Posted on 11/08/2015 1:57:51 PM PST by campg
We are in the midst of a cultural collapse. One of the indicators is a phenomena called “mircoaggression.†Most people have never heard of the term, but its applications are taken for granted at most American universities.
Microaggression is a phrase used to refer to a variety of verbal and nonverbal forms of communication that could be said to show disrespect for a particular group of people, especially those who have encountered historical discrimination, and which now includes any group the liberal establishment has classified as victims.
The implications of the paradigm behind the term should not be minimized. We cannot use masculine pronouns because that could be seen as microaggression against women. Asking someone where they are from is macroaggression because white males may be asked that question less frequently. Referring to a group as “ladies and gentlemen†could be seen as microaggression against transsexuals. A “walk-only zone†on a street could offend and marginalize people in wheelchairs.
Wearing a Halloween costume from an ethnic group cannot be seen positively; it only identifies the costume-wearer as an ignorant privileged person who doesn’t realize how offensive this could be to a member of a victimized group.
Microaggression doesn’t need to be deliberate. It is nevertheless evil because over time a pattern of microaggression could harm members of marginalized groups by reminding them of their victimized status.
Note portraying white males as stupid in sitcoms and ads is not “microaggression.â€
Last year, Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning published a paper in a sociology journal. Their work suggests we are leaving a moral culture that was superior in many ways to the ones that preceded it, and we are now moving into a new moral culture that is, essentially, a step back into the past.
The thesis is this: Two hundred years ago, Western societies moved away from cultures of honor in which people had to earn, avenge and defend their honor. There were intergenerational feuds, duals and perceived slights that would lead to violence. This was replaced by a culture in which people were assumed to have dignity and didn’t need to earn it. Major violations were turned over to courts or other administrative bodies. Minor insults and slights were either ignored or an attempt was made to resolve them through social norms. If fact, people were encouraged to see another’s point of view and not to whine about minor insults. The authors called this a culture of dignity.
The paper claims the culture of dignity is being replaced by a new “culture of victimhood†in which people find the slightest violation, even unintentional ones, as a major offense in much the same manner as in the rejected culture of honor. There is, however, a major difference. Instead of handling the situation directly, the offended person is encouraged to appeal for help from powerful outsiders and make the case they have been victimized. It becomes advantageous for people to identify themselves as helpless and put-upon victims.
Critics of Campbell and Manning's moral theory get caught in an interesting tautology. They maintain the theory is incorrect because it looks at the history of the dominant moral culture, which is a classic case of critics who live in a glass house throwing rocks.
Collapse of a dominant culture has implications far beyond the immediately obvious. The economist Steven Horwitz maintains Americans are increasingly expecting adult supervision. The idea of microaggression encourages people to see themselves as victims and to find an external “adult†to resolve any and every slight. That “adult†is most often associated with an increasingly powerful central government that issues ever more complex and intrusive rules and demands for proper behavior and thought.
In many ways, the hypersensitivity found at many universities is not a pathway to a more moral culture, but a road into a regressive, illiberal world where the powerful tell us how, what and when to think.
That is unquestionably the cause of demoralization.
Never heard of microaggression and apparently I’m not alone. Thanks for helping clear it up. Since Universities are about 62% dominated by Liberal professors my simple conservative mind is probably incapable to understanding.
Liberal professors in the hallowed halls of academia;-) Not Conservatives— their brains are not as polluted;-)
Dennis Clayson wrote it, but Ben is a great target of these uber liberals who come up with a term, microaggression. They can’t allow victimhood and political correctness to be destroyed by an accomplished black conservative.
I doubt it if you support Cruz. I’m with you;-)
It would flop at the box office;-) Thanks, you nailed it.
ping
Now you can claim mental anguish if someone doesn’t bake you a cake, get a good lawyer, and make $150,000 per person in the name of victimhood.
Collaboration between Academia, MSM, Clinton, and the Democrat Plantation is a fine-tuned machine in their own minds. They just can’t quite completely dismantle the Constitution or stop the bleeding going on at the state and local level. How much chaos and decline will it take before the low info crowd wakes up?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.