Bitching and Praising

Let's start with what regular readers have lately come to expect in my more recent columns, relentless bitching (not "bitchin"). This is a continuation of my rant over the bastardization of language. Hmm looks like I just bastardized it. Cole Porter's song "Anything Goes," performed in the musical Anything Goes in 1934, comes to mind. If you don't know who Cole Porter is, I would prefer not knowing about it. A few of the lyrics make my point:

Good authors too who once knew better words

Now only use four-letter words

Writing prose....

The world has gone mad today

And good's bad today,

And black's white today,

And day's night today....

You get the idea. And this takes me to something more to rail about - words today that have meanings that are the opposite of what the words mean. Yes, I know that in the 50's if someone of the opposite sex was attractive, they were "cool" and now they are "hot." Of course, now if you say anything about the opposite sex's appearance you may be sued.

I am confused about the term "microaggression." It may be a misnomer. It is not necessarily an aggression. In many cases it is just an unintentional screw-up. Notice in the preceding sentence I wrote "screw up" and didn't write the "F" word? Why not? Refined, well-dressed people of all sexes use the word with abandon. Witnesses testifying under oath in the January 6th hearings quoted White House officials. So and so "said the F word." Why didn't they just say the word? It has become the most widely used word in our language. Have you watched television "dramas" lately? Yet a college professor who commented on this phenomenon was fired for saying the F word during a lecture in which he was explaining the phenomenon.

Wonder if it's OK if I write it? I didn't check with my editor Diana Bosetti or the Daily Journal's Editor-in-Chief David Houston. They are both enlightened, "cool" people. Whoops, I just dated myself. But I digress.

So, getting back to what is a microaggression. I was puzzled because this word seems paradoxical. "Micro" means extremely small and it seems out of place in juxtaposition with "aggression." I acknowledge bacteria are extremely small and some do lots of harm. Whether "they" mean to do harm I leave to experts in microbiology. Microaggression is used to describe actions by people. If someone throws a claw hammer at you, that's an aggression. If they throw an empty pillowcase at you... forget it. Nothing to do with microaggression.

I read that 50 years ago a Harvard University psychiatrist named Chester Price coined the term to describe insults inflicted by non-Black people on Black people. But there is nothing "micro" about overt racism. Over the years the definition has undergone revision. Scholars in the field of psychiatry and psychology now describe it generally as a comment directed at someone who belongs to a "socially marginalized group." Seems to me that calling a group "socially marginalized" is a kind of insult. But according to psychologist Derald Wing Sue, and others, the comments may be well-intentioned. But "well intentioned" implies the opposite of aggression. This does not include the example of a mistake. Imagine two movie actors being filmed in a fist fight on a public street. A do-gooder, an unobservant bystander, who didn't see the camera or the barriers to keep out the public, intervenes to help the loser is not what we are talking about.

Is a well-intentioned "microaggressor" someone who gives candy to a diabetic, or someone who holds the door open for 30 seconds for an obviously disabled person? This last example could elicit the following response: "I don't need any favors buddy. I get around."

I do not question that the recipient of the "microaggression" might be offended, but is the well-meaning klutz who tries to do the right thing really an aggressor? How about giving money to someone who appears to be a homeless person who did not ask for it and is insulted by the offer? I recall some years ago on a cold winter night in Oxford, England, I saw a shabbily dressed elderly man sifting through a garbage can. I offered him a pound or two, not ground round, but money, you know, English money, that isn't worth all that much these days. He rejected my offer with a harsh "no" which implied where I could go with my pounds. So, I guess I was a "microaggressor" shortly after the term had been coined. My action was intentional but ...

A good example of an unintentional microaggression is the following: an employer is interviewing a person who appears to be Asian for a management position in the company. The employer remarks that the interviewee's use of English is excellent. The interviewee was born in Sacramento.

So, let's all think before we speak. Wait! I was told that when I was a kid. But let's not be so inhibited that we are afraid to open our mouth because of the possibility we might offend someone. So I repeat what my mother taught me, "Think before you speak." That I did not learn that lesson is beside the point. So, Mom, you are right once again. This is a far better approach than simply saying "who gives a F..."

And now for the "praise" part of the column. This praise is macro and intentional because it comes in abundance for our Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, who led the California Judiciary for the past 12 years. Her remarkable leadership made a difference that will last for generations. She crafts readable opinions that reflect scholarship and commonsense. No doubt her time on the trial and appellate courts contributed to this much necessary and admired skill. In addition to leading our Supreme Court, she administered a budget of over $5 billion dollars, and she has been involved in committees to bring access to justice for all our citizens.

Her "Power of Democracy" campaign involves educating youth in the tenets of democracy. Her support to end domestic violence and to increase diversity in our government is legendary. And she brings her characteristic warmth and humanity wherever she goes.

What else can I say? We all admire and love you, Tani. We wish you the best in what will soon be your new position as president and chief executive of the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonprofit think tank, whose mission is to "inform and improve public policy in California through independent, objective and nonpartisan research."

And we can rest easy in knowing our new Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero will also bring extraordinary attributes to our Supreme Court.