Microaggressions/Microinequities

Because of the pressure of social justice movements, legislation such as the Civil Rights Act in 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act in 1972, and the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990 have banned discrimination in the workplace, in educational settings, and in other parts of society. Shifting demographics of society, the United States becoming more racially diverse, and various legislative acts have led to changing social norms. These changes posit that overt discrimination against women and minorities is less socially acceptable than in the past. Scholars have noted [Page 1458]that although overt discrimination may have decreased, subtle forms of discrimination have actually increased. These elusive events, acts, and comments that are often difficult to explain have been called microaggressions and/or microinequities. Microaggressions and microinequities are interrelated concepts founded in the idea that individuals perpetuate various forms of discrimination like racism and sexism through subtle, sometimes unintentional acts.

Many have attributed the origin of microaggressions to the work of Dr. Chester Pierce, who investigated racism in television commercials and its impact on audiences. Originally conceived in terms of subtle actions that belittle people of color, recent scholarship has expanded the concept of microaggressions to encompass behaviors or acts that demonstrate biases pertaining to gender, sexual orientation, and disability. Microaggressions have been described by D. W. Sue as “brief everyday exchanges, that send denigrating messages to individuals because of their group membership.” Some examples of microaggressions include a white woman crossing the street or holding her purse tighter as she sees a black man approaching on the sidewalk and a female employee's idea being dismissed while the same idea offered by a male employee is lauded.

Identifying microaggressions is complicated for both the sender and receiver because of their relatively subtle nature. Further complicating the matter is that although these scenarios often go unnoticed by the perpetrator, they have a lasting impact on the individual on the receiving end of the microaggression. This is especially true if the receiver consistently encounters demeaning comments or situations over his or her lifetime. For example, research indicates that people on the receiving end of microaggressions have faced both psychological and institutional barriers, including lowered self esteem and lack of access to education and health care.

Similarly, the concept of microinequities can be traced back to articles written in the 1970s by Mary Rowe, an economist. She based it on research conducted by Jean-Paul Sartre and Dr. Pierce. Similar to microaggressions, microinequities occur when people are perceived to be different. Scholars have argued that, regardless of whether racist or sexist comments are intentional or not, they have a cumulative negative effect on women and minorities. Microinequities, in particular, encompass two areas: how demeaning comments or events impact the effectiveness of individuals in the workplace, and how microinequities can perpetuate a glass ceiling for women and people of color. These acts are so subtle that it is very difficult to bring legal action against them.

Rowe has claimed that microinequities in the workplace can have a Pygmalion effect, meaning that employees will live up to the expectations placed on them by managers. Therefore, if managers set low expectations for some employees, but not others, those expectations could have numerous negative effects, including lowering of the self-esteem of the employees, causing feelings of alienation/marginalization, inhibiting creativity and productivity of individuals, and reinforcing stereotypes among management. Whether intentional or not, microinequities end up further marginalizing individuals already perceived to be different.

...