Micro-aggression: a form of “unintended discrimination.” It is depicted by the use of known social norms of behavior and/or expression that, while without conscious choice of the user, has the same effect as conscious, intended discrimination” – from wikipedia

The definition of this theory is seriously flawed because “aggression” already has a meaning. Micro-aggression, as a word, implies that there are small acts of aggression. When we start to examine this extreme liberal theory and begin to dissect it, the truth is that many of these acts are not aggression, but attempts at good will. The use of the word places its claimant in a defensive stance against an attack, which is often not the case. The word invites and promotes a victim frame, which automatically implies that the incoming item is an attack whether it is or is not.

As college student’s claims of racial and gender mistreatment grow ever more disconnected from reality, college administrators have abdicated their responsibility to cultivate an adult sense of perspective and common sense in their students. They are running scared and walking on eggshells. Instead, they are creating ever more emotionally fragile individuals who appear to be injured by the slightest collisions with real life. The effects appear to be long term and will affect us for years to come. This is the case with “rape culture,” “trigger warnings,” “safe spaces,” and “micro-aggressions.”

Whoever codified the term micro-aggression appears to have done so from a victim mindset. They seem to have roped in things that were not aggression by any stretch of the word. It’s understandable to feel like a victim if you’ve just been jabbed, but in life, we encounter all kinds of jabs, literal and figurative; many of which are unfortunate but also unintentional and non-malicious. For instance; getting elbowed at a rowdy concert, or bonked in the nose by someone who is trying to kiss you. You might get hurt temporarily, but you roll with it because that is life. We are surrounded by things like this every day. Fetishizing these types of instances under an inaccurate label gives artificial extra weight to a victimization mindset and is disingenuous and inflammatory.

Here is an excerpt from an excellent editorial by Wendy McElroy originally posted to this site: http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35979/Wendy-McElroy-Victims-Frantically-Search-For-Offense/?uuid=6F812338-5056-9627-3C59347FF3CE9388

She’s great and right on point

Microaggression. The word may soon be knocking on your door to demand supplication or another form of payment. Microaggression is the new politically correct campaign being launched by “disadvantaged” elites who are running out of even vaguely real transgressions to complain about.

What You Can Expect to Be Accused Of

Microaggression is unintended discrimination that demeans the “disadvantaged” even if the perpetrator does not intend to do so and is well-meaning. Coined in 1970 by Harvard psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce, it described unconscious racial insults delivered by whites to minorities. An example is a white teacher who asks a black student if he needs help with a math problem.

The concept includes micro-insults or insensitive communication such as asking an Asian coworker where she comes from; the question allegedly suggests she is a foreigner and not a true American. It also includes micro-invalidations that negate the feelings or reality of a black, such as speaking well of Southern cooking; the comment allegedly suggests an approval of past slavery. These behaviors lead to micro-inequities; the behaviors are conveyed through unconscious messages that allegedly devalue the “disadvantaged” in the subtle communication of facial expressions, gestures, tone, word choice, nuance and syntax.

In 1973, MIT economist Mary Rowe expanded Pierce’s term to focus on discrimination against women. A classic example of microaggression against women is using the pronoun “he” to indicate people in general when it is also a gender-specific term. Merely substituting the pronoun “she,” however, is microaggression as well because it sweeps the insult of the original situation under the rug.

The “disadvantaged” now include racial minorities, women, sexual minorities, the poor, the disabled … that is, any group considered to be marginalized. It includes almost everyone but white males or any white female who disagrees with political correctness.

Who You Can Expect to Accuse You

A predictable vector of transmission is PC feminism. And, as with the current gender insanity, it will begin on campuses. In fact, it already has. But seeing microaggression in everyone everywhere is not limited to feminists.

…………………..

Why the Utter Madness?

A seeming simply question, the answer is multi-layered. Addressing just two aspects of the madness:

1) “There are no objective definitions to words and phrases.” Without becoming philosophical or providing details, this statement comes from the belief that there is no reality whatsoever beyond what is constructed by the culture through its language, texts, history, assumptions of biological sexuality, philosophy, legal theory, etc. Objectivity and conclusions through reason and evidence do not exist; only the subject narrative presented by voices exists. In order to radically change society, it is necessary to deconstruct the current narrative and replace it with a desirable one; it is necessary for their voices to be the ones that are heard. The deconstructionist approach dates back to the postmodern philosopher Jacques Derrida and has been adopted in a wholesale, cartoon version by gender feminism.

2) Politically-correct victims are desperate to preserve their own victimhood. In terms of gender feminism, this means preserving the myth of the “rape culture”; this is a culture that so profoundly encourages rape, “rape” becomes the one word defining the culture. This may be an appropriate description of Afghanistan but it is palpably untrue of North America. In order to sustain the myth, therefore, it is necessary to define more and more innocuous behavior as sexual assault so that words, attitudes and other non-violence become assault. Equally, in order to sustain the myth that the “disadvantaged” are being constantly victimized, it is necessary to define more and more innocuous behavior as acts of violence. Or, even worse, the need for definition is being trashed and a victim now self-defines him- or herself by an entirely subjective standard.

As insane and vicious as it seem to reasonable and decent people, micro-aggression is the new cutting edge of political correctness and its subset of gender feminism.

Conclusion

The claim of microaggression is a justification for censorship and social control. To advocates, the slightest hint of insult becomes evidence of epidemic oppression in society. What you say, what you don’t say, when you do not show up either to speak or stay silent … all of these can be evidence of microaggression. That is, as long as the act or non-act is committed by a white male or by someone who disagrees with the PC theory of victimhood.

Read the entire piece HERE