14 ms·
In a given situation, who decides who the "aggressor" is? You're throwing that word around as though it's always a given.
by hacker789 14y ago
In a given situation, who decides who the "aggressor" is? You're throwing that word around as though it's always a given.
- stcredzero 14y agoA big part of the difficulty, is that this is the stuff that goes on once bigotry has been pushed down to the subliminal level. Once there is little overt bigotry, then further progress is through accomplishment. There is no sharp demarcation, of course. The tech industry is perhaps still not quite at the "everything is subliminal" point. And yes, a part of the human condition, is that everything is subverted and abused or misapplied, sometime. Because...humans. We're messy.
- jackowayed 14y agoSeriously? In the situations where people talk about microaggressions, it's one party acting in a certain way toward someone from an oppressed class that subtly devalues them in a way that ties into the oppression of that class. Out of context, one may see it as "not a big deal", but in the broader context of that class's oppression, and the frequency with which people of the oppressed class may experience microaggressions, it is a big deal. In that case, there is one clear party who is being (subtly) aggressive.
- hacker789 14y agoSeriously. Situations are rarely black and white. It is uncivilized to always assume that the person taking offense is automatically correct. We're all people, and people are capable of dishonestly taking advantage of the sympathies of the mob du jour. It is always okay to discuss whether someone is actually guilty, and it is always okay to discuss whether someone is actually making false accusations.
- stcredzero 14y agoI agree. Let me also add that it's often good policy to assume we're all basically decent people, and any problems are due to mistakes or incomplete knowledge. At least at first. Innocent until proven guilty.
- mkr-hn 14y agoThe post isn't short on examples.
- theorique 14y agoGenerally, in modern social justice circles, the more privileged person is considered the aggressor and the less privileged person is considered the victim. If a person is targeted by multiple "isms" then they can be the victim of people targeted by fewer "isms". However, it is not possible for a privileged person to be the aggressor in a conflict with a less privileged person.