Several months ago, yours truly, the Factual Feminist was the victim of a microaggression. Body-acceptance
activist Lindy West tweeted: “Why does Christina Hoff Sommers constantly
look like she’s being drained of her gelfing essence?”
For those who are not up on Muppet fandom, here is what happens when a gelf loses her
essence:
Now, you might find this funny. It made my own mother laugh. But it’s a textbook microaggression.
According to Columbia Teacher’s College professor Derald Wing Sue microaggressions
are those everyday comments or quips used by the privileged to keep others in their
place. Lindy’s tweet was a lookist, ageist, and gelfist reminder of my devalued status
as an age-enhanced woman. Here are some other microaggressions: asking
someone who appears to be Asian or Hispanic where they were born. Using words such as
“crazy,” or “lame.” Calling the United States a melting pot, or referring to a group
of women as “you guys.” Experts say these comments are “otherizing” and hurtful.
Microaggressions may seem trivial. But Sue and his colleagues argue that they are dangerous
because of their triviality. Over time, the theory goes, microaggressions
accumulate to form an invisible, relentless, and degrading system of control. Professor
Sue summarized the damage they inflict in his influential treatise Microaggressions
in Everyday Life. “They deplete psychic energy…produce physical
health problems, shorten life expectancy—and deny equal access to education…”
Colleges have acted swiftly to protect their students. . At Berkeley, North Carolina and
University of Minnesota, microaggression training is a key part of diversity education. At the
University of Santa Cruz, a psychology professor even developed a microaggression mobile app.
Mostly, students seem to be reporting lame jokes:
“I told a male identified friend that I am taking a class called "Women's Lives".
He jokingly said, "So are you going to learn how to make a sandwich?"
Here’s another:: “My friend asked if I was drinking for ‘Cinco de Drinko.’ It
offended me to think that a significant battle in Mexican history has come to be a joke.”
Dear offended person: It wasn’t a significant battle. They were fighting the FRENCH. Almost
no one in Mexico cares about this holiday. It’s largely the invention of Tequila and
Corona Beer distributors in the U.S. Calm down. Have a drink. I’ll even make you a
sandwich. Over 200 colleges have established Bias Response
Teams that spring into action in response campus microevents. The Bias Team at Wisconsin-Platteville
received an anonymous tip that 3 students had posted a potentially ablest photo of themselves
on Facebook. Here they are dressed up as the Three Blind Mice. The photo has been removed.
The Factual Feminist is concerned. This new microaggression regime appears to be empowering
spies, busybodies, and scolds. And it turn out, there’s no real research to back it
up. In a recent paper, Emory University psychologist
Scott Lilienfeld exposes at least three fatal flaws in microaggression scholarship:
ONE: Lilienfeld could not find a coherent definition of the term “microaggression.”
It appears to be anything Dr. Sue and his followers say it is.
TWO: The researchers never bothered to find out if African-American, Hispanics, Asians,
Women, are actually OFFENDED by the items on their lists. Members of marginalized groups
don’t all think or react alike. THREE: Sue and company claim that microaggressions
exact a devastating toll over time. He even mentioned a shortened lifespan. But Lilienfeld
couldn’t find a single well-designed study linking microaggressions to such outcomes.
Derald Wing Sue replied to Lilienfeld’s critique. He concedes all of Lilienfeld’s
major points. But he faults Lilienfeld’s for his fixation on elitist research methods
favored by the “dominant society”. By demanding things like valid measurements and
evidence of causality, Sue says Lilienfeld is dismissing the “the lived experiences
of marginalized groups.” In sum: Sue finds Lilienfeld critique of microaggression theory
to be—microaggressive! But, wait a minute. I am a woman, and I find
microaggression theory to be macro-annoying. I’m not bothered when someone addresses
my friends and me as “You Guys.” Or when they tell lame jokes, pardon the expression.
Who cares? Not me—and I suspect—not most women.
So I’m calling out Sue for mansplaining my lived experience as a female identified
person. Am I calling Sue and his colleagues is microaggressors?
Yes, and that’s exactly the problem. The theory is so amorphous that it’s meaningless—it
can be used by anyone, anywhere, for anything. It’s a game we all can play, but none can
win. So why play it? Look, I sympathize with school officials want
students to be respectful of one another. I want that too. But as the American Civil
Liberties Union says, “Verbal purity is not social change.” Bias response teams,
anonymous informants, mobile apps—these threaten free expression and suppress normal
human interaction. Friendship is the best way to overcome bigotry, real or imagined.
Maybe the only way. A word to university administrators: There’s
no evidence that microaggressions are hurting your students. But your attempts to eradicate
them are hurting freedom and friendship. What do you guys think of the microaggression
movement? Let me know in the comments’ section. And please subscribe to the series and follow
me on Facebook and Twitter. Thank you for watching the Factual Feminist.