Two professors disclosed the discovery of 5 new “invisibility microaggressions” this week in a controversial new paper.
Jasmine Mena a psychology professor at Bucknell University, and Annemarie Vaccaro, a Higher Education professor at the University of Rhode Island, discuss their findings below.
“There is a growing body of literature that suggests invisibility is a common form of exclusion—or microaggression,” Mena and Vaccaro suggest. “However, no studies have focused deeply on the ways women faculty and staff experience invisibility microaggressions on college campuses”
To remedy a lack of research on the topic, Vaccaro and Mena interviewed 13 women of color working at “predominantly white institutions,” the majority of whom were heterosexual and middle-aged. From their research, they discovered that there are five types of “invisibility microaggressions,” three of which are “environmental,” while two are “interpersonal.”
Here are the different “microaggressions”,
According to their study, which was published in the NASPA Journal About Women In Higher Education, the three environmental microaggressions that women of color face relate to their “invisibility” on campus, in disciplinary/professional settings, and in their local communities, because they are “among the few, or only” people of color in each context.
Interpersonal invisibility microaggressions, on the other hand, involve what they call “professional and leadership invisibility,” both of which hinder women of color in their “everyday work roles.”
And here is what is crazy – no second party is needed to confirm a “microaggression” has occurred.
Unlike more traditional forms of microaggressions, such as microassaults and macroaggressions, no second-party is needed for an “invisibility microaggression” to occur. Instead, merely a lack of other racial minorities in a specific environment (such as a faculty meeting or in a cafeteria) can be a microaggression under this theory, according to Mena and Vaccaro.
Honesty can hurt at times. The honest reality here is that we’re discussing a study composed of 18 mentally challenged (presumably, no?) women and taking these findings as supposedly being relevant or noteworthy.
Liberal academia is a pathetic joke, really it is. Countless social justice warriors and well meaning liberal sheep are interpreting these findings as scientific truth, instead of the garbage that it is.
These 18 ladies are struggling with NORMAL everyday human emotions such as insecurity, disappointment and failure NOT victims of invisible racial microaggressions.
Just listen to them speak,
“I feel invisible…not always…but as sort of a day-to-day thing,” said Xiomara, one the 18 participants in the study, adding, “I just feel like I can go days without seeing another person of color.”
Do you actually go days without seeing another person of color? Considering this is supposedly a “scientific study”, you’d think either the researchers or the respondents would take the time to dibranchiate between feelings and reality. Consequently, would it not be logical to assume Xiomara is literally talking about her emotions NOT what she actually encounters on a day-to-day basis (but not always…)?
Linda, another woman of color, told researchers that “any meeting I walk into that usually I’m the only person of color,” noting that that she feels like “people don’t even know we exist most of the time.”
Ladies, you gotta ease up on the word feel if you’re expecting sane people to take these new findings as facts or reality. These 18 responses composing the entire basis of the study are hysterically moronic and highly reflective of liberal academia.
SO, seriously, we’re supposed to believe that “invisible” but “real” microaggressions are responsible for your success or lack thereof in life?
Nothing to do with the fact you struggle to distinguish feelings from reality or operate in a perpetual state of infantile victimhood? Nothing at all?
Because, really, really, this is more believable?
Meanwhile, the second most common “invisibility microaggression” is “professional invisibility,” which refers to a lack of people of color in a faculty member’s respective academic field, and, as is the case with “campus invisibility,” no actual insult needs to occur for a “professional invisibility” microaggression to occur.
We’re dealing with a bunch of emotional middle aged liberal snowflakes here – minority women who need special affirmation while simultaneously receiving lighter workloads and less intellectual demands based on their race or gender.
Since microaggressions “perpetuate an oppressive cycle” for faculty of color, the professors conclude by calling upon colleges to make faculty of color feel less “invisible,” mainly by singling them out for positive attention.
First, they ask college administrators to publicize and “celebrate the accomplishments of women of color on campus” through “alumni magazines, campus newsletters, and the university website.”
Additionally, they suggest deliberately choosing women of color for high-profile awards, saying that “Both campuses and disciplinary/professional associations should be purposeful in nominating and selecting diverse winners for awards, thereby making sure women of color are celebrated.”
Seriously, how does one not realize how racist, and sexist, these cornerstone liberal ideologies ALL are? It’s sickening.
Source: Campus Reform