Nina Svirsky's Critical Conversation Response #4

In the quest for absurd political correctness and arbitrary color-blind politeness, our crusade against microaggressions has, at times, become a bit excessive. Considering that by definition, microaggressions are completely unintentional, hyper-stigmatizing them can sometimes produce the opposite effect we seek, of perpetuating the alienation of whichever group, culture, or race is being addressed. Nonetheless, the weight of microaggressions is not at all "perceived". The subtlety of their attack doesn't undermine the severity of their impression, especially on targets who already experience more overt forms of discrimination, as we've seen clearly in our present-day educational system. As always, awareness (and, as a natural result, discussion) is key to ending the threat of microaggressions. More importantly, unpacking the long-held stereotypes and simply outdated historical associations that give birth to these attacks are the key to controlling exactly what we struggle with controlling all of our lives - the subconscious itself. Both the conscious and the subconscious are developing at incredibly rapid rates during the first ten years of a child's life, so in educating the teachers and administrators that oversee this development, we must not only address when and where microaggressions are used but also how to address them directly to these students. The only thing worse than intolerance is ignorance, and without some authority in their life to help pinpoint and disparage the microaggressions heard every day, a child will only understand them as true and certain. Thus, the threat of microaggresions is real while its inevitability is CERTAINLY not.