits one of bias will therefore produce cognitive dissonance if the conscious perspective of the accused is to value everyone as an individual. Especially since not all incidents labelled as microagressions really do indicate bias, it is better to respond with a neutral question rather than an accusation or criticism (which itself is aggressive). This will reveal whether there was a valid reason for the action, and reduce misunderstandings. If it turns out there was bias, education is a better response than scolding. Most people don't need to be convinced that discrimination is wrong; they just need to be shown how their action or statement really was motivated by race, gender, or some other irrelevant consideration. If it was not, then the "victim" is trying to reveal something that isn't there, which is unlikely to result in a productive encounter.

If you actually read the articles about microaggression before blindly reacting to the word, you might avoid illustrating the point of the articles so perfectly. It is pretty amusing to watch, though.

I read 2 of the 3 articles, and have seen this type of behavior both in myself and others, and still share Rasofy's concern, though perhaps not quite in the way he intended. The responses reported generally seem unproductive and aggressive in themselves, at best falling in the category of "two wrongs don't make a right".

 

[Rasofy]

If you actually read the articles about microaggression before blindly reacting to the word, you might avoid illustrating the point of the articles so perfectly. It is pretty amusing to watch, though.

I read them. You happen to be less smart than you think you are (and that's not because you're a woman).

You're illustrating my point as well, so we have a double irony here.

 

[Randomnity]

The fact that discrimination like this has happened and continues to happen, does not mean that it always happens, or has happened in a specific case.
...
Because these remarks and actions are rooted in our subconscious biases, they are like a bad habit. We have internalized them and they are second nature, and as such can be very hard to break. Accusing someone who commits one of bias will therefore produce cognitive dissonance if the conscious perspective of the accused is to value everyone as an individual. Especially since not all incidents labelled as microagressions really do indicate bias, it is better to respond with a neutral question rather than an accusation or criticism (which itself is aggressive).
...
Most people don't need to be convinced that discrimination is wrong; they just need to be shown how their action or statement really was motivated by race, gender, or some other irrelevant consideration.

Some excellent points. Response is definitely the hardest thing to figure out. I'm not sure there is an ideal response at all - certainly accusing someone of being a sexist/racist is not usually a good idea for situations like these. And yes, it is likely that some people are oversensitive or have a victim complex, and see these microaggressions where none exist. And I agree that most of these actions are done without any conscious racist/sexist intent, which is why they can be uncomfortable to confront.

The problem (described in the articles and illustrated predictably here) arises when people have an emotional reaction to the possibility that they might do some things with sexist and/or racist connotations (knowingly or most likely, unknowingly), and respond with a knee-jerk rejection of the possibility that sexist/racist actions exist on a level less severe than preventing women from voting and hanging black people.

While it can be uncomfortable to think more closely about whether your actions might be hurting other people, it also sucks to be the people hurt by those actions every day. I don't think we should be dismissing other people's experiences without examining the possibility that they are indeed valid, even if it's an unpleasant few minutes of thought for us. That doesn't mean assuming they are 100% valid and objective (no individual experience is) - it just means not assuming they are 100% invalid.

 

[Coriolis]

The problem (described in the articles and illustrated predictably here) arises when people have an emotional reaction to the possibility that they might do some things with sexist and/or racist connotations (knowingly or most likely, unknowingly), and respond with a knee-jerk rejection of the possibility that sexist/racist actions exist on a level less severe than preventing women from voting and hanging black people.

While it can be uncomfortable to think more closely about whether your actions might be hurting other people, it also sucks to be the people hurt by those actions every day. I don't think we should be dismissing other people's experiences without examining the possibility that they are indeed valid, even if it's an unpleasant few minutes of thought for us. That doesn't mean assuming they are 100% valid and objective (no individual experience is) - it just means not assuming they are 100% invalid.

It sucks just as much to be accused of sexism or racism when not only did you not mean it, but you would have acted the same way toward a person of your own sex or race, for reasons completely separate from these considerations. The emotional response of the person who feels offended usually starts off any discussion of the incident on the wrong foot.

You cannot tell someone their actions reflect bias, you can only show them. In fact, you have to lead them to figure it out themselves, and sometimes this realization only happens over time. This means those on the receiving end have to be consistent in responding in ways that highlight the bias in a nonconfrontational way. For instance, the black who feels waiters always hand the wine list to his white dinner companion could simply take it from his friend in sight of the waiter, saying "I'll take that. What would you like tonight?", just as I as a woman sometimes take the check from a male dining companion. This confronts the behavior without confronting the person, and leaves the waiter thinking, "perhaps I should have given the wine list/check to him/her". Next time perhaps he will lay it in the middle of the table, or ask who wants it.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

...Because these remarks and actions are rooted in our subconscious biases, they are like a bad habit. We have internalized them and they are second nature, and as such can be very hard to break. Accusing someone who commits one of bias will therefore produce cognitive dissonance if the conscious perspective of the accused is to value everyone as an individual. Especially since not all incidents labelled as microagressions really do indicate bias, it is better to respond with a neutral question rather than an accusation or criticism (which itself is aggressive). This will reveal whether there was a valid reason for the action, and reduce misunderstandings. If it turns out there was bias, education is a better response than scolding. Most people don't need to be convinced that discrimination is wrong; they just need to be shown how their action or statement really was motivated by race, gender, or some other irrelevant consideration. If it was not, then the "victim" is trying to reveal something that isn't there, which is unlikely to result in a productive encounter.

This is an important statement and empowers people on both sides of the problem, and the vast majority of people will find themselves on both sides of some type of micro-aggression.

When I took the course that addressed racism it was an eye-opener because I belong to the dominant race in my society. What was so helpful is that we all acknowledged how racism affected each one of us and not "if" it had. Everyone living in a racist society is affected by racism. The same is true of sexism. Our first assignment was to write a paper on how we individually benefitted from privilege. It was amazingly uncomfortable to examine my life and admit how there were times I had it easier because of race and achieved some things not entirely on personal merit. I also had the chance to examine some of the unconscious negative assumptions I had developed that were racist. This was done in a primarily non-accusatory manner and so it was more productive.

I have called out certain statements here online as misogynistic which is questionably helpful depending on how it is interpreted. I can appreciate guys who respond defensively at being called misogynistic because that indicates that they don't want to have that as part of their identity. What is important to explain is that saying/doing something misogynistic doesn't indicate that the person is horrible or intends to be harmful towards women. I have had to work to overcome misogynistic assumptions myself. From my perspective I think there are wonderfully kind and admirable people who commit these micro-aggressions.

I especially appreciate your comments, Coriolis, because it describes a way to communicate so that each one of us can make progress as human beings.

 

[Mal12345]

Micro or macro, makes no difference. People are just exchanging their old prejudices and hatreds for new ones.

 

[Coriolis]

I have called out certain statements here online as misogynistic which is questionably helpful depending on how it is interpreted. I can appreciate guys who respond defensively at being called misogynistic because that indicates that they don't want to have that as part of their identity. What is important to explain is that saying/doing something misogynistic doesn't indicate that the person is horrible or intends to be harmful towards women. I have had to work to overcome misogynistic assumptions myself. From my perspective I think there are wonderfully kind and admirable people who commit these micro-aggressions.

I hesitate to put labels on behaviors or comments. It is at best an oversimplification, and is rarely well-received. Instead I might ask whether someone would make the same remark to a man, or act the same way toward a white person; or even more neutrally, I will ask why they did what they did. We might actually have some reasonable discussion this way. I have many ways of highlighting and/or correcting sexist behavior, for instance, but none of them involve an accusation of sexism.

Instead of "microagressions", we might just as well call these incidents acting on incorrect assumptions. They are all rooted in some assumption we are making about the other person based on race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc. which doesn't correspond with the reality of who they are. But assumptions are not all bad. We would be hard put to navigate life without them. We assume that the woman with the badge and uniform is a police officer, and that the old man with the cane would appreciate a seat on the bus. It's what happens when we are wrong that is important, and that must start with an understanding of how we are wrong.

 

[Bamboo]

Dealing with them:

- point them out directly
- don't jump to an assumption of what it means, ask them
- if they write it off as something else, question them directly about that - could it be expressed in other ways without invoking certain behaviors?

- in sum: create positive tension by questioning why it's necessary to tell someone they are weak by calling them "gay", or gender typing certain behaviors, or whatever. predictably the person doing it will say "but it just means this", but then the question is: why don't you just say that? if someone is being a coward, then call them a coward - why slander an entire group in the process?

rinse and repeat.

 

[WhoCares]

The first step is to realise that people are highly discriminatory animals in the first place and are socially conditioned to seek the acceptance of the group in power and to exlude others according to that groups dictates. This occurs on many basis even amoung a culturally and racially homogenous group. Acceptance without condition actually runs counter to social behaviour as we currently practice it. When people think we have progressed as a society, they are mistaken, all that has occurred is that the difference of focus has now become a term of acceptance of the group. But the basic dynamic of acceptance and exclusion is still there.

As someone with an obstensively 'weird' personality I can assure you of first hand experience of how social conditioning seeks to exclude anyone considered aberrant to the desires of the popular majority. It does not matter that I look like everyone else, I don't act like them and that is sufficient grounds for exclusion.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Micro or macro, makes no difference. People are just exchanging their old prejudices and hatreds for new ones.

That is one important point that came up when I was studying racism and the other "isms" in that course I mentioned. Even though there has been progress made in eliminating these issues, some of the overt oppression has been replaced by these micro-oppressions. Some think that the small prejudicial attacks have become more prevalent because they are still socially acceptable.

I hesitate to put labels on behaviors or comments. It is at best an oversimplification, and is rarely well-received. Instead I might ask whether someone would make the same remark to a man, or act the same way toward a white person; or even more neutrally, I will ask why they did what they did. We might actually have some reasonable discussion this way. I have many ways of highlighting and/or correcting sexist behavior, for instance, but none of them involve an accusation of sexism.

Instead of "microagressions", we might just as well call these incidents acting on incorrect assumptions. They are all rooted in some assumption we are making about the other person based on race, gender, ethnicity, age, etc. which doesn't correspond with the reality of who they are. But assumptions are not all bad. We would be hard put to navigate life without them. We assume that the woman with the badge and uniform is a police officer, and that the old man with the cane would appreciate a seat on the bus. It's what happens when we are wrong that is important, and that must start with an understanding of how we are wrong.

In formally studying the issue I see the importance of using the term "micro-aggression", but I do agree with you that on the individual, personal level it can destroy any hope of true communication. Certain terms make people feel defensive and judged too harshly. I certainly regret and apologize for times I have done this.

As a side note, I have noticed that in some cases people who take a stronger stance pushing back against these issues have faced "macro-aggressions" (like that term Mal+) and so feel more urgency in taking the veil off of these still acceptable forms. I can feel that urgency because my sense is that there are naive people who use these "micro-aggressions" (to still use the formal term) and they don't realize the nature of the system of oppression they are contributing to sustaining. I find these function like the foundation of a pyramid of oppression. It takes a whole society of assumptions to produce the more extreme forms of violation. It is good, well-intentioned people who naively participate in supporting the system as whole. Like I said, I don't consider myself above it, since I've looked inside and seen the problems with my own assumptions. It can take a lifetime to undo the internal damage that these externally imposed assumptions of oppression cause.

 

[Ivy]

I wish people weren't so defensive about their own racism, however small it manifests itself. We are all part of the racist system/culture so we are all going to express it in smaller or larger ways, depending on how much self-reflection/inspection we do. Taking the direction without becoming defensive is kind of the only way we're ever going to make any progress.

One thing I used to do before I had it pointed out to me (gently but firmly, which I appreciated) was asking members of a minority to speak for everyone in their demographic. "How do black people feel about X?" "Uh, I can tell you how *I* feel, but don't ask me to speak for all black people everywhere, please." I appreciate these wake-up calls.

 

[prplchknz]

I wish people weren't so defensive about their own racism, however small it manifests itself. We are all part of the racist system/culture so we are all going to express it in smaller or larger ways, depending on how much self-reflection/inspection we do. Taking the direction without becoming defensive is kind of the only way we're ever going to make any progress.

One thing I used to do before I had it pointed out to me (gently but firmly, which I appreciated) was asking members of a minority to speak for everyone in their demographic. "How do black people feel about X?" "Uh, I can tell you how *I* feel, but don't ask me to speak for all black people everywhere, please." I appreciate these wake-up calls.

I try to catch myself, like one illusion i had was only black people smoked newports, because before treatment I never saw any other race smoke a newport, than i get to treatment and tons of white people smoked newports, who knew??

 

[Coriolis]

One thing I used to do before I had it pointed out to me (gently but firmly, which I appreciated) was asking members of a minority to speak for everyone in their demographic. "How do black people feel about X?" "Uh, I can tell you how *I* feel, but don't ask me to speak for all black people everywhere, please." I appreciate these wake-up calls.

This hasn't been a problem for me. What I tend to watch for is questions directed preferentially at one gender. Women, for instance, are more often asked about family while men are more often asked about their jobs. Women who have jobs and families especially are asked things like, "what does your family do when you have to travel?", or "are you going back to work after your baby is born?". I hardly ever hear these questions addressed to men - except when I do so myself. (Actually, I ask expectant parents of both genders whether they will get much time off.)

A very public version of the question imbalance can be seen in politics, especially campaigns involving women candidates. There is a group called Name It, Change It that has even published a guide on gender neutrality for the media. Good advice for the rest of us as well.

 

[Mal12345]

This hasn't been a problem for me. What I tend to watch for is questions directed preferentially at one gender. Women, for instance, are more often asked about family while men are more often asked about their jobs. Women who have jobs and families especially are asked things like, "what does your family do when you have to travel?", or "are you going back to work after your baby is born?". I hardly ever hear these questions addressed to men - except when I do so myself. (Actually, I ask expectant parents of both genders whether they will get much time off.)

A very public version of the question imbalance can be seen in politics, especially campaigns involving women candidates. There is a group called Name It, Change It that has even published a guide on gender neutrality for the media. Good advice for the rest of us as well.

That answer is too generic. It treats everybody as equivalent.

If a male asks you about your family (and I know of one who prefers to talk about family), then that points you in the direction of conversation for that individual.

This has more to do with his being a Feeler than being a male.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I mean, of course we want racism to be taboo, but I think we all need to realize that most of us probably engage in some sort of racist behavior

Yeah.... I think there's this perception is racism is something that only KKK or neo-nazi members have, but I think racism (and sexism, or anything else like that) exists in different degrees. I look at racism as a cognitive bias.

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] said it very well. I think the important thing with the more subtle racism is to try and catch ourselves when we do it. I suppose I'll out myself here... A good example of this is that I was frustrated and trying to drive Center City, and I found myself thinking "Why do black people never cross at intersections?" I went to Center City, and sure enough, I saw plenty of white people exhibiting the exact same behavior... running across the middle of the street instead of crossing at the intersection.

I think as humans, we have a tendency to treat behavior we don't like differently depending on whether or not a person is a member of the group we don't belong to. If I'm a white male, and there's a person who is a white male who is acting like a jackass, I'm going to say "that person is just being a jackass". I'm not going to attribute it to him being white or him being male. If someone seems superficially different from me, there's a tendency to perceive it as somehow emerging out of his differentness. It's very easy to do, but that doesn't change the fact that it can have negative consequences.

Something that seems to help is getting to know people better who are different from yourself.