CHAPTER ONE Microaggressions as Toxic Rain: Here, There, and Everywhere!

      “Still I Rise”

      You may write me down in history

      With your bitter, twisted lies,

      You may tread me in the very dirt

      But still, like dust, I'll rise.

      ..............................................

      You may shoot me with your words,

      You may cut me with your eyes,

      You may kill me with your hatefulness,

      But still, like air, I'll rise.

      Maya Angelou

Written by Maya Angelou, a renowned African American poet, writer, and Civil Rights advocate, the poem “Still I Rise” both empowers and validates those who have suffered oppression, abuse, bullying, humiliation, and injustice and pricks the conscience of “oppressors” for the hurt and pain caused by their racial prejudice and discriminatory actions. It is also a testament to the courage, resilience, and strength of African Americans in their ability to survive and thrive in the face of constant hatred and bigotry. Although written primarily about the lived experience of Black individuals in the United States, the poem has universal appeal and application to all persons of color and to members of socially marginalized groups in our society.

      There is perhaps no better way to introduce the topic of microaggressions than in these two selected passages. Most people who read the poem believe Maya Angelou is referring to overt and conscious displays of racism or hate crimes associated with bigots or White supremacists. That, however, is only a small part of the meaning of “Still I Rise.” In this poem and in her other writings, Angelou also addresses the everyday racism expressed by well‐intentioned, dominant‐group members who experience themselves as good, moral, and decent human beings, who would never consciously discriminate against people of color. Although she never used the term “microaggressions,” Angelou likened the everyday slights and indignities to “little murders” as distinct from the “grand execution” (hate crimes). These everyday and seemingly innocuous insults and putdowns (microaggressions) are what she labels “death by a thousand cuts.” The two passages indicate how microaggressions are manifested in the educational curriculum of our schools (“You may write me down in history with your bitter twisted lies”), verbally (“You may shoot me with your words”), and nonverbally (“You may cut me with your eyes”). In other words, microaggressions may be delivered contextually, verbally, and nonverbally. Let us use two examples to illustrate the manifestation, dynamics, and impact of microaggressions.

What do these incidents have in common? How does Maya Angelou's poem relate to these two cases? In both examples, individuals with power deliver subtle, perhaps unconscious, microaggressions. In Example 1.1, a well‐intentioned professor delivered racial microaggressions, and in Example 1.2, a commuter on the train and the vice president both delivered gender microaggressions. “Still I Rise” represents resilience of the targets. Before we analyze these two examples in greater depth, let us first define microaggressions in greater detail.

Example 1.1

      Standing before his classroom, Charles Richardson, a White professor, asked for questions from the class. He had just finished a lecture on Greco‐Roman contributions to the history of psychology. An African American male student raised his hand.

      When called upon, the student spoke in a frustrated manner, noting that the history of psychology was “ethnocentric and Eurocentric” and that it left out the contributions of other societies and cultures. The student seemed to challenge the professor by noting that the contributions of African, Latin American, and Asian psychologies were never covered.

      The professor responded, “Robert, I want you to calm down. We are studying American psychology in this course, and we will eventually address how it has influenced and been adapted to Asian and other societies. I plan to also talk about how systems and theories of psychology contain universal applications.”

      Rather than defusing the situation, however, Professor Richardson sensed that his response had raised the level of tension among several students of color. Another Black male student then stated, “Perhaps we are looking at this issue from different perspectives or worldviews. Just as language affects how we define problems, maybe we all need to evaluate our assumptions and beliefs. Maybe we are ethnocentric. Maybe there are aspects of psychology that apply across all populations. Maybe we need to dialogue more and be open to alternative interpretations.”

      Throughout the semester, the professor had sensed increasing resentment among his students of color over the course content (he could not understand the reasons), and he welcomed the opportunity to say something positive about their classroom contributions. He responded, “Justin [who is a Black student], I appreciate your exceptionally thoughtful and intelligent observation. You are a most articulate young man with good conceptual and analytical skills. This is the type of nonjudgmental analysis and objectivity needed for good dialogues. We need to address these issues in a calm, unemotional, and reasoned manner.”

      To the professor's surprise, Justin and several other students of color seemed offended and insulted by the praise.

Example 1.2

      Kathleen, graduating with her master's in business administration, was dressed conservatively in a black blazer and matching skirt as she rode the number 1 subway train from Columbia University to downtown Manhattan. This would be her second job interview with a major brokerage firm and she was excited, sensing that her first interview with a mid‐level manager had gone very well. She had been asked to return to be interviewed by the department vice president. Kathleen knew she was one of three finalists but also sensed her advantage in having unique training that was of interest to the company.

      During the train ride, Kathleen endured the usual smattering of admiring glances as well as a few more lecherous stares. As she exited a very crowded subway train at Times Square, she attempted to squeeze out between the streams of commuters entering the train car. One man, seeing her dilemma, firmly placed his hand on her lower back to escort her out onto the platform. With his left arm, he steered her toward the exit, and they walked briskly toward the stairs, where the crowd thinned. Upon separating, the man smiled and nodded, obviously believing he had acted in a chivalrous manner. Kathleen did not appreciate being touched without her permission but thanked him anyway.

      During the interview, the vice president seemed very casual and relaxed. Kathleen noted, however, that he referred to male employees as “Mr. X” and to female employees by their first names. Several times he called her “Kathy.” She thought about telling him that she preferred “Kathleen” but did not want to alienate her potential employer. She very much wanted the job. When she inquired about the criteria the company would use to hire for the position, the vice president joked, “What do you need a job for, anyway? You can always find a good man.”

      When Kathleen did not laugh