U Of Washington Study Links ‘Microaggressions’ To Whites-No Whites included in study

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: fiverx313

Given my own background, and the way I was raised, I find it incredibly difficult to reconcile "words" being considered "action".

When did words become an action? I know its happened...its why we have all the wailing and gnashing of teeth nowadays....but when did this actually happen?

i'm not quite sure what you mean, could you go into that a little more?

i mean, you choose your words and you say them... in what way is that not an action?

a reply to: fiverx313

Traditionally, words and actions have not been seen as the same. Its why "the pen is mightier than the sword" and why "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words cannot harm me".

Yes, technically speaking is an action. The word "speak" can be a verb. In actuality, however, words are not actions. If they are, we have several sayings that will need to be removed, and several quotes that will be meaningless.

"Actions speak louder than words but not nearly as often" - Mark Twain
“The universe doesn’t give you what you ask for with your thoughts - it gives you what you demand with your actions.” - Steve Maraboli
“I am not imposed upon by fine words; I can see what actions mean.” - George Eliot

I could go on, but you get the point.

So if words can now be a "prejudicial action"...when did this change? Used to be words were just words. Prejudicial actions required actually DOING something.

a reply to: seasonal

In my estimation the concept of microaggression is patently absurd. It is a perfect example of core authoritarianism.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So if words can now be a "prejudicial action"...when did this change? Used to be words were just words. Prejudicial actions required actually DOING something.

words aren't a punch in the face but they have the power to affect things. i think that the dividing line you're looking for is more of a large grey area. like assigning this semantic negation with the word action is assuming that words don't really hurt anything... but they can.

if someone was in an abusive relationship that wasn't physically abusive, but psychologically and verbally abusive... is that not really an abusive relationship?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: seasonal

In my estimation the concept of microaggression is patently absurd.

'you're pretty, for a black girl'

'you're only here because of affirmative action, right?'

'i don't understand your language, it's all just ching chong ching chong to me'

'oh you're mexican? i bet you make great tacos! i love tacos!'

'your hair is so weird! can i touch it?'

'oh you're gay? you've GOT to help me pick out my outfit for tonight'

'what do women know about sports, anyway'

'a woman dentist? can women even BE good dentists?' -from a recent thread, actually

'so insensitive, what else can you expect from a man'

do you call comments like this out for what they are and make yourself a target? or do you let them slide and know over and over again that you're on the outside? it has an effect.

a reply to: fiverx313

Great examples. And?

ETA: Well only one or two would make any sense attached to me ... but what’s your point?

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
So if words can now be a "prejudicial action"...when did this change? Used to be words were just words. Prejudicial actions required actually DOING something.

words aren't a punch in the face but they have the power to affect things. i think that the dividing line you're looking for is more of a large grey area. like assigning this semantic negation with the word action is assuming that words don't really hurt anything... but they can.

if someone was in an abusive relationship that wasn't physically abusive, but psychologically and verbally abusive... is that not really an abusive relationship?

Words only have the power you give to them. If you ignore/don't hear the words to begin with, they have no effect.

RE: relationship....that is not the same as the world of microaggressions that is being propagated today. Casual relationships cannot be equated to personal relationships. As an example, once you participate in the intimacy that comes with nuptials, there is a betrayal that can be felt due to the investment of emotion. If, once you see your new bride naked, you refer to her as "fat"...that is a betrayal of your trust.

On the other hand, if some random dude calls you fat on the street, there is no trust (or should be none) and there is no emotional investment (or there should be none...its a random stranger). Thus, it is completely different.

Someone who can feel verbally or psychologically abused in casual, day to day interactions would typically be considered "emotionally frail". Are that many people emotionally frail that its really a thing now?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: fiverx313

Great examples. And?

ETA: Well only one or two would make any sense attached to me ... but what’s your point?

maybe i misunderstood yours. what is your problem with the concept?

I microagress when I stand in a room doing NOTHING, the way people avoid my eyes.
I try not to bully or push unless that done is first then I can mirror the intent.
I see NO reason to accommodate weak willed cultures by becoming one.
I am an EXCEPTIONAL AMERICAN as are we all.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: fiverx313

Given my own background, and the way I was raised, I find it incredibly difficult to reconcile "words" being considered "action".

When did words become an action? I know its happened...its why we have all the wailing and gnashing of teeth nowadays....but when did this actually happen?

When we become narcissistic enough as a society that how we feel about something become more important than what was actually intended by it.

Going back to my fried chicken example (and note that I use fried chicken for two reasons: 1. It's a common stereotype for blacks because of its soul food background and 2. I can't think of very many people I know of of *any* ethnic background who *don't* like good fried chicken), it's now more important if you suggested fried chicken as a meal to a mixed race group that the blacks in that group felt you were doing it for racial reasons more than because you know the near universal appeal of the dish and figured almost everyone, no matter who, would agree it was fine to eat.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Words only have the power you give to them. If you ignore/don't hear the words to begin with, they have no effect.

RE: relationship....that is not the same as the world of microaggressions that is being propagated today. Casual relationships cannot be equated to personal relationships. As an example, once you participate in the intimacy that comes with nuptials, there is a betrayal that can be felt due to the investment of emotion. If, once you see your new bride naked, you refer to her as "fat"...that is a betrayal of your trust.

On the other hand, if some random dude calls you fat on the street, there is no trust (or should be none) and there is no emotional investment (or there should be none...its a random stranger). Thus, it is completely different.

Someone who can feel verbally or psychologically abused in casual, day to day interactions would typically be considered "emotionally frail". Are that many people emotionally frail that its really a thing now?

maybe the stoicism you associate with not being put off in casual relationships was never that common to begin with?

as for the nuptial relationship and the random person on the street, there's a wide gradation between the two types of relationships. workplace, classroom, social sphere -- people you see many days of the week or spend time with on a repeated basis. wouldn't that make it harder to shrug off 'mere words'? especially on a repeated basis?

i feel like it's all well and good to say 'well don't let it bother you' but that's not a conscious choice a lot of the time -- and being worn down by repetition doesn't make one 'emotionally frail'.

a reply to: fiverx313

The “concept” is BS. Some of those comments are rude and can be handled as such. Making rules against rudeness goes over the line for me.

originally posted by: ketsuko

When we become narcissistic enough as a society that how we feel about something become more important than what was actually intended by it.

Great example ... flags.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: fiverx313

The “concept” is BS. Some of those comments are rude and can be handled as such. Making rules against rudeness goes over the line for me.

i'm not sure i saw any rules being made about who could say what?

originally posted by: fiverx313


'you're pretty, for a black girl'

If you are not typically attracted to a specific racial demographic, this seems like a legit statement. Im not really into white chicks, and (as a white guy) have thought "for a white chick, she's pretty attractive".

'you're only here because of affirmative action, right?'

That's just an asshole thing to say to someone. That said, were affirmative action not demanding quotas to be filled, it likely wouldn't cause the assholes to come out of the woodwork with their righteous indignation. Because lets face it...affirmative action is racist. Quoatas are racist, too.

'i don't understand your language, it's all just ching chong ching chong to me'

Oh come on man. Then i've been treated with enormous amounts of microaggression by New Yorkers who couldn't stand my "hick accent". I've had untold numbers of female call center employees leave crying after someone in New Yorker alluded to them being inbred. Does it suck? Yeah...but if someone speaks a different language altogether? Used to be we would laugh about that kind of stuff as we shared cultures with each other. Ill tell you, hearing northerners use Spanish makes me laugh pretty hard....i can see why the Mexican folks like to laugh at my spanish.

'oh you're mexican? i bet you make great tacos! i love tacos!'

Funny story....my grandma was raised in South El Paso. She learned how to cook from some of the ladies on the reservation, and could make amazing Mexican food from scratch (i mean real scratch...grinding her own corn in the mocajete).

When she first met my wife, she asked, "Where do you guys get your green chiles from". My wife said, "um...the store". My grandmother was looking for some tips on where to buy better chile's without having to drive back to El Paso. My wife just thought she was a racist old bat. Which, to be fair, she was (she once told my wife and I she was happy to see us in the waiting room at the hospital because she was "getting run out by mexicans"....my wife is as "mexican" as it gets).

Nonetheless...that isn't racist. That is an opportunity to share your culture with someone who doesn't know anything more than "tacos" about the culture.

'your hair is so weird! can i touch it?'

I need some context to know what you are referring to. In my mind im seeing a punk rocker with a rooster comb for hair.

'oh you're gay? you've GOT to help me pick out my outfit for tonight'

Never heard this one before. That said, my oldest is gay and I can't imagine he would do anything other than jump on board and start looking for an outfit to wear.

'what do women know about sports, anyway'

Really?

'a woman dentist? can women even BE good dentists?' -from a recent thread, actually

Yeah, people say stupid things.

'so insensitive, what else can you expect from a man'

Lets not pretend that misandry isn't all the rage. Lets not also pretend that this isn't an accurate statement when referring to the vast majority of men.

a reply to: ketsuko

My wife and I have had this debate. Her (and the oldest son) are more about what is said.

Meanwhile, me and the younger son are more about what is intended. So we will call each other horrible names as terms of endearment. We use extremely coarse language as a shortcut.

My wife things saying things makes them somehow real. After 22 years, she has come to realize that what I say isn't really what I do. The gap is filled in with "intention".

a reply to: fiverx313

Yep my bad I’m applying personal knowledge to the argument based on association with Emory.

a reply to: fiverx313

Well...what else can you do? You can either get over it, leave the area, or fight back (verbally or physically).

Better article on the actual study at UWash here

LInk to actual study documents here