#microaggressions in everyday life

[lyndentree63]

I think people have taken the concept of "it's not my job to educate you" too far.

Like, the place I first saw it is when Black people were telling white people it's not their job to educate them about racism and YES. This is true and good, and especially in the case of an everyday Black person just going about their life, they should not be expected to teach white people about why microaggressions are bad or that systemic oppression exists.

"It's not my job to educate you" is true when there's a power dynamic. It's true when the marginalised person is being forced to tell the person in power why what they're doing is wrong / perpetuating oppression.

But broadly? And especially if we are in a position of relative privilege? It's absolutely our job to educate other people on why racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, classism, etc etc are bad.

If we're a leftist or a progressive and we want to make the world better, it IS our job to educate people.

[fountainpenguin]

"I'm not the kind of girl to get messed up with you- Hello! ... You're all right, but I'm here, darling, to enjoy the party..." (x)

---

New Dog's Life chapter today! ~ 3rd Life series fan-season

Chapter 31 - “Flame (Etho, Skizz, Pearl)”

❤️ Read on AO3

💛 Start from Chapter 1

💚 More Pixels Imperfect fics

---

Scar files a microaggression complaint with the HALO team. Pearl helps Scott settle in while he recovers from glitchy code. They have a spat that's not about a sticker.

Meanwhile, SnifferMyFeet and Etho separate their souls… and start an honest talk about Sniff's identity as Sniff, not Joel. It was needed. It's for the best.

(First 900 words under the cut)

---

Etho - Fox

Status: Resting

Self-taught programmer, full-time hero

💙  💙  💙

He gets it now.

It's like ice in your water. It's like marshmallows in your cocoa. It's like wind beneath your wings. The final week before he's due back in Between (reluctantly, but definitely due), Etho flops on his bed and sprawls his arms to either side. Is he giddy? He doesn't mean to be, but this feels…

… Oh, it's a game-changer. Which is exactly what he texts Cleo after scooping up his admin panel. They won't see it if they've left their private server, and since Session 2 of Dog's Life could be starting any day now, there's no telling how long that may take.

Etho: hey so Etho: remember after limlife 4 or 5 when we talked about burnout?

Grocery shopping. For a family dinner- he and Cleo both made one (like a peace offering) in a way that wasn't really flirty married life roleplay, but more like… regular, everyday person roleplay. Did all their shopping together so they wouldn't cook the same thing. Call it 'date night' if you want; he walked her home and there might've been a little 'dramatic logout' roleplay in there. We don't… We don't need to go into detail about it.

To some people that's romantic and to some it's completely gross. Not really sure why… It's a natural process, isn't it? Soul-eaters can't help being what they are, and you may as well snap at endermen hybrids for struggling with eye contact or shame unthreaded players if they expose their glitches instead of keeping them covered up. This world's too big and life too long for arguing. Do you really want to make enemies and be rude to people who are going to carry the echo of your words for the rest of their lives?

Lend a helping hand. Extend a little kindness. Be polite. Respond to the hurt. Try not to avoid responsibility when others are counting on your strength. Sit with the injured, even when the night is cold. They're simple goals, but so easily forgotten these days.

Etho: I think you said if I felt stuck then I should break my routine for a while

Nothing happens for several minutes. Etho rotates words without meaning through his head, then types out something else.

Etho: you were right. I get now why you go on adventures with Martyn. Why you let him and no one else log you out all the time. Thanks for the advice. Let me know next time you need a favor. Rating this cycle 10 of 10 and I owe you big xD

He takes a long, guilt-free nap in his cushioned bed. Catching up on block updates and videos really drains a guy (especially this close to the end of the Hermitcraft season, not to mention Vault Hunters and a Life series on top of it), but he spent all morning prepping the bed and it's already providing every agonizing tick of its worth. Two hours later, he's stirred awake by a buzz on the admin panel.

ZombieCleo: yay! So glad that worked for you <3 I want to hear all about it. Maybe in a couple weekends you can watch MCC with me and the kids + Martyn? If we catch a minute alone, I can recommend more stuff you might be into ;)

The kids refers to Bdubs and Scar, who skated through Limited Life like energetic teenagers spreading their wings. It's goofy, it's endearing, and Cleo's got her roleplay voice on because she knows it makes him snort. His tail gives a twitch as he tries to keep a smirk from creeping out behind his mask.

Martyn, huh? he muses, but doesn't say that. Cleo circles between lovers, friends, and exes like a pollinating bee.

Etho: whoaaaa Etho: inviting a fox? that's dangerous! ZombieCleo: nose out of your tail, fur boy Etho: dibs on Martyn, I see ZombieCleo: If you're serious about returning the favor, Martyn says Rhetoric's down here and this might be our best chance at smash and grabbing from your mum's museum Etho: Hm… ZombieCleo: I mean, you did leave my eggshell when you rescued Grian and that other soul

Yeah- it looked distressed. Now Sniff's down here. He can actually talk now when he couldn't before. Honestly, not the worst decision he could've made.

If anyone's going to try getting into the Fox Dragon's museum, a fox has the best chance of doing so. It's kept separate from the nesting cave where souls respawn, but even the deadliest traps won't keep foxes out since they'll just respawn. Unless they're traps that can't be dodged even with careful planning, or some sort of system that short-circuits code. The phantom roost is nearby, right? Frankly, phantoms are excellent trackers, they can fly, and they're probably the fastest of all non-swimming hybrids, so a phantom alone provides great security as-is.

Etho: I'll think about it. Not tonight, though. Full moon fox face isn't for me. Also if there are raiders there then that's probably the worst time to show up ZombieCleo: Fair ZombieCleo: I can think of something else, but if you ever get the chance, I want it back Etho: duly noted ✌️ ZombieCleo: btw say hi to Scar and Bdubs when you see them. They've been cracking nonstop jokes since you disappeared. One can only imagine they're attempting humor to bury immense throes of pain Etho: D:

[Full chapter on AO3 - Link at top]

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Bret Stephens

Published: Jun 25, 2024

The notable fact about the anti-Israel campus demonstrations is that they are predominantly an elite phenomenon. Yes, there have been protests at big state schools like the University of Nebraska, but they have generally been small, tame and — thanks to administrators prepared to enforce the rules — short-lived. It’s Stanford, Berkeley, Yale, Penn, Harvard, Columbia and many of their peers that have descended to open bigotry, institutional paralysis and mayhem.

Two questions: Why the top universities? And what should those on the other side of the demonstrations — Jewish students and alumni most of all — do about it?

Regarding the first question, some argue that the furor over the campus protests is much ado about not much. The demonstrators, they say, represent only a small fraction of students. The ugliest antisemitic expressions occasionally seen at these events are mainly the work of outside provocateurs. And the student protesters (some of whom are Jewish) are acting out of youthful idealism, not age-old antisemitism. As they see it, they aim only to save Palestinian lives and oppose the involvement of their universities in the abuses of a racist Israeli state.

There’s something to these points. With notable exceptions, campus life at these schools is somewhat less roiled by protest than the media makes it seem. Outside groups, as more than one university president has told me, have played an outsize role in setting up encampments and radicalizing students. And few student demonstrators, I’d wager, consciously think they harbor an anti-Jewish prejudice.

But this lets the kids off the hook too easily.

Students who police words like “blacklist” or “whitewash” and see “microaggressions” in everyday life ignore the entreaties of their Jewish peers to avoid chants like “globalize the intifada” or “from the river to the sea.” Students who claim they’re horribly pained by scenes of Palestinian suffering were largely silent on Oct. 7 — when they weren’t openly cheering the attacks. And students who team up with outside groups that are in overt sympathy with Islamist terrorists aren’t innocents. They’re collaborators.

How did the protesters at elite universities get their ideas of what to think and how to behave?

They got them, I suspect, from the incessant valorization of victimhood that has been a theme of their upbringing, and which many of the most privileged kids feel they lack — hence the zeal to prove themselves as allies of the perceived oppressed. They got them from the crude schematics of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion training seminars, which divide the world into “white” and “of color,” powerful and “marginalized,” with no regard for real-world complexities — including the complexity of Jewish identity. They got them from professors who think academic freedom amounts to a license for political posturing, sometimes of a nakedly antisemitic sort. They got them from a cheap and easy revision of history that imagines Zionism is a form of colonialism (it’s decidedly the opposite), that colonialism is something only white people do, and that as students at American universities, they can cheaply atone for their sins as guilty beneficiaries of the settler-colonialism they claim to despise.

They also got them from university administrators whose private sympathies often lie with the demonstrators, who imagine the anti-Israel protests as the moral heirs to the anti-apartheid protests and who struggle to grasp (if they even care) why so many Jewish students feel betrayed and besieged by the campus culture.

That’s the significance of the leaked images of four Columbia University deans exchanging dismissive and sophomoric text messages during a panel discussion in May on Jewish life on campus, including the suggestion that a panelist was “taking full advantage of this moment” for the sake of the “fundraising potential.”

Columbia placed three of the deans on leave. Other universities, like Penn, have belatedly moved to ban encampments. But those steps have a grudging and reactive feel — more a response to Title VI investigations of discrimination and congressional hearings than a genuine acknowledgment that something is deeply amiss with the values of a university. At Harvard, two successive members of the task force on antisemitism resigned in frustration. “We are at a moment when the toxicity of intellectual slovenliness has been laid bare for all to see,” wrote Rabbi David Wolpe in his resignation announcement.

That’s the key point. More dismaying than the fact that student protesters are fellow traveling with Hamas is that with their rhyming chants and identical talking points, they sound more like Maoist cadres than critical thinkers. As the sociologist Ilana Redstone, author of the smart and timely book “The Certainty Trap,” told me on Monday, “higher education traded humility and curiosity for conviction and advocacy — all in the name of being inclusive. Certainty yields students who are contemptuous of disagreement.”

And so the second question: What are Jewish students and alumni to do?

It’s telling that the Columbia deans were caught chortling during exactly the kind of earnest panel discussion that the university convened presumably to show alumni they are tackling campus antisemitism. They were paying more lip service than attention. My guess is that they, along with many of their colleagues, struggle to see the problem because they think it lies with a handful of extremist professors and obnoxious students.

But the real problem lies with some of the main convictions and currents of today’s academia: intersectionality, critical theory, post-colonialism, ethnic studies and other concepts that may not seem antisemitic on their face but tend to politicize classrooms and cast Jews as privileged and oppressive. If, as critical theorists argue, the world’s injustices stem from the shadowy agendas of the powerful and manipulative few against the virtuous masses, just which group is most likely to find itself villainized?

Not even the most determined university president is going to clean out the rot — at least not without getting rid of the entrenched academic departments and tenured faculty members who support it. That could take decades. In the meantime, Jews have a history of parting company with institutions that mistreated them, like white-shoe law firms and commercial banks. In so many cases, they went on to create better institutions that operated on principles of intellectual merit and fair play — including many of the universities that have since stumbled.

If you are an Ivy League megadonor wondering how to better spend the money you no longer want to give a Penn or a Columbia — or just a rising high school senior wondering where to apply — maybe it’s time to forgo the fading prestige of the old elite for the sake of something else, something new. That’s a subject for a future column.

==

Intersectionality is a "luxury belief"; that is, it signals a form of elite status. It's a form of academic masturbation which has no alignment with reality.

Luxury beliefs are ideas and opinions that confer status on the upper class, while often inflicting costs on the lower classes. – Rob Henderson

[mmakaylllaa]

Week 6 Blog 10/3

What are some examples of white supremacy in online spaces?

Besides bias embedded into coding leading to racism infiltrating online spaces we need to look at the conscious decisions gamers use when participating in video games pushing stereotypes.

“...the “male” cyborg continues to march on preestablished pathways of colonization, domination, and destruction through his militarized versions of video games and Nintendo wars.” (The Revenge of the Yellowfaced Cyborg Terminator) Although the point of this Terminator character is supposed to represent an apocalyptic future, the author poses a great question- what thought was put behind racializing the character with a distasteful name? This character poses as a ‘menace’ going through the virtual world committing heinous acts while posing as a certain race. The owner of this game sent out a statement claiming this game is merely a parody- ultimately confining the gamer and society to view and play the game through the lens of a “joke” which undermines any damage caused to the targeted community. This also poses another issue of preserving white supremacy and outcasting any backlash,

How can we relate today’s society to the Black Mirror episode “Nosedive”?

We are a very digital society reliant on connection and validation. Nosedive shows a world that poses as a futuristic one but with all the same values as the average middle class trying to climb to the top. Lacie starts off with a basic rating and due to the possibility of economic and social opportunities, she dedicates every interaction and moment of her day to creating and maintaining superficial relationships. The rating system is mostly based on social media posts which leads to an obsession to strive for others to perceive one in the most perfect lighting. Through the episode we see this has detrimental impacts on Lacie’s mental health and relationships which only lowers her status. Another important detail to take note of is the exploitation of personal data. We see this as Lacie is applying for apartments and is only considered for qualification based on her data and networks. We can relate all this to our day to day lives as we are currently in an obsessive, image/status driven society which distorts real life. Although the episode may pose as an extreme take, we must understand it emphasizes the dangers of having our lives so intertwined with technology.

How do we perform gender/race online?

Throughout the entire online world, we are able to present ourselves in any possible way. This goes beyond our posts and bios but into what media we consume and what online communities we interact with. We make language choices such as “feminine” or “masculine” communication, code switching, or even emojis. We decide when it is appropriate to use these communication styles based on our virtual communities, platforms, and social movements. It is important to note the dangers of these anonymous and fluid identities. Many take the opportunity to push gender and racial stereotypes and overt discrimination such as microaggressions, gendered harassment, and racial trolling all posed as “dark humor”.

How does race differ from real life and the cyberworld?

In our everyday real life, race is perceived based on visuality such as skin color, facial features, and cultural clues. These indicators are ultimately irreversible as people are assigned these racial identities at birth. In the cyberworld, online users have autonomy to hide, alter, or emphasize any aspects of their identity- both real or made up. The choice to remain anonymous allows people to present themselves without immediate visual indicators of race which can either reduce or completely remove any existing racial bias throughout online actions. A major privilege is for those in the online world is the option to present as something other than their racial identity, which is entirely impossible throughout face to face interactions.

[landrysg]

Students who police words like “blacklist” or “whitewash” and see “microaggressions” in everyday life ignore the entreaties of their Jewish peers to avoid chants like “globalize the intifada” or “from the river to the sea.” Students who claim they’re horribly pained by scenes of Palestinian suffering were largely silent on Oct. 7 — when they weren’t openly cheering the attacks. And students who team up with outside groups that are in overt sympathy with Islamist terrorists aren’t innocents. They’re collaborators. ...

More dismaying than the fact that student protesters are fellow traveling with Hamas is that with their rhyming chants and identical talking points, they sound more like Maoist cadres than critical thinkers. As the sociologist Ilana Redstone, author of the smart and timely book “The Certainty Trap,” told me on Monday, “higher education traded humility and curiosity for conviction and advocacy — all in the name of being inclusive. Certainty yields students who are contemptuous of disagreement.”

[mayoayonnaise]

She moved with a fluid grace, a goddess sculpted from moonlight and honey. Her power wasn't a weapon brandished, but a silent, irresistible force. A whisper that could shatter mountains, a glance that could ignite revolutions. She wasn’t above the fray; she was woven into the very fabric of it, the heartbeat of creation, the pulse of life itself. She wasn’t draped in celestial fabrics or perched on a throne of clouds. She was just… her. A woman, maybe a barista, maybe a teacher, maybe a single mom juggling three jobs. But in her eyes— the quiet strength of a thousand suns. This was God, in her most human form, and her power wasn’t some cosmic force, but the quiet, unwavering resolve to dismantle the systems that had tried to break her, and countless others like her. SHE WAS JUST A WOMAN, A WOMAN.

The men who misjudged her, the ones who saw only her grin, not the fire in her eyes— they missed the point entirely. Her strength was only increased by their attempts to subdue, and control her. Their biggest flaw was their blindness, and their arrogance was their downfall. For she was the earth— fertile and unwavering, capable of both nurturing and destruction. They didn’t see the years of hard work, the sacrifices made, the battles fought and won in the quiet corners of my own heart. They failed to recognize the courage required to get out of bed every morning, deal with the continual push to fit in, the subtle slights, and the microaggressions. MEN ARE TRASH— WHY MUST MEN DISREGARD WOMEN’S WORTH?

She was the storm— powerful and erratic, capable of both gentle rain and devastating thunder. She was the sun— radiating warmth and light, but could also burn those who dared to stand too close. She was the moon— a silent observer, a confidante, a source of both enigma and comfort. She didn’t need to raise her voice; her actions spoke volumes. She wasn’t seeking vengeance— she was building a better world, a world where the divine feminine wasn't relegated to a distant, ethereal realm, but woven into the very fabric of everyday life. THE TRUE POWER OF GOD, A WOMAN THAT SHE IS.

And maybe that’s okay. Maybe they’re not meant to understand. Her power is for her alone, for the women who stand beside her. It’s a power built not on anger, but on self-acceptance, on resilience, on the unwavering belief in our own inherent worth. And that, her friends, is a force to be reckoned with. She was unquestionably powerful, the embodiment of creation, the creator of her own fate. It was a power that was earned rather than imposed, one that was evoked by awe and reverence rather than fear. She is aware that she is unstoppable. MEN SHALL KNEEL BEFORE THE WOMAN, KNEEL BEFORE HER— KNOW YOUR PLACE, PEASANT. WORSHIP WOMEN.

[readychilledwine]

About CoParents:

Warning- Long post, and my thoughts are a little jumbled

I got accused of racism today over my Co Parents drabble featuring Eris and Cassian. I was also accused of alienating Cassian from his daughter, forcing her to grow up in a place known for racism and prejudice, ect.

And I just need to talk about it.

To address the alienation- I based the relationship between Cassian, Eris, and babygirl off of one I see in my everyday life between my partner's brother, his daughter, her momma and her significant other.

In my real life- Momma has primary custody of their daughter, and she has been with her significant other since their daughter was about 7 months old. She is 4 and views both of them as daddy. She gets sad when she leaves her "home dad" and mom. But that sadness is quickly gone as soon as she is with bio daddy (partner's brother.)

I based the communications and exchange on what I've watched between the two men in my life. The babygirl in my life is happy, healthy, loves both of her daddies equally, but like all Littles who have adult feelings, but do not know how to express them, she gets a little sad because she knows she'll miss mom and dad, even if she's super excited to also see biodaddy, and she cries leaving biodaddy to go back home. We've ALL worked our asses off ensuring she has healthy home lives, support from all of us, and she knows how loved, wanted, and supported she is (and she does.) I do not see a few little tears during an exchange as a sign of alienating a parent.

I also tried to make it clear she sees Cassian. The updates Eris gave him are SMALL. (She likes hot chocolate before bed now. Potty issues a lot of littles struggle with.) Eris calls Cassian her dad, which is NOT something people alienating a parent does. Eris told Cassian he had no doubts Cassian would take good care of her over the next 2 weeks, which is a sign of Eris supporting Cassian as a father. I had planned on doing the exchange back with Cassian in Autumn, returning babygirl to the reader, and meeting the babe.

But now we head into the racism part.

Being accused of being racist is a lingering ick, and I can't shake it.

I am active in organizations that work with BIPOC on educating people on racism, discrimination, and privilege. I work with law enforcement, medical, and fire teams regarding race sensitivity education. I am the dispatcher who also handles empathy training in our department. I pride myself on being sensitive, empathic, and educated on signs of racism and microaggressions.

I want to apologize if Co Parents came off that way to someone else, though. I want to apologize to anyone who may have been offended. It was not my intent at all as the writer, and genuinely, if I hurt you, I am sorry.

I'm debating on deleting Co Parents and being done with writing acotar characters as parents, especially in Coparenting situations and blended houses. I never want to feel as icky as I do right now, I will not be writing a follow-up to it if it does stay up, and I'm going to be done with the dynamic to prevent this from happening again.

I do also want to add-

I am fine with discussing and taking criticism for my writing. If it turns into a debate, though, and "let's agree to disagree," has been said by both of us, but it still turns into more digging and backhanded attacks, I make no promises I won't block you.. I want my blog to be a safe haven for myself and my followers. I won't allow someone to attack any of you or me here. I don't appreciate that at all. I was going to allow the comments to sit, but there's a line, and I felt it was crossed in this situation.

I don't know, friends. Feeling pretty icky.

[allamericanlacy]

Lacy.

Lacy has been the one song on Guts that has been sticking with me every second of everyday, and I finally figured out why.

On genius, this is what it says Lacy is about.

"In one lens, Rodrigo embraces her inferiority complex by personifying the beauty of women she’s intimidated by in this “Lacy” character. Similar to “jealousy, jealousy” and “obsessed,” Olivia succumbs to her habit of comparing herself to other women to an extent so extreme that it seems like a crippling romantic obsession."

Using that, I have found myself relating it to a girl that I know in real life. This girl, who I have admired for years, is everything I want to be and even more. She's pulchritudinous. Gorgeous eyes that always have a glimmer of optimism in them, long arms and legs that aren't plagued by the burden of body hair, shiny hair that effortlessly frames her face beautifully, a face that isn't weighed down by glasses that conceal her best feature.

However, her beauty is beyond being purely physical. She has the intelligence level that my parents and I could only dream of me having. Her ability to excel every subject without an ounce of stress seeming to weigh down her natural beauty. And her voice—a voice so sweet and sultry I could die from sugar poisoning—never seems to waver when speaking kind word to people, no matter who she was talking to.

The asshole of the grade? She praised him for his art, the one thing he seemed to be proud of.

The shy girl who had been cast out and bullied? She sat with her at lunch, going on and on since she knew that the other girl didn't have the confidence to.

The average person? She never criticized them for anything. She had a hard time with things like that, even if it was a large part of an assignment.

This girl seemed to be perfect. A smile on her gorgeous face, the smarts of a reputable scholar, and the sincerity that most lack. How couldn't I keep myself from trying to be around her? And that's the thing: this girl is my best friend in the entire world.

I've known her for a decade already, having met when we were 5 in kindergarten.

If I remember correctly, this wonderful girl had come up to me at recess when I was sitting alone at the swings. She mentioned that she thought no one deserved to be ostracized from everyone else just because they were "different." Obviously that isn't exactly what she said, but that was the gist of it.

I was cast out simply because of how I look. Rather than have the pale, milky skin and flowing ocean of blonde hair with piercing blue eyes, I had everything but that. Darker, tanner skin with frizzy dark hair with equally dark eyes that I have been told were ugly. Not even just that, but the hair that was prevalent on my arms and legs were all the more reason for the kids in my predominately white school to view me as being both different and inferior to them.

Seeing my own Lacy reminds me of the years of microaggressions that I've been subjected to. She reminds me of how badly I wanna be here, as well as how many others like me—poc people—wanna be her too.

It isn't her fault, it never has been. It's the fault of how society has instilled this image of the "perfect person" in our brains as being white with blonde hair blue eyes. And yet I still find myself here, jealous of her.

[persephinae]

i know i'm a woman and i face microaggressions everyday and the world is fucking shit because people really fucking hate women

but i sometimes forget how ingrained disregarding women and women's oppression is. how easy it is to write off struggles in every day life and how we're judged by how well we perform "woman"

sorry! i forgot for a moment that people really just do not give a shit. my bad :(

[ethanswgstblog]

Blog Post #5 due 3/6

How does Nosedive show the dangers of relying on social validation, and how is it similar to real-life social media?

Nosedive portrays a world in which a rating system governs people's lives, highlighting the risk of depending too much on societal validation. Lacie, the main character, obsessively pursues high marks in an attempt to elevate her social standing, but this reliance ultimately brings about her downfall. She demonstrates how an obsession with outside validation can be draining and self-destructive by acting in a performative rather than sincere manner as she seeks acceptance. The episode critiques a world where self-worth is measured by digital approval, warning of the emotional and psychological toll that comes with it.

The culture of social media in real life, where followers, likes, and comments affect people's opportunities and sense of self, is reflected in this fictional universe. Similar to Nosedive, real-life people frequently develop their online personas to gain acceptance, sometimes at the expense of their authenticity. Many people are anxious about their online presence, which is reflected in the need to keep a high rating. As a warning against the effects of a culture that values social validation, the show challenges viewers to value online acceptance and place greater emphasis on real human interactions.

How does the internet both enable the spread of white supremacist ideology and provide opportunities to challenge it?

The internet is used as a platform for opposing white supremacist ideas as well as a tool for its propagation. White supremacists have made their ideology more accessible than ever before by successfully using modern media to spread their ideas, find new followers, and establish international networks. According to Jessie Daniels, "The Internet facilitates publication and distribution of white supremacist discourse and ideology for those committed to producing it and increases its availability to those interested in reading it" (Daniels, 2009). But the internet also gives civil rights organizations, academics, and activists a platform to dispute these rumors. Protest planning, awareness-raising, and dispelling false information have all benefited greatly from online platforms. 

How does humor in social media serve as a tool for challenging racial stereotypes?

Social media humor is a powerful weapon for breaking racial stereotypes because it makes contentious discussions about race more approachable and interesting. Satire based viral videos such as "Sh*t White Girls Say to Black Girls" draw attention to the everyday microaggressions that people of color face, making viewers—especially white viewers—think about their own prejudices. These videos create an environment where humor promotes awareness by exaggerated typical race interactions. According to Sarah Florini, humor is a common way for Black Twitter users to "signifyin'," a linguistic practice that permits "the communication of multiple levels of meaning simultaneously, most frequently involving wordplay and misdirection" (Senft and Noble, 2015). 

However when comedy enables privileged audiences to absorb racial critiques without actually enacting change, it can also become a roadblock to effective anti-racist activity. Although satirical depictions of racism can make people laugh, they don't always force them to face their role in racial injustice. Rather, comedy might be a type of "nonperformativity," in which admitting racism does not result in action (Senft and Noble, 2015). Viral memes, for example, can lead to performative cooperation, in which people share information but do not confront repressive systems in their everyday lives, even though they may also generate conversations. 

How do companies use diversity in marketing?

In order to appeal to various racial and cultural groups without undergoing significant structural change, businesses strategically employ diversity in marketing. Businesses give the appearance of diversity by customizing digital experiences and ads, but they fail to address underlying inequalities. Platforms such as Netflix, for instance, employ tailored algorithms to "make Black actors appear more visible than they really are in the actual film" (Benjamin, 2019), creating the appearance of more representation without addressing casting inequalities across the industry. Similar to this, companies frequently use diverse representatives to portray technology as empowering while neglecting the ways in which these same technologies promote racial inequality. One example of this is Microsoft's use of rapper Common to promote AI. Businesses might profit from multicultural appeal while preserving systematic racial disparities in recruiting, product development, and algorithmic choices thanks to this staged approach to diversity.

Nosedive short film

Daniels, J. (2009). White Supremacy in the Digital Era.

T. Senft, S. Noble (2015) Race and social media. In J. Hunsinger and T. Senft (Eds.), The Social Media Handbook (pp. 102-125). Routledge

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity.

[blackoutfeverdream]

Tumblr transfems really need to overcome their addiction to victimhood discourse.

To codify every microaggression from a position of bad faith and presumption of injury is lunacy and dilutes the patience and attention people have for our real problems.

If you just want to whine here, of course- but I worry some of you carry this doggerel into everyday life, and that does not help us.

[quillforourthoughts]

Why I changed sides

Growing up one of the first things I was most looking forward to was the ability to vote in elections. And right after putting my name down for the draft that was the second thing I did. I was also excited because that year was a presidential election year for Hillary Clintion and Donald J. Trump was the last two candidates standing that year. I come from a liberal arts family, the old style of Vietnam hippy who I exclusively only watched CNN at the time decided that it was time for a woman to be president of The United States of America. I cast my vote and vigorously went down the line to mark down every Democrat I could except for one option who was Republican.

Then after finishing I handed in my ballet and left for home. That night I watched closely while the Electoral College did its magic and went to bed being horrified and stressed out that Donald Trump had won the presidency. Four years went by quickly and I lived in fear that someone was going to come for me because I didn't fit the mold of a normal person, that's putting it mildly. But after the four year term was up I woke up one morning with the realization that I had survived a Trump presidency and nothing really wrong happened. My life certainly wasn't affected or really changed in any way.

After four years you start to get more experience and wisdom and I had finally come to terms with my Bisexuality. However there was becoming a big problem with that and not for the reasons you think. I continued to watch CNN and over and over they would talk about Someone did this or that or someone was offensive. Things about microaggressions and pronouns and all these social problems like legalizing all drugs and this woke mind virus. Which I do think exists.

But I tried to ignore that and so when the next election came I voted for Joe Biden and went exclusively Democrat except for that one Republican again. And Biden won after that. However this liberal woke agenda keeps popping up in the news. Everyday to me it was a new problem which made me feel even more distant. By that time I was living with my parents in the countryside on seven acres of land. And when I returned I was not in the best financial state whatsoever but I went back to the old ways of farming and living off the land where you couldn't complain about how unfair things were. I got a manual labor job and turned my life around with hard work and determination.

Then it was time for the next election and needless to say I still didn't want Donald Trump in charge so I voted for Kamala Harris. But after I did and Donald Trump won I was in disbelief that was until I saw what happened the Democrats lost the house and the senate the presidency and the supreme court, had lost reproductive rights. Frankly this made me very upset with what direction the country was going. And then I realized that deep down I wasn't a Democrat nor Was I a Republican I had always been a Libertarian. So in an answer to why I changed sides, it's because the Democratic party lost my confidence of competency. They spent the entire election period whining about social problems that were clearly not winning arguments and not learning the basic principle that making shoving your problems and beliefs is gonna make people sick and fed up with it and yes they will turn away and try and change the problem. Being morally correct does not entitle you to win and if Democrats want to hold onto any kind of power they need to change and learn from this and stop these pointless and absurd notions because no one wants to hear them anymore. Perhaps the silver lining is that maybe a bit of common sense has returned but only time will tell.

Just some thoughts that might Quill you in

Please leave comments but please be respectful and civil I hope to create a community here of common sense.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Louisa Clarence-Smith

Published: Feb 23, 2024

Russell Group universities have told staff and students that saying “the most qualified person should get the job” is a “microaggression”.

At least five universities have issued guidance or training courses on how to eliminate “microaggression”, which are defined as subtle or indirect forms of discrimination.

Guidance from the University of Glasgow and the engineering department of Imperial College London states that saying “the most qualified person should get the job” is an example of a microaggression.

Glasgow’s guidance, which forms part of the university’s anti-racism campaign, suggests that the statement would be wrong because it asserts “that race does not play a role in life successes”.

Other examples of microaggressions listed by the university include saying that “everyone can succeed if they work hard enough”. The university states that possible implications of the statement could include suggesting that someone only got a job because of quotas, or that they cannot make a valuable contribution.

‘Denying individual prejudice’

Other statements listed as microaggressions by Imperial include “men and women have equal opportunities for achievement” and “positive action is racist”.

Meanwhile, the University of Edinburgh states that microaggressions often take the form of “questioning an individual’s lived experience” or “denying individual prejudice”.

Examples cited by the university include saying of a third person: “I’m sure they didn’t mean anything by that”, or denying that a person is a racist.

Newcastle University describes microaggressions as “the everyday slights, indignities, put downs and insults that people of colour, women, people from LGBTQIA+ communities or those who are marginalised, experience in their day-to-day interactions with people”.

It lists examples such as a white person telling a black person “white people get killed by the police too”, when discussing police brutality.

The microaggression statements from universities were uncovered by the Committee for Academic Freedom (CAF), a group of academics worried about the erosion of free speech on campus.

‘Expression of lawful beliefs’

Dr Edward Skidelsky, a philosophy lecturer at the University of Exeter, who is director of the CAF, said: “By campaigning against questioning and denial, these universities are advocating an uncritical acceptance of statements in the various, undefined areas that their microaggression guides refer to. The effect, again, is to undermine a culture of free inquiry.

“Universities must not campaign against the expression of lawful beliefs. They must not take official positions. They must not outlaw ‘questioning’ and ‘denial’. They must not undermine free inquiry.”

Chris McGovern, the chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said: “It would seem that the woke virus has infected universities in a major way. It is cowardly. Universities are supposed to show their intelligence and reason and they are disapplying their intelligence and reason in order to pursue the woke agenda.”

The universities have been contacted for comment.

[ecafamclass]

Blog Post #1

Pageof 2

Zoom

Blog Post #1 Jordan Peele's Get Out follows the story of Chris, a Black man, who discovers a racially charged, life-threatening secret within his white girlfriend's family, combining horror with sociopolitical analysis. Through Chris's time at her family's manor, Peele navigates viewers through evident themes of social and systemic racism, Black disenfranchisement, and the commodification of Blackness and Black culture. Specifically, the film's portrayal of microaggressions, the constant paranoia and fear Black individuals feel in predominantly white spaces, and the importance of Black solidarity stood out to me most, as these themes repeated in subtle yet evident ways throughout the film. While the film receives widespread praise for its exploration of these themes, it also faces critique for its underdeveloped characters and the simplified portrayal of complex issues of racism. Despite these criticisms, I still think the movie delivers a unique portrayal of Black trauma, using horror to highlight critical social issues and the subtle, yet undeniably present racism that shapes Chris's story in a thought-provoking and original way. Peele explores pervasive microaggressions, the paranoia of Black individuals in predominantly white spaces, and the importance of Black solidarity. From the beginning of the film, Chris encounters various racial microaggressions, ranging from assumptions about athleticism to being objectified and tokenized as the "only Black person" in the space. It is these moments in the film that capture how the discomfort and unease are not just situational but an everyday reality of Black people navigating white-dominated spaces. However, what distinguishes Get Out from typical horror movies is its portrayal of Black solidarity, especially in the film's conclusion, which challenges the recycled white savior trope. Chris's comedic best friend, Rod, plays a vital role in the film's finale when he saves Chris from the Armitage family,

offering a refreshing alternative to the usual horror stereotype where the Black characters are either sidelined or killed off, with white characters stepping in as the hero. Ultimately, Rod's role highlights how essential Black solidarity is, showing that in moments of danger, these bonds' strength can genuinely make a difference. In conclusion, Get Out is significant to the genre of horror, not just for its approach to racial issues but for its bold representation of Blackness in a genre that often sidelines Black characters. While I agree with the critique that some aspects of racism in the film are oversimplified, the movie's clever handling of Black trauma and solidarity still resonates with me. As a middle schooler entering high school, seeing a dark-skinned Black protagonist—along with other dark-skinned Black characters, including the ultimate savior, Rod—was a powerful moment, as it directly challenged the usual narrative where Black characters are either tokenized, marginalized, or killed off in horror films. For me, Get Out will always be a favorite, not just because of its critical commentary but because it shifted the portrayal of Blackness within horror in a meaningful way. Despite any shortcomings, I really appreciate what the movie has done for Black Horror and its lasting impact on conversations about race and representation in film.

[melis-blogs2024]

Blog Post #1

"Get Out" affected me on so many levels that I did not fully expect. Going into this film, I thought I was going to see a regular horror movie, stuff with jump scares, suspense, and maybe a haunted house; what I got instead was much more chilling and upsettingly deep: an inspection of modern-day racism in manners that were both terrifying and-too painfully-relatable.

What was most interesting with "Get Out" was the way it used horror to mediate everyday, unspoken racism. It wasn't about brutal, violent acts of hatred but about that insidious, so-called "well-meaning" racism that still permeates today. Take the Armitage family: they weren't some stereotypical movie plot villains portraying racist villains. Instead, they were outwardly courteous, "progressive," and even complimentary toward Chris, which made their true intentions that much scarier. That, I think, was what hit hardest for me: the fact that racism can be so masked and hidden behind smiles and pleasantries, which feels so much more suffocating than outright hostility in many ways.

What really resonated with me was the concept of "the sunken place." That feeling of helplessness, being in a place of confinement and not having control over your life, is such a strong metaphor that captures how someone would feel about racism. It's not just about fear; it's about isolation from people, losing your voice to a world that is deaf and refusing to care enough to listen. But I do know in my own life there have been moments where I felt as if I was in a type of sunken place, but not of George Washington's making-much like how I have felt when experiencing microaggressions or when I'm in spaces where I feel out of place or judged for things that are just outside of my control. It's a kind of silent, internal horror-and how it all played itself out on film felt so very real to me.

What I also liked about "Get Out" is that it is quite an elaborate movie. It was not just terrifying the viewers with blood and goriness, but gave them a reason for reflection. It's one of those films that can make a person think how much we have come regarding race relations and how far we are yet to come. It embodies the fears and anxieties that come with being a person of color in spaces you are not fully accepted into, even though people often pretend otherwise.

In general, I feel that "Get Out" is horror that definitely stays with you long after the movie's over. It's not just about jump scares and creepy atmospheres; it's about the uncomfortable truths of society it unravels, things people of color are still being put through nowadays.

[beatyrosefirefly]

Multimedia Journal: Get Out

"Get Out," directed by Jordan Peele and released in 2017, is a unique horror-thriller. The film follows Chris Washington (Daniel Kaluuya), a young African American man, who visits the family estate of his white girlfriend, Rose Armitage (Allison Williams). What starts as an uneasy visit soon turns into a nightmare as Chris uncovers the horrifying truth about the Armitage family’s intentions. The film uses horror to address deep-seated racial issues and the exploitation of black bodies in America.

"Get Out" directly relates to our discussions on race and ethnicity, power dynamics, and systemic racism in multicultural America. The film serves as a metaphor for the black experience, highlighting how racism can be hidden beneath the surface of seemingly polite society. It addresses the commodification and objectification of African Americans, which ties into the course's exploration of privilege and power.

Using course readings, "Get Out" can be analyzed for its portrayal of systemic racism and the intersectionality of race and class. The Armitage family’s method of transferring the consciousness of white individuals into black bodies speaks to a modern form of enslavement and exploitation. This chilling narrative aligns with theories discussed in class, such as those by bell hooks on the dehumanization of black individuals and their reduction to mere physicality for white benefit (hooks, 1992).

The film also delves into microaggressions and the subtleties of liberal racism. The Armitage family and their friends exhibit what might be seen as progressive attitudes, but their fascination with Chris’s physical traits and their casual racist remarks reveal a more insidious form of racism. This aligns with our discussions on the everyday realities of racial prejudice, even among those who consider themselves allies (Sue et al., 2007).

"Get Out" also utilizes symbolism and visual storytelling to convey its messages. The sunken place, a metaphor for the marginalization and powerlessness felt by black individuals, is a powerful visual that resonates with the concept of double consciousness described by W.E.B. Du Bois. Chris’s struggle to reclaim his agency from the sunken place mirrors the broader fight against systemic oppression (Du Bois, 1903).

The film’s ending, where Chris finally escapes, can be seen as a representation of resilience and the struggle for autonomy in the face of dehumanization. However, the alternate ending, where Chris is arrested by the police, underscores the precariousness of black freedom and the omnipresence of racial injustice, reinforcing the themes of our course readings (Peele, 2017).

"Get Out" is not just a horror film; it’s a profound commentary on race relations in America, making it a perfect subject for this project. By analyzing it through the lens of our course materials, we gain a deeper understanding of the pervasive nature of racism and the enduring struggle for equality.

References:

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). The Souls of Black Folk. Chicago: A. C. McClurg & Co.

hooks, b. (1992). Black Looks: Race and Representation. Boston: South End Press.

Peele, J. (Director). (2017). Get Out [Film]. Universal Pictures.

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271-286.

Media:

Photo 1: https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2023/10/what-scares-jordan-peele/675777/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

Photo 2: “Get Out”: Jordan Peele’s Radical Cinematic Vision of the World Through a Black Man’s Eyes | The New Yorker

Photo 3: Get Out - The Sunken Place | Movie scenes, Get out 2017, Movie shots (pinterest.com)