I found this curious when reading the article and expected more context as to why this was racist. Why did Gebru consider this was due to her race or immigrant status? I got this comment through my whole life too even though I don’t share Gebru’s background or demographic factors. Were my teachers racist? Or were they concerned? Or was the subject just really hard? Or were they classist against my poverty?
It seems more info is needed and attributing this to racism (or sexism or xenophobia) seems like an unsupported conclusion. Although it seems Gebru felt it was racist and significant enough to mention in the background for this article.
I think this is what makes measuring micro aggressions so difficult. It’s rare to confirm the intent of the person who did something that is perceived as micro aggressions but the recipient feels and infers an intent.
I don’t know how to fix this but I want to.
I remember once remarking to a coworker that they had a nice car. It was a new 7-series and looked really nice. I thought nothing of it as it was just small talk and I frequently make such small comments to note something positive.
A few months later we were having a large zoom call after the George Floyd murder where people were recounting persistent and systematic racism. My coworker shared an example of what he called everyday racism when someone said he had a nice car and he assumed it was because he was black and couldn’t afford such a nice car. He seemed really hurt and spoke for 5 minutes about it and how he worked really hard to afford the car and his spouse had a high income as well. He didn’t name me as the person who made the comment but it sounded like my small comment.
I was so confused as to how all that could be inferred from “nice car.” I don’t know him well enough to ask about it and clear it up. I felt bad he was hurt, even though I just intended it as a small comment recognizing a nice car from a coworker and would have made the comment regardless of his race. So I don’t think I did anything wrong but still feel bad. And there’s no way I could predict such a response.
> is perceived as micro aggressions but the recipient feels and infers an intent.
> I don't compliment coworkers cars any longer.
I'm starting to think these "micro aggressions" are just a way to keep a culture war going, because some groups need a cause to fight for (for political reasons).
It reminds me of the whole master vs main debate.
A (black) engineer colleague of mine told me about his team's effort to change master to main. The whole initiative was started by a rainbow colored hair (white) PM and since it was what they believed to be a highly visible and easy fix, grew to a team of 5. All non-technical PMs of course.
They ended up producing a "manifesto of inclusive software" where they listed every word they considered offensive and what it should be replaced with and made a very public announcement regarding the change.
The only response to their email was my (black) colleague asking if the branch renaming could be postponed to after a release because he didn't know what it could break in the build and release automation in case "master" is hard-coded somewhere.
This apparently started a lengthy thread between him and the 5 PMs where they explained to him that the reason he wasn't supportive of the change was because of the "systemic and cultural racism" he apparently internalized.
This apparently started a lengthy thread between him and the 5 PMs where they explained to him that the reason he wasn't supportive of the change was because of the "systemic and cultural racism" he apparently internalized.
and yet non white people do agree on things like white privilege and microaggressions. Non white people overwhelmingly support politics that reflects a view that white people are racist and privileged. It's seen in things like this poll https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/12/17/views-on-rac....
If the majority of non white people[1] support those politics, how is it a conspiracy by liberal whites? It sounds like it's affirmatively popular to reengineer society.
The poll you link addresses people “who say white people benefit from advantages in society that black people do not have.” That’s self-evidently true: for example, white people have more wealth than black people. They are much more likely to have college degrees. Etc. You could also say “WASPs benefit from advantages in society that Appalachians don’t have” and it would be equally true.
Racial preferences and quotas, and language policing are the most prominent of the concrete policies championed by white liberals who use phrases like “white privilege,” and most minorities don’t support either.
The poll I linked shows a difference in thought among white vs Hispanic vs Black perceptions of whether or not whites benefit from advantages in society. I don't see any definition of what a societal advantage is; it may be income. My point was more that races don't agree on whether whites have societal advantages which is very serious if policies are based on that. Things like university admissions, scholarships, and job applications do not favor whites so this point is debatable I think. I would argue that being non white is a societal advantage, being white is a disadvantage now. Anti white racism is publicly acceptable.
Non white people may not care about "microaggressions" but I think for racial quotas at schools it is much less clear[1], polls seem to go back and forth. Polls aside, my point is that even if what you are saying is true, non white people support the party that discusses microaggressions and quotas overwhelmingly. Why should the polls be trusted? I believe there are certain liberal white elites who benefit from this but it's surely not just them and surely non white people are aware of what they are supporting. Another interpretation of this is just that there is indifference to radicalism or even varying degrees of support for radicalism.
> The poll I linked shows a difference in thought among white vs Hispanic vs Black perceptions of whether or not whites benefit from advantages in society. I don't see any definition of what a societal advantage is
In the absence of a definition, people’s reading of the question may reflect political polarization, but not necessarily about how a multiethnic society should work. For example, I think the constitutional design of a limited, federalized government was killed a century ago by non-Anglo immigrants. Certainly, black people generally believe in a robust federal government that can protect them from racism, and both they and Hispanics support big government with substantial investments in education and healthcare that can help reduce disparities. But that doesn’t mean they necessarily support the social and cultural rituals around race advanced by white liberals, or the more extreme policies such as racial preferences.
For that reason, it’s important to distinguish between “affirmative action” and “racial preferences. Originally, “affirmative action” mean taking affirmative steps to end explicit racial discrimination that was known to be happening. Today, it can encompass things like taking affirmative steps to ensure that universities and companies are marketing openings to qualified applicants of various races. Obviously that is a policy that has pretty broad support.
But poll after poll shows that minorities oppose using race as a factor in the actual admissions and hiring decisions. In California, Prop 16 was defeated in every single majority Hispanic county: https://thehill.com/opinion/education/526642-hispanics-shock.... Racial preferences, and similar policies such as “diversity requirements” (i.e. quotas) are a core approach for white liberals that most minorities reject.
Looks like one particular party is a beneficiary and drafter of immigration policy.
> But that doesn’t mean they necessarily support the social and cultural rituals around race advanced by white liberals,
What about black professors and activists like Ibram Kendi? Blacks appear to support racial quotas in respect to Prop 16. White liberals are certainly part of it, but not all of it. I don't see any reason to say that black elites are being led by whites and not speaking on their own accord. Brandon Johnson, the mayor of Chicago, is a good example of a radical race activist. He was most popular in areas with highest black population and won the black community by the widest margin. That suggests that radical agendas are not just shared by white liberals but have support in the black community.
> Racial preferences, and similar policies such as “diversity requirements” (i.e. quotas) are a core approach for white liberals that most minorities reject.
If there was really such opposition to racial quotas and other racial preferences, why do they continue to support the party who puts race at the center of everything they do? Several attempts recently have been made at establishing quotas for medicine, grants, etc. but challenged in court. This was no surprise. It's contradictory to support that party especially since the party seems to focus particularly on black issues and expects other non white people to act along.
> The people selected to be “representative” of the group aren’t actually a representative sampling of the group.
I believe white liberals are involved in it yes. But I also believe elite black radicals have their own goals and can sustain their own power. In general the elite don't reflect the norm so black elites have different goals than the average black person. A similar pattern is seen in South Africa. Black elites run the country while the norm is impoverished. It would be hard to argue that SA is run by white liberals though.
The majority of large cities have black mayors and a number of teacher's unions are run by blacks. It's hard to see how white liberals even can benefit from things like not enforcing laws and taxes targeted at wealthy whites https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/01/chicago-mayo.... Right now the relationship is symbiotic with white liberals. But in my opinion this is a strange relationship.
Speaking of SA, racial retribution is a politically popular narrative demagogues can take advantage of. It's not unprecedented and happened repeatedly in ethnically diverse African countries in the last few decades. I think this is the general pattern ethnic conflict in a democracy leads to which I think the US is headed towards.
A lot of the Hispanic and Asian population came in the last 30 years or so and it would be hard to argue they are a victim of racism in the US but it is disappointing that they are siding with the pro ethnic conflict side.
> This is the white-liberal-dominated selection process at work.
This can happen in a selection process because the white american mind is propagandized to believe it is subconsciously racist and an evil oppressor so generally white people give deference to outspoken blacks to avoid being accused of racism. A small number of radicals can overpower a majority in that sense.
Wow. Totally wrong lesson learned. Go refresh yourself to some hardcore problems and then replay your situation again.
A more standard response may be: “oh that was me. Your car is better than mine. Sometimes you know, a compliment is just a compliment.”
I’m currently reading Hunting Eichmann. Really nasty stuff that went down, as many know. A very strong reminder that so many of these first-world problems, micro-aggressions, sympathy-seeking woe-is-me public sob stories are just crap. Seriously?? He felt bad from a complement about his car??
So I don’t think I did anything wrong but still feel bad. And there’s no way I could predict such a response.
I feel bad for both of you. This anecdote seems to capture everything wrong with the current climate of discussion on these topics in the US right now.
It's unfortunate, but for you to feel guilty and to stop this seems unreasonable. There are myriad of traps I can imagine you'd be afraid of falling into. Like, "Oh I want lunch and I fancy some fried chicken. Oh wait if I invite [black colleague] will they be offended at the suggestion to go for that food?"
Communication goes through filters, as this cheap graphic shows, and I don't think it's something you can fix on your side:
To clarify, I don’t feel guilty over my actions and didn’t stop complimenting out of virtue. I stopped to not cause potential harm, or even worse, to be labeled a racist and all the time they would take.
I also never suggest friend chicken for lunch. I love fried chicken. I make a pretty good friend chicken. I’m just too timid and over leveraged to risk having it perceived incorrectly.
I found this curious when reading the article and expected more context as to why this was racist. Why did Gebru consider this was due to her race or immigrant status? I got this comment through my whole life too even though I don’t share Gebru’s background or demographic factors. Were my teachers racist? Or were they concerned? Or was the subject just really hard? Or were they classist against my poverty?
It seems more info is needed and attributing this to racism (or sexism or xenophobia) seems like an unsupported conclusion. Although it seems Gebru felt it was racist and significant enough to mention in the background for this article.
I think this is what makes measuring micro aggressions so difficult. It’s rare to confirm the intent of the person who did something that is perceived as micro aggressions but the recipient feels and infers an intent.
I don’t know how to fix this but I want to.
I remember once remarking to a coworker that they had a nice car. It was a new 7-series and looked really nice. I thought nothing of it as it was just small talk and I frequently make such small comments to note something positive.
A few months later we were having a large zoom call after the George Floyd murder where people were recounting persistent and systematic racism. My coworker shared an example of what he called everyday racism when someone said he had a nice car and he assumed it was because he was black and couldn’t afford such a nice car. He seemed really hurt and spoke for 5 minutes about it and how he worked really hard to afford the car and his spouse had a high income as well. He didn’t name me as the person who made the comment but it sounded like my small comment.
I was so confused as to how all that could be inferred from “nice car.” I don’t know him well enough to ask about it and clear it up. I felt bad he was hurt, even though I just intended it as a small comment recognizing a nice car from a coworker and would have made the comment regardless of his race. So I don’t think I did anything wrong but still feel bad. And there’s no way I could predict such a response.
I don’t compliment coworkers cars any longer.