What did I just read
Perhaps it makes more sense if you go and actually read the source rather than taking it out of context: http://www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_files/seminars/Tool_Recognizing_Microaggressions.pdf
For what it’s worth, I don’t think those phrases are microaggressions. I think calling America the land of the free/opportunity is a load of crock but not a microaggression.
I actually agree with several of the statements on there being microaggressions and really inappropriate.
What is a microaggression, anyways? Something so trivial and slight that only a person with no self esteem whatsoever would take offense? At least that’s what it sounds like.
I figure you can choose to take offense at things, or you can choose not to. I choose not to take offense, and my life is simpler and happier because of that.
Ah, okay, I just looked it up. It looks like anyone can claim microagressions against them except for white men. Unless they are gay, poor, or disabled. So can some of the victims of microaggressions, make microaggressions against other people? Or can only white men exert microaggressions on people? Good grief!
What is a microagression, anyways? Something so commonplace and slight that only a person who uses their ignorance as a crutch would object to correcting themselves? At least that’s what it sound like.
Just showing it goes both ways.
My problem with lists of “microaggressions” is that I generally find that it bundles together unequivocally discriminatory statements with things that might be completely innocent in context.
I read Romani’s link, and agreed that many of the statements singled out were inappropriate. I also think it is important to be aware of ways in which we can be unintentionally hurtful. That doesn’t mean members of minority or marginalized group get carte blanche in deterining what is and isn’t offensive - there is such a thing as being hypersensitive.
I routinely ask people where they are from. It goes with the territory in a college town with a large percentage of transplants and temporary residents. The fact that a certain number of the people I ask are Asian doesn’t make it offensive – and indeed, I don’t think asking someone with an accent where he or she is from, in the context of a conversation, is a microaggression either. Now, if someone answers “I’m from LA” and your response is “no, where are you REALLY from,” that is a different story.
I also object to defining political positions we don’t like as racial microaggressions. I consider the statement “affirmative action is racist” as simplistic and misguided, but it is also not an opinion I think need be censored, even at risk of making people uncomfortable – and especially in a college setting that should be expected to accommodate a range of opinions.
And surely, there must be a way to tell an Asian student to speak up more or a black student to “calm down” without being guilty of a microaggression. What if an Asian student really is being silent during your class? What if the black student really is being overly aggressive in challenging another student’s opinions?
“What is a microagression, anyways? Something so commonplace and slight that only a person who uses their ignorance as a crutch would object to correcting themselves? At least that’s what it sound like.”
So commonplace and slight? So minor that you could only take offense if you were really trying? I am very careful not to say things to people that could even be remotely construed as offensive. I am very careful not to hurt anyone’s feelings. However, I try to behave that way to everyone, not just because they are in a certain “group”. And some of those phrases are so trivial and inoffensive, you’d have to be really trying hard to find offense.
Let’s ban certain mundane sentences. But only if said by certain people. And of course, we can say anything to those certain people, because they are white men, so they don’t have the right to get offended.
One of my pet peeves. Everyone is looking to be offended. :-SS
I agree with this. It’s a two way street involving context. More of the responsibility falls on the listener, but the listener should definitely review the content of the conversation and interactions to judge the statement’s intentions. If it was an no-harm-intended ignorant statement, one can gently shine light on it. There’s no need for harsh reactions.
Guy: You’re not like other black girls. You’re normal.
Girl: What do you mean?
Guy: You’re not loud and like ghetto.
Girl: Loud and ghetto? What made the girls ghetto?
Guy: They have badly colored weaves and weird hair.
Girl: Oh, extensions? Lots of girls wear those, but it’s only different if you’re not used to it. Hair is hair and can be styled differently.
I believe the UC system has stepped into the “hypersensitive” area. Banning opinions and expressions have proved to do anything but help growth. Opinions should be welcomed so communication can take place. Can’t educated if you can’t talk about it.
Congratulations, you’re doing exactly what you should be doing. I don’t expect you to treat marginalized groups any different than your fellow man, but lets not forget why they’re marginalized in the first place – people, clearly not you because you don’t do such a thing, don’t treat them like their fellow man. There are valid, commonplace discriminatory statements that have been noted in the articles in this thread and there are statements that were overreacted to.
Trivializing microagressions only hurts those who are truly facing the discrimination and, in my opinion, encourages ignorant statements.
That PDF is not about banning anything; it is about making people aware of some of the ways that they can be unintentionally offensive to some people.
It’s comforting to see they are not banning the phrases. As I said before, can’t educate if you can’t talk about it.
There are some phrases in there that are obviously offensive, and a professor would have to be a moron to use them. But mixing those with completely innocuous phrases is inappropriate. Too bad they didn’t add phrases that are offensive to people that certain professors feel entitled to offend…ie religious students, conservative students.
Maybe we should fire Janet P. What bothers me is that she raises tuition claiming there is no money but the UC donated nearly $300k to Hillary.
Come on now, DrGoogle. Hillary needed the money, she’s got to pay the bills somehow. Have a little heart, America is the land of opportunity.
Doh! Just committed a microaggression! >:)
I love to commit a lot of microagressions. Hehe, it’s me and the land of opportunity.
You are so chatty, where do you really come from?
She came from the TTT, where else could it be?
I just love that acronym, though I am jealous, because I came from the FTT.
Dang, for some reason I can’t open it. Probably because it asterisked out the first word. Wonder what that word was (but don’t get in trouble saying it).
I reposted the link and it’s individual contributors from UCs and not the UC.
Re: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000019
UC itself was not the source of these donations; individuals associated with UC were.