Why we should let go of the term microaggressions
Some time ago I had a discussion with my significant other on why words matter. As with many of our in depth-conversations, this chat took place during breakfast. A moment in the day that is often stressful because we’re operating on an insufficient amount of sleep while trying to get some nutrients in our bodies and that of our 2-year-old toddler.
Yet despite feeling depleted, these mornings are usually moments where I let my mind roam and talk freely, or perhaps even associatively, about topics that matter to my heart. I do not know with certainty what triggered this particular Ted Talk, but I remember feeling frustrated about how inadequately the term “micro-aggressions” captures bigotry and its effects on those who are at the receiving end of it. And especially the ease with which this term is often used within anti-bigotry discourses.
So after venting and offering arguments for why this term should be buried, my partner said: “You know I love these morning chats but I think your ideas shouldn’t remain at the kitchen table. So do me a favor and write them down so that you can share them with others.”
Following his advice, I started thinking about how I could convey my train of thoughts as unambiguously as possible. I wondered how I could effectively communicate my feelings and thought while acknowledging the inherent limitations of words in capturing our internal experiences. Because, indeed, whether words are spoken or written, there is always a risk of something getting lost in translation.
Nevertheless, I strongly believe in the importance of carefully choosing our words, considering that they not only convey ideas but also shape our perception of and subsequent engagement with the world. Words have the power to influence how we think, feel, and act. Therefore, failing to reflect on and select appropriate words to describe our internal experiences may potentially invalidate both our own experiences and those of others. It is with this in mind that I thought it was important to scrutinize, bury, and seek an alternative for the term “microaggression”.
“mixed kids are the prettiest”
At present, microaggressions are defined as “the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.” Examples may be questions and statements such as “mixed kids are the prettiest”, “where are you really from?”, “I don’t see color”, or “you are so articulate for an African.”
I remember the first time I heard of the definition of microaggressions and how relieved I felt because I had finally acquired the words to articulate some of the atrocities that I had experienced as a Black woman. Yet, somehow, I always felt that the term did not fully acknowledge the profound impact that these acts may have on the well-being of marginalized individuals. Especially given the fact that people often assume that microaggressions have minor effects on those subjected to them. Although these effects are not explicitly described in the definition of microaggressions, I believe that the prefix ‘micro’ inadvertently contributes to this misconception. It is precisely for this reason that I believe we should abandon this term as it may mask or minimize the experiences of marginalized groups.
“assessments of the impact of bigotry require insight into the experiences of those affected by it”
When reflecting on the impact of bigotry it is important to acknowledge that we can never make judgments about its effects by simply looking at how it is manifested and whether it was intentional or not. Instead, assessments of the impact of bigotry require insight into the experiences of those affected by it. To fully understand these experiences, it is critical to consider the context in which marginalized individuals live. This context encompasses their past and present experiences, including experiences that were passed on from generation to generation such as historic trauma and resilience. It is the sum of these experiences that determines how bigotry impacts the individual.
As such, when we focus on why a certain act of bigotry occurred or what the intention was behind it without contextualizing it, we are only scratching the surface and are not considering the deeper layers that shape our experiences. When these layers are examined, they help us understand why there is often nothing micro about so-called microaggressions; they reveal that these presumed small acts of injustice can have significant consequences.
“there is often nothing micro about so-called microaggressions”
Whenever I have spoken about my aversion towards the term “microaggressions” I have often encountered the argument that as long as it is clearly defined and understood, there is no real problem. I strongly disagree with this logic for two reasons. Firstly, the definition of microaggressions is not easily grasped, leading to potential confusion and misinterpretation. Secondly, even if a more graspable definition existed, persistently using the term may inadvertently downplay the impact of these bigoted messages or actions. This may perpetuate the misconception that so-called microaggressions are insignificant, while in reality, their cumulative effects can be profoundly detrimental to a person's well-being.
This erroneous belief may further hinder effective communication and, perhaps most importantly, an adequate understanding of what the impact is of what I prefer to label as subtle signs of social exclusion. I believe that using this terminology instead of “microaggressions” is useful as it 1) captures the subtlety of everyday bigoted messages or actions, 2) acknowledges their marginalizing effects but 3) does not make claims about their severity.
By refraining from making assumptions about the impact of subtle signs of social exclusion, we invite our minds and hearts to create space and listen to the experiences of those affected by them. This openness is critical for understanding the impact of social exclusion and giving back power to those whose stories are often untold or unheard because they have been silenced or ignored.
I want to emphasize that I’m not claiming that my suggestion is the ultimate solution. My only goal is to challenge the status quo. Since the term ‘microaggressions’ was first coined in the 70s, our understanding of bigotry has continued to expand. We have broadened our lexicon to better capture individual experiences. However, as we progress, we should periodically revisit influential concepts. We should assess their current relevance and let go of those that no longer serve us.
With that being said, don’t you think it’s time to retire the term “microaggressions” and view it as a respected veteran?