Читать книгу Microaggressions in Everyday Life - Derald Wing Sue - Страница 12

Similar to Philomena Essed's (1991) concept of everyday racism, racial microaggressions reflect a complex relationship between microinteractions and macrostructures. In other words, everyday racism and racial microaggressions are manifestations of systemic inequities in the larger society (e.g., income, wealth, education, and health disparities). Racial microaggressions often go unnoticed and unacknowledged because they seem so familiar in everyday settings, such as classrooms, shopping malls, restaurants, hotels, and offices. Next we describe social psychologist James Jones's levels of racism to highlight the dynamic interplay between microacts and macrostructures (Jones, 1997). Racial microaggressions are commonplace and make sense only in a world rife with institutional inequities grounded in the cultural superiority of the dominant group.

“Racism” may be defined as any attitude, action, institutional structure, or social policy that subordinates persons or groups because of their racial group membership (Jones, 1997; Ponterotto, Utsey, & Pedersen, 2006). The subordination of people of color is manifested in inferior housing, education, employment, and health services (D. W. Sue, 2003). The complex manifestation of racism occurs at three different levels: individual, institutional, and cultural (Jones, 1997; Jones & Rolon‐Dow, 2018). All of these manifestations vary in their degree of overtness and conscious intentionality.

“Individual racism” is best known to the American public as overt, conscious, and deliberate individual acts intended to harm, place at a disadvantage, or discriminate against racial minorities. Serving Black patrons last, using racial epithets, preventing a White son or daughter from dating or marrying a person of color, or not showing clients of color housing in affluent White neighborhoods are all examples. At the other end of the spectrum, hate crimes against people of color and other marginalized groups represent extreme forms of overt individual racism. In 2015, during Bible study at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, 21‐year‐old White supremacist Dylann Roof pulled out a Glock .45‐caliber pistol and fired 70 rounds at the parishioners, killing nine people and injuring one. In his racist manifesto, he explained that he was fighting for the White race. He was charged with 33 federal hate crimes and convicted on all counts. Also reflecting individual acts of violence, a report in 2017 by the National Coalition of Anti‐Violence Programs documented the highest number ever recorded of homicides of LGBTQ people (approximately one per week). When we think about these extreme forms of individual racism and violence, most people are able to say “That's not me. I'm not racist … I'm not homophobic.” It must also be noted, however, that the majority of individual racism and heterosexism is more subtle, indirect, unintentional, and outside the level of conscious awareness of perpetrators. Often these forms of expression are referred to as everyday racism (Essed, 1991) or implicit bias (Dovidio, Pearson, & Penner, 2019).

“Institutional racism” refers to any policy, practice, procedure, or structure in business, government, courts, places of religious worship, municipalities, schools, and the like by which decisions and actions unfairly subordinate persons of color while allowing White individuals to profit from the outcomes. Examples of this racism include racial profiling, segregated churches and neighborhoods, discriminatory hiring and promotion practices, and educational curricula that ignore and distort the history of minority group members. Institutional bias often is masked in the policies of standard operating procedures that are applied equally to everyone but that have outcomes that disadvantage certain groups while advantaging others (Jones, 1997; D. W. Sue, 2003). Systemic or institutional biases that reside in the philosophy, programs, practices, and structures of communities and organizations are referred to as macroaggressions (D. W. Sue, Alsaidi, et al., 2019). Before proceeding, it is important to distinguish between microaggressions and macroaggressions. First, microaggressions are manifest in the biased attitudes and behaviors of individuals, whereas macroaggressions reside in the rules, regulations, and sanctioned practices of institutions, communities, or society. Second, microaggressions generally are directed toward a specific individual target, while macroaggressions are group‐focused and affect an entire class of people. Third, combating microaggressions means directing action toward the personal bigotry of the person (biased attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors); confronting and eliminating macroaggressions means altering biased institutional policies and practices.

“Cultural racism” is perhaps the most insidious and damaging form of racism because it serves as an overarching umbrella under which individual and institutional racism thrive. It is defined as the individual and institutional expression of the superiority of one group's cultural heritage (arts/crafts, history, traditions, language, and values) over another group's, and the power to impose those standards on other groups (D. W. Sue, 2004). For example, Native Americans¹ have at times been forbidden to practice their religions (“We are a Christian people”) or to speak in their native tongues (“English is superior”), and in contemporary textbooks the histories or contributions of people of color have been neglected or distorted (“European history and civilization are superior”). These are all examples of cultural racism.

To summarize, individual racism is the source of microaggressions; institutional/structural racism is the source of macroaggressions; and cultural racism validates, supports, and enforces the expression of both (D. W. Sue et al., 2019).

As awareness of overt racism has increased, however, people have become more sophisticated in recognizing the overt expressions of individual, institutional, and cultural bigotry and discrimination. Because of our belief in equality and democracy, and because of the Civil Rights movement, we as a nation now strongly condemn racist, sexist, and heterosexist acts because they are antithetical to our stated values of fairness, justice, and nondiscrimination (Dovidio, Gaertner, Kawakami, & Hodson, 2002; Sears, 1988). Unfortunately, this statement may apply only at the conscious level and may be changing as President Donald J. Trump and his allies express widely publicized racist, sexist, and xenophobic sentiments. For example, in the current political climate where those in authority openly express bigotry, researchers found that such displays foster ethnic hostility contagion among adolescents who overheard or witnessed overt acts of prejudice (Bauer, Cahliková, Chytilová, & Želinsky, 2018). The experimenters found that harmful behavior directed toward a disliked minority group is twice as contagious as behaviors that harm members of one's own group. They issued an ominous warning that even in social situations or societies with minimal interethnic hatred, witnessing or publicly overhearing biased behaviors or comments can create a “social contagion” where overt prejudice and discrimination can thrive and spread quickly.