Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > The Political Solution: A Nation Befitting White Men > Whiteness Studies
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old March 25th, 2014 #21
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

'MICROAGGRESSION' IS A STUPID WORD YOU SHOULD TAKE SERIOUSLY

By Charles Davis Mar 19 2014



An example of a microaggression from the I, Too, Am Harvard Tumblr, which highlights the bullshit black Harvard students have to put up with on a daily basis.

“So where are you from?” It's innocent enough, that question—a way to break the ice when no more can be said about the weather. But if you aren't White, there's a good chance it will be followed by one of the most cringe-inducing sentences in the White lexicon: “No, I mean originally.”

That's never asked of me, mind you. No one ever wants to know where I came from, since I'm pale enough and sufficiently boring-looking to appear to other White people as a born-and-raised American, which I often lament that I am. That question, when I've heard it, is always posed to a friend of mine, who always responds the same way: “Ca-li-for-ni-a.” This always comes out sounding a bit like “Fuck. You.” It inevitably causes offense, this matter-of-fact response. It isn't what people—White people—want to hear. They feel cheated.

“Oh, you know what I meant,” they always groan, the word asshole on the tip of their tongue.

The problem is apparently my friend, who isn’t White and looks “exotic” to people whose idea of exotic is a beer with a lime. My friend isn't pale like me, which means he's a walking zoo exhibit from the coasts to the country, always expected to respond to strangers’ interrogations about his native land with a smile and a careful recounting of his family tree.

Oh, but these people always mean well. They mean so fucking well that they act all offended if anyone ever calls them out on their insensitivity. That's because, as a big dumb pack, we White people can’t stand when anyone complains about our doing or saying offensive things when, gosh, we didn’t mean to cause offense—which we take as license to cause any offense we like. We White men are the worst when it comes to this and the most loath to learn and liable to go all angry-talk-radio on anyone who has the temerity to point out that we're acting racist or sexist or just gerally shitty. “Don't be so sensitive!” we say, doggedly determined to make things worse, though of course the pasty White dudes of America are some of the most overly sensitive people on the planet (go ahead, just try making a joke at our expense).

Some call not being a jerk “political correctness,” a pejorative term that brings to mind some ivory-tower prick in a cardigan who believes we ought to outlaw testosterone and the right to call a spade a spade. They imply that referring to racial minorities or sexual preferences or intellectual abilities requires a reference manual—and the latest edition at that—lest we be subjected to a sensitivity tribunal and sentenced to six months of hard feminist theory.

But complaining about political correctness is about as fresh as a loaf of white bread from the 90s. And so, according to the National Review, the “trendy new complaint on college campuses”—or rather, the trendy new thing for assholes to complain about—is something called “microaggression,” with the conservative magazine's use of “trendy” and “college” telling us all we need to know: This is some serious liberal bullshit.

Dr. Derald Sue, a psychology professor at Columbia University, is trotted out as the liberal caricature asked to do the impossible: defend the concept of microaggression in a publication whose readers stopped taking him seriously as soon as he was introducd as a professor at Columbia named “Derald.” But Dr. Sue does the best he can, informing the National Review's smirking readers that a “microaggression” is an “everyday slight, putdown, indignity, or invalidation unintentionally directed toward a marginalized group.”

This sounds altogether reasonable, the idea that somewhere between lynching and saying “hello” there can lie something that causes offense. Indeed, even the National Review's own examples of microaggression fail to persuade otherwise, suggesting it is in fact a real, rather ugly phenomenon: a White person telling an Asian student that he can “probably” solve a hard math problem because, obviously, he's Asian; a White woman clutching her purse when Black men walk by because, obviously, they're dangerous; a teacher assigning books almost exclusively by White dudes because, obviously, they're the only ones who matter.

Telling a Black person he or she is “basically White” or asking a lesbian if she has ever had “real” sex are other examples of micoaggressions that aren't imagined offenses dreamed up by some liberal jerk-off but real, and really offensive, things that real people say. But those who are hurt are presented as whiners; on its Facebook page, the National Review even links to its piece on microaggresions with a photo of a crying baby—though the baby is White, which serves as reminder of who's really doing all the whining.

Now, can concern for others sometimes be taken too far? Sure, I guess. Earlier this month, the New Republic, an arguably liberal magazine, ran a piece bemoaning the spread of “trigger warnings”—basically a heads-up that the content about to be discussed could trigger a negative reaction in those suffering post-traumatic stress—from social-justice Tumblrs to college classrooms. Some schools, it seems, are telling students ahead of time when a class will be dealing with subjects like rape and domestic violence. This practice could conceivably be taken too far—and the New Republic assures us with scant evidence that it has been—but that some people might be overly concerned about the emotional well-being of those who have suffered trauma is not high up on my daily list of things to get upset about.

But we have a narrative of overly sensitive women and minorities to maintain, and both liberal and conservative publications seem set on maintaining it. So when Dr. Sue tells the National Review it's “best to believe the one who perceives the bias,” rather than defer to the judgment of the but-I-didn't-mean-it offender, the reader is meant to scoff. That people may be “unknowingly making racist remarks or unintentionally engaging in sexist and homophobic behaviors” is cast as a ridiculous. And when the professor goes on to suggest that a “truly multicultural” education for the young might help address subconscious prejudice, that's taken as code for Soviet-style totalitarianism, and the author even suggests to his better-dead-than-considerate readers that what will happen next is “reeducation for the rest.”

Sadly, no one is talking about “reeducation” camps where the last of the Real Men will be forced to sit around campfires singing songs about feelings while a big-government bureaucrat monitors their body language for signs of masculine aggression (that part got dropped from Obamacare). But also, let's remember, no one is saying that committing a microaggression is the worst thing in the world—that's why the word micro is there. Nor does inadvertently triggering someone make you a monster. What people are suggesting is merely that there are things we can all probably do to make sure we don’t go around inadvertently offending and triggering people. If it helps, you don't even need to use the word “microaggression”—you can call it “being an asshole.”

You don’t need a reference manual to not make people feel bad; you just need to listen every once in a while, learn a thing or two, and try to be more considerate, particularly around people you just met. Since when did stopping to think before you open your stupid mouth become such a bad thing? We can all be insensitive—no one is perfect, and no one expects perfection—but maybe we can avoid lashing out and getting defensive when people point that out. If you were being an asshole without being aware of it, wouldn't you want someone to point that out?

“Look, I know you didn’t mean it, but can you please not do it again?” is really not too much to ask. On the other hand, asking someone whose name you just learned where he's from—no, where he's really from—just because he doesn't look like you is a shitty thing to do as it makes that person feel he's not at home in his own country. That some people righteously refuse to consider why they may be causing offense, or just don't care that they are, says more about them than it does about the excesses of “political correctness.” It says some people are just dicks.

Charles Davis is a writer and producer in Los Angeles. His work has been published by outlets including Al Jazeera, the New Inquiry, and Salon.

http://www.vice.com/read/microaggression-a-stupid-word
 
Old March 25th, 2014 #22
jaekel
Senior Member
 
jaekel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,975
jaekel
Default

Microagresssion?
Would you prefer a FUCK YOU!!!

These marxists always try to make others responsible for their feewings. Po wittle abused niggers, gooks, chinks, queers and womenz.
Who do they blame when yt ain't around? They go after each other. More chaos. Dykes don't want gay boys around their clubs, etc. This doesn't stop anything. It just makes it worse.
 
Old March 25th, 2014 #23
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

These mongrels don't get it, we want them to feel bad. It would be worthwhile to memorize some of these triggers and use them on random muds, especially the tokens that are kept as mascots at universities. If it works play all innocent, but don't apologize. Just say "lighten up, it's all good" and laugh.

But don't do it at work.
 
Old March 25th, 2014 #24
Jason 916
☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆
 
Jason 916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N. California
Posts: 2,374
Jason 916
Default

There's some good comments on that article that Alex just posted.

I do soooo love my "microaggressions" too , although mine are a little more than micro, as I make sure the nig knows about it. Nigs are usually the ones I just feel that visceral anger and disgust towards and want to make uncomfortable. It seems the only thing Whites can do anymore without being done in for a hate crime.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
Support the church? What the f**k for?
 
Old March 25th, 2014 #25
N.B. Forrest
Senior Member
 
N.B. Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Virginia, CSA
Posts: 11,145
N.B. Forrest
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
'MICROAGGRESSION' IS A STUPID WORD YOU SHOULD TAKE SERIOUSLY

By Charles Davis Mar 19 2014



An example of a microaggression from the I, Too, Am Harvard Tumblr, which highlights the bullshit black Harvard students have to put up with on a daily basis.

“So where are you from?” It's innocent enough, that question—a way to break the ice when no more can be said about the weather. But if you aren't White, there's a good chance it will be followed by one of the most cringe-inducing sentences in the White lexicon: “No, I mean originally.”

That's never asked of me, mind you. No one ever wants to know where I came from, since I'm pale enough and sufficiently boring-looking to appear to other White people as a born-and-raised American, which I often lament that I am. That question, when I've heard it, is always posed to a friend of mine, who always responds the same way: “Ca-li-for-ni-a.” This always comes out sounding a bit like “Fuck. You.” It inevitably causes offense, this matter-of-fact response. It isn't what people—White people—want to hear. They feel cheated.

“Oh, you know what I meant,” they always groan, the word asshole on the tip of their tongue.

The problem is apparently my friend, who isn’t White and looks “exotic” to people whose idea of exotic is a beer with a lime. My friend isn't pale like me, which means he's a walking zoo exhibit from the coasts to the country, always expected to respond to strangers’ interrogations about his native land with a smile and a careful recounting of his family tree.

Oh, but these people always mean well. They mean so fucking well that they act all offended if anyone ever calls them out on their insensitivity. That's because, as a big dumb pack, we White people can’t stand when anyone complains about our doing or saying offensive things when, gosh, we didn’t mean to cause offense—which we take as license to cause any offense we like. We White men are the worst when it comes to this and the most loath to learn and liable to go all angry-talk-radio on anyone who has the temerity to point out that we're acting racist or sexist or just gerally shitty. “Don't be so sensitive!” we say, doggedly determined to make things worse, though of course the pasty White dudes of America are some of the most overly sensitive people on the planet (go ahead, just try making a joke at our expense).

Some call not being a jerk “political correctness,” a pejorative term that brings to mind some ivory-tower prick in a cardigan who believes we ought to outlaw testosterone and the right to call a spade a spade. They imply that referring to racial minorities or sexual preferences or intellectual abilities requires a reference manual—and the latest edition at that—lest we be subjected to a sensitivity tribunal and sentenced to six months of hard feminist theory.

But complaining about political correctness is about as fresh as a loaf of white bread from the 90s. And so, according to the National Review, the “trendy new complaint on college campuses”—or rather, the trendy new thing for assholes to complain about—is something called “microaggression,” with the conservative magazine's use of “trendy” and “college” telling us all we need to know: This is some serious liberal bullshit.

Dr. Derald Sue, a psychology professor at Columbia University, is trotted out as the liberal caricature asked to do the impossible: defend the concept of microaggression in a publication whose readers stopped taking him seriously as soon as he was introducd as a professor at Columbia named “Derald.” But Dr. Sue does the best he can, informing the National Review's smirking readers that a “microaggression” is an “everyday slight, putdown, indignity, or invalidation unintentionally directed toward a marginalized group.”

This sounds altogether reasonable, the idea that somewhere between lynching and saying “hello” there can lie something that causes offense. Indeed, even the National Review's own examples of microaggression fail to persuade otherwise, suggesting it is in fact a real, rather ugly phenomenon: a White person telling an Asian student that he can “probably” solve a hard math problem because, obviously, he's Asian; a White woman clutching her purse when Black men walk by because, obviously, they're dangerous; a teacher assigning books almost exclusively by White dudes because, obviously, they're the only ones who matter.

Telling a Black person he or she is “basically White” or asking a lesbian if she has ever had “real” sex are other examples of micoaggressions that aren't imagined offenses dreamed up by some liberal jerk-off but real, and really offensive, things that real people say. But those who are hurt are presented as whiners; on its Facebook page, the National Review even links to its piece on microaggresions with a photo of a crying baby—though the baby is White, which serves as reminder of who's really doing all the whining.

Now, can concern for others sometimes be taken too far? Sure, I guess. Earlier this month, the New Republic, an arguably liberal magazine, ran a piece bemoaning the spread of “trigger warnings”—basically a heads-up that the content about to be discussed could trigger a negative reaction in those suffering post-traumatic stress—from social-justice Tumblrs to college classrooms. Some schools, it seems, are telling students ahead of time when a class will be dealing with subjects like rape and domestic violence. This practice could conceivably be taken too far—and the New Republic assures us with scant evidence that it has been—but that some people might be overly concerned about the emotional well-being of those who have suffered trauma is not high up on my daily list of things to get upset about.

But we have a narrative of overly sensitive women and minorities to maintain, and both liberal and conservative publications seem set on maintaining it. So when Dr. Sue tells the National Review it's “best to believe the one who perceives the bias,” rather than defer to the judgment of the but-I-didn't-mean-it offender, the reader is meant to scoff. That people may be “unknowingly making racist remarks or unintentionally engaging in sexist and homophobic behaviors” is cast as a ridiculous. And when the professor goes on to suggest that a “truly multicultural” education for the young might help address subconscious prejudice, that's taken as code for Soviet-style totalitarianism, and the author even suggests to his better-dead-than-considerate readers that what will happen next is “reeducation for the rest.”

Sadly, no one is talking about “reeducation” camps where the last of the Real Men will be forced to sit around campfires singing songs about feelings while a big-government bureaucrat monitors their body language for signs of masculine aggression (that part got dropped from Obamacare). But also, let's remember, no one is saying that committing a microaggression is the worst thing in the world—that's why the word micro is there. Nor does inadvertently triggering someone make you a monster. What people are suggesting is merely that there are things we can all probably do to make sure we don’t go around inadvertently offending and triggering people. If it helps, you don't even need to use the word “microaggression”—you can call it “being an asshole.”

You don’t need a reference manual to not make people feel bad; you just need to listen every once in a while, learn a thing or two, and try to be more considerate, particularly around people you just met. Since when did stopping to think before you open your stupid mouth become such a bad thing? We can all be insensitive—no one is perfect, and no one expects perfection—but maybe we can avoid lashing out and getting defensive when people point that out. If you were being an asshole without being aware of it, wouldn't you want someone to point that out?

“Look, I know you didn’t mean it, but can you please not do it again?” is really not too much to ask. On the other hand, asking someone whose name you just learned where he's from—no, where he's really from—just because he doesn't look like you is a shitty thing to do as it makes that person feel he's not at home in his own country. That some people righteously refuse to consider why they may be causing offense, or just don't care that they are, says more about them than it does about the excesses of “political correctness.” It says some people are just dicks.

Charles Davis is a writer and producer in Los Angeles. His work has been published by outlets including Al Jazeera, the New Inquiry, and Salon.

http://www.vice.com/read/microaggression-a-stupid-word

"I'm pale enough and sufficiently boring-looking..."; "The problem is apparently my friend, who isn’t White and looks “exotic” to people whose idea of exotic is a beer with a lime." ; "But complaining about political correctness is about as fresh as a loaf of white bread from the 90s."; "...as a big dumb pack, we White people ...; "the pasty White dudes of America"....

A shitload of Judas-y micrometeorites in there.

In spite of his generous use of Tuffguy talk, Davis is the low-T Cardiganed Prick he scoffs at.
__________________
"First: Do No Good." - The Hymiecratic Oath

"The man who does not exercise the first law of nature—that of self preservation — is not worthy of living and breathing the breath of life." - John Wesley Hardin
 
Old March 26th, 2014 #26
jaekel
Senior Member
 
jaekel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,975
jaekel
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason 916 View Post
There's some good comments on that article that Alex just posted.

I do soooo love my "microaggressions" too , although mine are a little more than micro, as I make sure the nig knows about it. Nigs are usually the ones I just feel that visceral anger and disgust towards and want to make uncomfortable. It seems the only thing Whites can do anymore without being done in for a hate crime.
Good idea. We should have a list to reference. One I like is, "he's a hard-working black man", as if to presume that most niggers are lazy.
We should have a list to reference, and see how many we can use on a given day.
 
Old March 29th, 2015 #27
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,375
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Ithaca College’s Microaggressions Bill Labels Students ‘Oppressors’ for ‘Belittling’ Speech
By Will Creeley March 26, 2015

Early last week, the Ithaca College Student Government Association passed a resolution to create an anonymous, online system for students to report “microaggressions” on campus. FIRE has closely monitored the bill’s progress, as its language presents obvious problems for freedom of expression at the private New York college.

First, the measure resolves to create a “school-wide online system to report microaggressions”—but does not define the term “microaggressions.” This glaring lack of clarity is deeply troubling. Without a stable understanding of what a microaggression is or is not, students run the risk of being reported for speech that crosses an invisible line, drawn by and known only to the offended listener. Of course, the inherent subjectivity of microaggressions is an even bigger problem, and the squirrely elasticity of the term makes the lack of clear definition all but unavoidable. One student’s microaggression is another’s earnest attempt to discuss different life experiences. The chill on student speech would be severe. In fact, chilling speech appears to be the point; as one supporter of the bill told The Ithacan student newspaper, “Just like any other resolution that we want to pass with microaggression and diversity in the institution, what it does is it helps to make people think a little more before they do or say something.”

If the bill had included a definition, the threat to free expression would likely be clearer still. In an interview with The Ithaca Voice, one of the bill’s authors defined microaggressions as “statements by a person from a privileged group that belittles or isolates a member of an unprivileged group, as it relates to race, class, gender, sexual orientation, ability and more.” This is an unequivocal attempt to police speech, and it only prompts more questions: What groups are privileged or unprivileged? Who decides? What makes a statement “belittling” or “isolating”? Who decides? What other class statuses might make a student a member of an unprivileged group? Who decides? Again, the inescapable subjectivity of the term means that student expression is only as safe as the most sensitive student on campus allows it to be, however unreasonable his or her determination.

Ithaca College is a private institution, and thus not bound by the First Amendment. But it promises students freedom of speech in no uncertain terms. The school’s Statement of Rights and Freedoms proclaims, “Freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression are essential elements in a campus community.” It’s impossible to square the student government’s call for “reporting” speech that one student finds “belittling” or “isolating” with the college’s clear promises of freedom of expression. And given those promises, students matriculating to Ithaca have every reason to expect the same First Amendment rights as their peers up the road at the University at Albany, State University of New York. Were this microaggressions policy passed at SUNY Albany, it wouldn’t pass constitutional muster. As FIRE’s Susan Kruth has noted, “Microaggressions that consist only of speech or expression are protected by the First Amendment unless they also fall into one of the few and narrowly-defined categories of unprotected speech, like true threats or incitement to imminent lawless action. (Since microaggressions are ‘subtle verbal and nonverbal insults’ that are often ‘done automatically and unconsciously,’ this is unlikely.)”

The problems with the student government’s measure don’t end there, unfortunately. The resolution further states that “the system will be set up to not identify individuals who choose to report by name but will note the demographics of people who report and the demographics of oppressors based on a coding system.” As explained by one of the bill’s authors, the bill would record the “gender, race, age and school within the college and year of both the person reporting the microaggression and the person being reported.”

In other words, the class status of student speakers (“oppressors”) who are deemed to have “belittled” or “isolated” a student member of an “unprivileged group” would be recorded. Presumably, the reporting student would be empowered to determine the oppressor’s gender, race, and age—a potentially fraught process in and of itself, as this recent televised exchange between writer Jay Smooth and CBS commentator Nancy Giles illustrates.

The Ithacan reports that the sponsors’ desire to go further by requiring that the names of the “oppressors” be recorded, too, was quelled only by “possible legal barriers.” Apparently, those barriers are currently being reviewed by college lawyers. Publicly labelling a student an “oppressor” solely on the basis of an anonymous report about speech that caused subjective offense? What could possibly go wrong?

Commentators elsewhere are pointing out these and other problems, too. Reason’s Nick Gillespie writes:

So remember, kids, you don’t go to college to learn new things and feed your head. You go to college to be subjected to an anonymous system of collecting information about the bad thoughts you have and the misstatements you make, some of which you might not even have intended to be hurtful.

[…]

I would like to believe that awfulness of imposing such a system is self-evident, especially at a university, which is supposed to be about the free and open exchange of ideas and the production of knowledge (at least in the few spare moments between football games and re-education seminars). In an astonishingly short half-century, we have cycled from a demand for “free speech” on college campuses to the condemnation of speech via anonymous, online, geo-tagged systems that may or may not accord the accused any ability to speak up in their own defense.

And as Professor William Jacobson of neighboring Cornell Law School asks, “To whom do students report the microaggression reporting system?”

http://www.thefire.org/ithaca-colleg...ttling-speech/
 
Old March 30th, 2015 #28
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default

Whites suffer from several 'Microaggressions' that aren't being reported anywhere.

Like the feral nigger beast eyeballing you menacing to go all-out jungle.



The nigger stench is too much to handle and like smoking it should be prohibited in indoor areas.


The low IQ undeveloped brain and the childish behavior of the nigger.


The slums were niggers like to live are a source of diseases violence and crime.



Their monkey like aesthetics don't belong to the human species and are a sore to the eyes.



The nigger urge to upgrade his sub-animality is spreading the sexual deviance of bestiality in our society.



__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.
 
Old August 10th, 2015 #29
Zorost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,110
Zorost
Default

Some brilliant stuff here, hopefully I can measure up.



===========



===========



===========



===========



===========



===========



===========

 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:19 PM.
Page generated in 0.11953 seconds.