Microaggression - a real thing?

[MajGenl.Meade]

The blog post reflected the opinions of some Employee Forum delegates and was intended to provide a general overview about microaggressions—not to fully examine the topic, which is nuanced and complex

Ah, now we know - there are microaggressions (other than rubato)

[Scooter]

Sort of like asking a recovering alcoholic if they want a beer, when you have no idea whether or not they are an alcoholic

Actually, it isn't the same. A recovering alcoholic can answer "no" without disclosing why.

They (the person being asked) needs to get over it. 99.99999999% of the time they mean nothing sinister by the question.

No one is suggesting that they are. But someone who hadn't thought of it before might actually appreciate the guidance if they don't want to unnecessarily offend a colleague.

And as far as the NC guidlines...And for a university to even write this stuff down well

As already posted, they weren't "guidelines" and it wasn't the university that wrote it.

[Big RR]

Sort of like asking a recovering alcoholic if they want a beer, when you have no idea whether or not they are an alcoholic
Actually, it isn't the same. A recovering alcoholic can answer "no" without disclosing why.

Couldn't a lesbian asked about her boyfriend/husband do the same thing and answer that she didn't have one. I think anyone who would follow up with additional questions on that would also be the sort of person who would say "come on, it's only one drink".
to have these questions
Again, I see nothing wrong with avoiding offense, but I am surprised someone would actually take offense to an innocent question. Before I had kids I had a lot of people ask me how old my kids were as an ice breaker. I didn't see it as offensive, more as just a clumsy way to start a conversation. Face it, if you deviate from the "norm" for whatever reason you're going to have these innocent questions, and it's part of life to deal with them.

[Scooter]

Couldn't a lesbian asked about her boyfriend/husband do the same thing and answer that she didn't have one.

It's still a lie in essence, because she is misleading the questioner into believing that she is single.

[Big RR]

I wouldn't see it that way, if I say I don't have a girlfriend it doesn't mean I don't have a boyfriend, but I guess others may see it differently. But, IMHO, I do not see a problem with lying in response to a question that someone asks a question merely as a matter of form (to open a conversation) or a question to which a person has not right to an answer. So I don't see lying in response as a problem, and wouldn't be upset if someone lied to me in response to such a question.

I've also said "I'm fine" many times in response to "How are you", even when I was feeling badly.

[Lord Jim]

Looks like whoever is charge of that website decided that they didn't want to have something really, really, really stupid appearing on their forum...

I can think of a couple of people around here who should be grateful that this forum does not have such a policy...

A substantial portion of their posts would disappear...

[MajGenl.Meade]

Couldn't a lesbian asked about her boyfriend/husband do the same thing and answer that she didn't have one.

It's still a lie in essence, because she is misleading the questioner into believing that she is single.

Most of the time that would be true; she is single. If she were "married" then she could say "yes". But of course in the first instance a likely follow-up question from another woman might be, "Oh I know a man you'd be interested in". That could be awkward.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Actually, it isn't the same. A recovering alcoholic can answer "no" without disclosing why.

And the lesbian (or gay) can answer "they're fine" (if there is a significant other) or "I'm not attached".

I still think people (some, not all) are looking for these "micro aggressions" when no ill intent was meant.
You results may vary.

[Scooter]

And the lesbian (or gay) can answer "they're fine" (if there is a significant other)...

Which would be a lie if the question was asked in a gender-specific way

... or "I'm not attached".

which would be tantamount to a lie by not correcting the questioner's assumption that he/she is heterosexual.

I still think people (some, not all) are looking for these "micro aggressions" when no ill intent was meant.

Oh for fuck's sake, no one is claiming that ill will is intended. None of this would have been directed at people of ill wil in the first place, because someone of ill will simply would not give a fuck. It is intended for people who are not of ill will who would not want to cause offense but who might be unaware that their choice of language may be doing so unintentionally.

Maybe if you got that boulder-sized chip off your shoulder, that might finally sink in after having it explained to you at least three times.

[oldr_n_wsr]

No chip, no boulder.
I understand, I just don't agree with it all.