Page 140 - Microaggressions in Everyday Live Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation

114 microaggressive perpetrators and oppression

The manifestations of oppression come in many forms. From the examples
given throughout these chapters, it is inescapable that microaggressions are
forms of oppression. Oppression can be overt or covert, subtle or obvious,
intentional or unintentional, conscious or unconscious. In light of our democratic
ideals and beliefs about egalitarianism, however, how do well - intentioned
people fall into occupying roles that oppress and engage in prejudicial actions
that harm others? The answer seems to reside in a dominant culture that

values ways of being, thinking, and acting that reflects the reality of a prima-
rily Eurocentric, masculine, and heterosexual worldview that is imposed upon
racial, ethnic, gender, and sexual minorities (Hanna et al., 2000; Sue, 2004).
To illustrate the conversion process, I will use the concept of “ whiteness ”
and White racial conditioning as it applies to racism and racial microaggres-

sions. It would be an oversimplification and disservice to attempt equating
the development of sexism and heterosexism to that of racism. Nevertheless,
many of the sociopolitical and sociocultural dynamics describing the trans-

formation of Whiteness to that of White supremacy and finally White racism
may share similarities with the development of group-specific biases and

prejudices experienced by other marginalized groups. We now turn our attention
to “ the nature of the beast. ”

THE INVISIBLE WHITENESS OF BEING:
THE NATURE OF THE BEAST

One of the major characteristics of both microinsults and microinvalidations
is that perpetrators are often minimally aware that they have engaged in a
demeaning or denigrating manner toward people of color. Because Whites
are socialized into Eurocentric values, beliefs, standards, and norms, they
become invisible to them, and represent a default standard by which all other
group norms and behaviors are consciously and unconsciously compared,
contrasted, and made visible (Sue, 2004; Wildman & Davis, 2002). Some have
argued that Whiteness in our society is considered to be normative and ideal
and, as a result, dominance is automatically conferred on fair - skinned people
(McIntosh, 2002; Jensen, 2002). It could also be argued that masculine and
heterosexual standards are likewise operative, which disadvantages women
and LGBTs.
The term “ visible racial/ethnic minorities ” was coined by Helms (1992, 1995)
to refer to sociodemographic groups such as people of color who possessed
phenotypical characteristics (skin pigmentation, head form, hair texture, and

1/19/10 6:10:48 PM
c06.indd 114 1/19/10 6:10:48 PM
c06.indd 114