It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: luciferslight
Are jokes considered microaggressions?
Well if the jokes are about minorities then yes they are microaggressions. And the jokes are 100% white students fault, according to the study.
We can't tell if jokes about whites are microaggressions, they were omitted from the study, I imagine it was an oversight. Right?
Seriously the study is the joke, and so is the U of W.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: seasonal
80% of CRT is bull#, 15% is such a non-starter that it may as well be and 5% is probably worth further consideration. CRT has done exponentially more to fuel right-wing propaganda than it has to improve race relations.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Serdgiam
Microaggression it seems is a theoretical bridge beginning in actual racism, winding through stereotypes and ending up in Thoughtcrime.
It began as a theoretical movement within American law schools in the mid- to late 1980s as a reaction to critical legal studies[verification needed] and is loosely unified by two common themes. First, CRT proposes that white supremacy and racial power are maintained over time, and in particular, that the law may play a role in this process. Second, CRT work has investigated the possibility of transforming the relationship between law and racial power, and more broadly, pursues a project of achieving racial emancipation and anti-subordination. Scholars such as Derrick Bell applauded the focus of civil rights scholarship on race, but were deeply critical of civil rights scholars' commitment to color blindness and their focus on intentional discrimination, rather than a broader focus on the conditions of racial inequality.[page needed] Likewise, scholars like Patricia Williams, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, and Mari Matsuda embraced the focus on the reproduction of hierarchy in critical legal studies, but criticized critical legal scholars for failing to focus on racial domination and on the particular sources of racial oppression.