Image 01 Image 03

Ithaca College student gov’t votes for Microaggression reporting system

Ithaca College student gov’t votes for Microaggression reporting system

Big brother, oh brother.

It has been a while since we have reported on Microaggression mania on college campuses:

What is a microaggression? One of the inventors of the terminology and theory describes it this way:

Microaggressions are the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership. In many cases, these hidden messages may invalidate the group identity or experiential reality of target persons, demean them on a personal or group level, communicate they are lesser human beings, suggest they do not belong with the majority group, threaten and intimidate, or relegate them to inferior status and treatment.

As our prior reporting reflects, microaggression theory and practice are passive-aggressive control mechanisms meant to empower those who can claim protected group identity (it’s a lot more than about race or gender) over those who cannot.

There is no better example than what just happened at Ithaca College, where the student government just voted to establish a microaggression reporting system where students can complain about each other as well as about faculty and staff.

The Ithacan student newspaper reports:

The Ithaca College Student Government Association passed a bill March 16 to create an online system to report microaggressions, which sponsors of the bill said will create a more conducive environment for victims to speak about microaggressions.

The bill, sponsored by Class of 2018 senator Angela Pradhan, calls for the implementation of a campus-wide online system to report microaggressions to “make Ithaca College a safer, more inclusive and diverse community for all students.”

Pradhan said the online system would fill what she sees as a lack of an adequate system to report microaggressions.

“I know a lot of senators are working on microaggression stuff within their respective schools, but I felt that there was a need for something to happen schoolwide,” Pradhan said. “And if there was a concrete way to document [microaggressions] online, it would provide students a way to kind of state what’s going on.”

The system would allow individuals reporting microaggressions to remain anonymous. However, junior Kyle James, vice president of communications and co-sponsor of the bill, said those reporting a microaggression would likely have to reveal their identity if they wanted to pursue any legal action….

Seriously, legal action? For something someone didn’t even know they were doing?

The Ithacan continues:

The bill does not currently state that the names of people accused of committing microaggressions will be reported. While Pradhan said she believes the names of alleged offenders should be reported, she said there could be possible legal barriers.

James said the college’s legal affairs representatives are looking into potential legal roadblocks regarding the online system. However, he said he is not sure exactly what parts of the bill are coming under legal scrutiny.

“There’s a lot to sort through,” James said. “They haven’t told me the parts that are worrying them.”

However, he said in his initial conversation about the bill, the question of anonymity in the online reporting system came up as a potential legal problem. But he said it was indicated that there is a way for the bill to be legal.

The bill calls for a committee to be created to begin the process of creating and implementing the online reporting system.

Bonus question: To whom do students report the micraggression reporting system?

[Featured Image: GIF involved in McGill controversy]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Sammy Finkelman | March 25, 2015 at 10:15 am

It’s patently obvious that such a system of complaints and adjudicating them can’t work fairly or even half reasonably, (if taken seriously, butr probably for the most part it won’t be) but the people who devised it, or who can’t bring themselves to oppose it, are a very very far cry from the founding fathers or any other kind of thinker about political or judicial institutions.

    Virginia42 in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | March 25, 2015 at 11:08 am

    It’s not intended be taken seriously for its stated purpose; it’s net another example of marxist claptrap intended to control thought and expression. The only way to stop it will be for more students and teachers to simply say “We’re not doing this crap.”

Microaggressions…invalidate the group identity or experiential reality of target persons, demean them on a personal or group level, communicate they are lesser human beings…relegate them to inferior status…

Affirmative Action does EXACTLY all that.
Affirmative Action works under the assumption that Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans cannot make it by themselves; that these minorities NEED a (not so) little help from Big Daddy Gubmint to succeed.
For all matters and effects, they’re being treated as inferior.

Do they do the same with Asians, for example?
Aren’t Asians a minority too?
Why aren’t Asians “protected”?
Why are Asians discriminated against?
Why is being Asian considered an advantage?
Why are Whites discriminated against?
Why is being White considered an advantage?
Why is being Black considered a disadvantage?
Why is being Hispanic considered a disadvantage?

Who are the racist ones here?
Who are the ones attacking and demeaning here?

Affirmative Action is a gigantic macro-aggression system.

Henry Hawkins | March 25, 2015 at 10:54 am

Coming soon when microaggression becomes passe to the cool kids……


    Another Voice in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 25, 2015 at 12:03 pm

    When microaggression evolves to nanoaggression and merge the practices of perfection achievement with the newest medical nanotechnology, will the next generation after the Millennials be known as the Borg Generation?

    What if we’re not even nanoagressed? Can I consider myself picoagressed? If Liberalism is Holistic, that’s even more serious than just plain agressed. 🙂

If everyone suffers uncontrollably from a cacophony of voices (oops, microaggressions) who then is left with more than ordinary fortitude to soothe the pains of the infantile adult victims and to tame (by force I suppose) the branded evil aggressors?

nordic_prince | March 25, 2015 at 11:01 am

Haven’t these “geniuses” ever heard of the the right to confront your accusers?

Anonymity in accusations opens the door for all kinds of abuse – which is why the right to confront the witnesses against you is included in that quaint little document known as the “Bill of Rights” ~

Micro-fascism. All part of the ‘training.’

Macro idiocy.

This looks like it could turn into macroaggression against white male students.

Midwest Rhino | March 25, 2015 at 11:20 am

So this is the PC Religion’s version of sharia law.

Unintentional offenses must be stopped, requiring devout submission to every tenant of PC law, purging the brain of offensive parental training. Enforce verbal whippings if they backslide, or criminal charges for repeat offenders.

As with sharia in an Islamic land, infidels (e.g. conservatives or Christians) are allowed to exist as the PC version of Zimmis, keeping their unholy beliefs closeted.

Imagine if Christian conservative scientists were the protected class, applying this totalitarian micro-aggression law. Any praise of AlGorewarming fraud would be sanctioned, shouting down atheist Marxist PC speakers would be required, and a college future would not belong to those that insult Jesus.

That is pretty crazy and undesirable, yet the PC flip side is becoming reality. Thanks Obama.

David R. Graham | March 25, 2015 at 11:34 am

That definition of micro aggression describes every speech and probably most private communication conducted by The Fraud and Democratic politicians. Also most if not all spouses at one time or another. Certainly every toddler and most young ‘us older. Every corporate motivation speech and program. Every nanny state declaration and regulation (for our good, of course). And the definition itself is a subtle micro aggression, threatening its readers if they disagree or are not self-aware of their sins. And what about animal-on-animal micro and macro aggressions? Even the oceans are eating up the land and rains and winds are eating up the mountains. And trees are the worst fracking agents on earth. So, yeah, time to get rid of everything:

Does B.O. convey a hidden message which may invalidate the group identity or experiential reality of target persons (such as the B.O. carrier), demean them on a personal or group level, communicate they are lesser human beings, suggest they do not belong with the majority group, threaten and intimidate, or relegate them to inferior status and treatment?

What about a “thumbs down”?

What about non-microaggression ‘sins’ of omission?

“Bonus question: To whom do students report the microaggression reporting system?” Psychotherapists, ASAP.

“negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership”
Of course this is a direct reference to the depredations visited upon Jewish, and white male, and pro-life, etc, students who are the oppressed minority on most campuses. (snark, snark)

Eventually, the SJW control freaks will insist on monitoring people’s heart rates, and if your heart rate goes up when a member of a protected group enters the room, the SJW control freaks will want the option of pursuing legal action against you for THAT, even if you don’t say or do anything. Because if the freaks can get you for stuff you don’t even know you’re doing, there’s really nothing to stop them from getting you for stuff your body is doing that is outside your control.

Virginia42 is right: The only thing that will stop this from expanding bit by bit until all action not approved by the control freaks is punishable is for the rest of us to say, “Enough of this. We’ve humored you long enough. Now back off” (and not to back down when the inevitable tantrums and accusations start up again).

We as a society are losing our collective minds.

But I guess it is kind of nice that we have so few real things to worry about (starvation, shelter) that we end up focusing on making sure no person gets their feelings hurt.

Heck I saw on twitchy yesterday a tweet that was not parody that asked people not to applaud a speaker at a conference because there was someone in the audience that was “triggered” by clapping.

As I said, we are losing our collective minds.

The Little Red Guards we are turning out in our “education” system are scaring even their Collectivist professors and administrators.

And there’s a way to stop this nonsense: reimpose the ideal of the university as a place where ideas are freely exchanged, and nobody who enters it can expect to be “safe” from things they find disagreeable.

It’s that simple. But it won’t be easy. It’ll take some people with guts.

    There you go clinging to that antiquated first amendment thingy which was written by a bunch of racist slave-owners. Check your white male privilege dude.

      Ragspierre in reply to Paul. | March 26, 2015 at 7:13 am

      Just as a historical note, the idea and experience of the university as a place where ideas were “universally” welcomed long pre-dates the Constitution.

      Not that that’s news to you, but I thought it worth noting.

What’s next? A reporting system for who’s Jewish?

Being a reasonable fellow, I’d settle for just cutting off every dime of federal money to the school, faculty, and students, and let them be as stupid as they wish on their own dimes.

But if you want to burn the school to the ground and salt the earth, I certainly won’t stand in your way.

Isn’t the act of going online and filling out a complaint about someone’s alleged micro aggression an act of micro aggression itself?

    David R. Graham in reply to TtT. | March 27, 2015 at 2:16 am

    Yes it is. Dialectics. Whatever cuts one way cuts the other way as well, and equally so. This is such ancient wisdom it hardly seems noteworthy.

    Dharma supports those who support Dharma.

    Secular “values” will not save the day on this. Classical Christian/human values can. There is no foundation unless it is both universal and transcendent.

“Seriously, legal action? For something someone didn’t even know they were doing?”

Yup. It’s the philosophical version of putting the speed limit sign behind a tree and having a patrol car staked out and ready to catch “the criminal.”