Search results

Microaggressions are a new moral category that refers to the subtle yet harmful forms of discriminatory behavior experienced by members of oppressed groups. Such behavior often results from implicit bias, leaving individual perpetrators unaware of the harm they have caused. Moreover, microaggressions are often dismissed on the grounds that they do not constitute a real or morally significant harm. My goal is therefore to explain why microaggressions are morally significant and argue that we are responsible for their harms. I offer a conceptual framework for microaggressions, exploring the central mechanisms used for identification and the empirical research concerning their harm. The cumulative harm of microaggressions presents a unique case for understanding disaggregation models for contributed harms, blame allocation, and individual responsibility within structural oppression. Our standard moral model for addressing cumulative harm is to hold all individual contributors blameworthy for their particular contributions. However, if we aim to hold people responsible for their unconscious microaggressions and address cumulative harm holistically, this model is inadequate. Drawing on Iris Marion Young's social connection model, I argue that we, as individual perpetrators of microaggressions, have a responsibility to respond to the cumulative harm to which we have individually contributed.

In the decade that has passed since the first edition of this book was published, there has been a significant cultural shift towards the acceptance of LGBTQ people in the United States, yet there are many ways that institutional and interpersonal discrimination takes place in the lives of LGBTQ people. Even as the world changes for the better- with the legalization of same-sex marriage, federal protections for LGBTQ people in the workplace, and more widespread acceptance of LGBTQ people- everyday homophobia and transphobia persists. Microaggressions are subtle, unconscious, and unintentional discrimination that is experienced by people of marginalized groups. In contrast to outright assaults and hate crimes, or conscious prejudicial treatment motivated by fear or dislike of "the other," microaggressions are more covert in nature, sometimes intentional or unintentional, communicating hostile, insulting, or negative messages about people of oppressed groups. This book highlights the microaggressions that LGBTQ people face on an everyday basis and examines the impacts that such experiences have on mental health

This study illustrates the types of multiracial microaggressions, or subtle forms of discrimination toward multiracial people, that transpire in family settings. Utilizing a Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) Method and a Qualitative Secondary Analysis (QSA), multiracial participants (N = 9) were interviewed in three focus groups to describe the types of microaggressions they encounter in their families. Five domains emerged including (a) isolation within the family, (b) favoritism within the family, (c) questioning of authenticity, (d) denial of multiracial identity and experiences by monoracial family members, and (e) feelings about not learning about family heritage or culture. We discuss how encouraging discussions of race and ethnicity in multiracial families is conducive to promoting healthier identities and well‐being for multiracial people.

Abstract
Despite the increasing interest in exploring microaggression in the humanitarian context, there remains uncertainty on its mechanism for affecting life outcomes. There is a lack of studies on ethnic and racial minorities in non-western countries. The current research explores dimensions and manifestations of microaggression and how they affect wellbeing in a multicultural setting. The study uses a qualitative approach with 15 focus group discussions (FGDs) and 66 participants conducted in 4 provinces of South Africa: Gauteng (k = 6), North-West (k = 3), KwaZulu-Natal (k = 3), and Western Cape (k = 3). The recorded FGDs were transcribed using the intelligent verbatim technique. The transcripts were then analysed using a phenomenological approach. Data analysis was done stepwise using the deductive coding technique. Results show that participants' perception of the dimensions of microaggression varies depending on the manifestation as verbal, behavioural, or systemic. Furthermore, variations in patterns and reactions to dimensions of microaggression were linked with participants' racial identity. It further confirms that experiencing discrimination is associated with poorer wellbeing. Connectedness to the ingroup provides stability and certainty in multi-group societies due to the group rivalry that pervades such societies.

In 1991, Philomena Essed highlighted the importance of studying contemporary racism, focusing on the interplay between the macro‐social dimension and its constant reactivation in everyday interactions. Later, psychologists redefined the pervasive experience of racism in everyday encounters in terms of racial microaggressions. Migrants and asylum seekers today constitute "ideal" candidates for this kind of experience. This is due to the persistent historical processes that harken back to Western colonialism and imperialism, as well as the growing hostility towards people migrating from the Global South. This hostility has been brewing for several decades in Western countries, and it manifests in both everyday informal interactions and institutional contexts, where migrants and asylum seekers constantly face racist attitudes.

Abstract
Despite the broad agreement that microaggressions cause harm, there is disagreement on how to capture microaggressor's accountability. Friedlaender (2018) argues that, in many cases, survivors of microaggressions are not justified in holding the microaggressor blameworthy or blaming them (Friedlaender 2018, 14). I argue, in contrast, that we are generally justified in holding most microaggressors blameworthy and blaming them. By adopting a broadly blame-inclusive account of microaggressor accountability, we are in a position to satisfy the desiderata an ideal account should meet: (1) account for cumulative harm; (2) consistently allow for standing to forgive; and (3) be risk sensitive to the microaggressed. By possessing these virtues, I believe my view of microaggressor accountability better equips us to take seriously the harm caused by microaggressions and center the well-being of microaggressees. I respond to Friedlaender's concerns regarding epistemic ignorance and what they call the disaggregation problem. In contrast to Friedlaender's broadly blame-exclusive responsibility model, I motivate a broadly blame-inclusive model for holding microaggressors accountable, explaining how it fulfills the desiderata. I respond to the objection that my account is too blame-inclusive by providing examples of (1) justified microaggressions; (2) excused microaggressions; and (3) blameworthiless microaggressions where blame is justified all the same.

Praise for Microaggressions in Everyday Life "In a very constructive way, Dr. Sue provides time-tested psychological suggestions to make our society free of microaggressions. It is a brilliant resource and ideal teaching tool for all those who wish to alter the forces that promote pain for people."-Melba J. T. Vasquez, PhD, ABPPPresident, American Psychological Association "Microaggressions in Everyday Life offers an insightful, scholarly, and thought-provoking analysis of the existence of subtle, often unintentional biases, and their profound impact on members of traditionally disadvantaged g