|
07-10-2015, 04:42 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
I have done some due diligence on the subject of micro aggression and trigger warnings.
Lets start with micro aggression:
You and I could have some fun with this one... I read several articles regarding this theory for the most part I have been cracking up ever since. While this theory was first described in the early 1970's but it really didn't come up until a group students at UCLA declared the campus to be a hostile atmosphere. When I reviewed the content of a list of these racial slurs it reminded me of the ebonics thing in Berkeley a few years ago. Here are some links to the best comments I was able to find.....
Microaggression and Changing Moral Cultures - Commentary - The Chronicle of Higher Education
Urban Dictionary: Trigger warning
Not sure how you go into being worried about this but from my research this "movement" is not going all that well.
Take Care. |
I am glad you find humor in this subject..this is from your first link...speaking of micro aggression
" The conflict is important because its outcome will determine the fate of higher education. Victimhood culture and its manifestations on campus threaten the goals of the academy. Honest inquiry and communication are bound to offend someone, and, if colleges are to continue, they must have a climate in which people are less — not more — prone to outrage than elsewhere."
The purpose of your second link talking about computer talking is well beyond me and has nothing to do with the concern not even broaches the subject being discussed.
This is from an article in Time Magazine from March of last year...they do not seem to find the humor that you did...
"Here’s what they are: The concept of microaggression has leapt from the shadows of academic writing into the bright light of general conversation, especially in the wake of widely consulted work by professors Derald Wing Sue and Madonna Constantine over the last seven or so years. Microaggressions, as these academics describe them, are quiet, often unintended slights — racist or sexist — that make a person feel underestimated on the basis of their color or gender."
They wrap this article up with....
"However, there is something equally counterproductive about the microaggression concept, at least as it is currently being put forth. The scholars promoting this concept claim that it is a microaggression even when someone says “I don’t see you as black,” or claims to be colorblind, or purports not to be a sexist, or in general doesn’t “acknowledge” one’s race membership or gender.
But let’s face it — it’s considered racist for whites to treat any trait as “black.” If we accept that, then we can’t turn around and say they’re racists to look at black people as just people. That particular aspect of the microaggression notion seems fixed so that whites can’t do anything right"
'Microaggression' Is the New Racism on Campus - TIME
AGAIN, the humor you saw in links that do not even apply to the subject being discussed seems to have escaped them.
AGAIN, the humor you saw in links that do not even apply to the subject being discussed seems to have escaped them.
I am sure you have heard of the magazine Psychology Today....I think they ta
am sure you have heard of the magazine Psychology Today....I think they take things seriously.....they took it from the campus where you evidently left it...
"Microaggressions are typically associated with everyday verbal and nonverbal slights, insults and putdowns directed towards socially devalued group members. However, environmental microaggressions can reside in the "climate" of an institution or even in the broader society. For example, when women in the workplace enter a conference room where portraits of all the past male CEOs or board of directors are honorifically displayed, the message given is that women are less competent and that a glass ceiling exists in the company. Over the past few months, similar environmental microaggressions have been communicated via the guise of the debates surrounding federal and state budget woes. In particular, the issue of developing a federal budget was and continues to be complicated by several issues, including America's growing deficit and the proposed tactics for reducing the deficit. Now, this posting is not going to advocate for a particular tactic for reducing America's deficit, but instead will discuss the covert messages communicated by the debate surrounding proposed budget cuts, specifically concerning Planned Parenthood."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-environmental
So it is not even all about race as you presented it. And one thing you were close to correct....it did begin in the 70's but is not as restricted as you see it.
"The term racial microaggressions was first proposed by psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce, MD, in the 1970s, but psychologists have significantly amplified the concept in recent years.
In his landmark work on stereotype threat, for instance, Stanford University psychology professor Claude Steele, PhD, has shown that African-Americans and women perform worse on academic tests when primed with stereotypes about race or gender. Women who were primed with stereotypes about women's poor math performance do worse on math tests. Blacks' intelligence test scores plunge when they're primed with stereotypes about blacks' inferior intelligence.
Meanwhile, social psychologists Jack Dovidio, PhD, of Yale University, and Samuel L. Gaertner, PhD, of the University of Delaware, have demonstrated across several studies that many well-intentioned whites who consciously believe in and profess equality unconsciously act in a racist manner, particularly in ambiguous circumstances. In experimental job interviews, for example, whites tend not to discriminate against black candidates when their qualifications are as strong or as weak as whites'. But when candidates' qualifications are similarly ambiguous, whites tend to favor white over black candidates, the team has found. The team calls this pattern "aversive racism," referring in part to whites' aversion to being seen as prejudiced, given their conscious adherence to egalitarian principles.
Sue adds to these findings by naming, detailing and classifying the actual manifestations of aversive racism. His work illuminates the internal experiences of people affected by microaggressions—a new direction, since past research on prejudice and discrimination has focused on whites' attitudes and behaviors, notes Dovidio.
"The study of microaggressions looks at the impact of these subtle racial expressions from the perspective of the people being victimized, so it adds to our psychological understanding of the whole process of stigmatization and bias," Dovidio says.
Research shows that uncertainty is very distressing to people, Dovidio adds. "It's the uncertainty of microaggressions that can have such a tremendous impact on people of color," including on the job, in academic performance and even in therapy, he and others find.
Unmasking 'racial micro aggressions': Some racism is so subtle that neither victim nor perpetrator may entirely understand what is going on--which may be especially toxic for people of color
So, as always you mock something that is serious which means something but I sure do not get it. Why is everything with you something to mock and make fun of without even understanding what you are talking about.
I hope that my links do not keep you from "cracking up" as you say this subject made you......it is a movement; it is a serious movement; and I find no humor.
|