George Korda: UT’s microaggressions laboratory: Where free speech is a priority?

In light of Tennessee General Assembly’s discussions about the University of Tennessee’s diversity programs - and a legislator’s wish to establish an “Office of Intellectual Diversity” to foster conservative speakers and thought on campus - it’s interesting to note that UT has a “microaggressions research laboratory.”

The College of Arts & Sciences microaggressions research lab studies, it says, “the subtle everyday experiences of discrimination and their impact on mental and physical health outcomes.”

Thus, it’s worth exploring how microaggressions correlate to free speech in the continuing controversy over UT’s (presently defunded) Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

For several months toward the end of 2015 UT’s diversity office impaled itself on self-inflicted public relations blunders. One was suggesting odd pronouns by which to address people who prefer not to be identified by the “gender binary” (male or female). Another recommendation was to not hold Christmas parties by that name and that religiously-themed cards potentially breach the campus’s “inclusion” imperative.  The legislature stripped $436,000 from the UT budget to defund the office for a year.

George Korda: Duncan says ‘no’ to a town hall meeting, and politics over principles

George Korda: If Trump’s not listening, it shouldn’t be a surprise

George Korda: Five-year-olds, the presidential election, and the Pride of the Southland Band

The diversity issue is enough on legislators’ minds that State Sen. Joey Hensley, R-Hohenwald, offered on March 1 an amendment to this year’s proposed UT budget calling for $450,000 to fund a UT Office of Intellectual Diversity. The Tennessean newspaper reported it as, “a move some senators suggested would encourage more people with conservative views to speak their minds.

Diversity of thought, expression, and civility are components of a look at the microaggressions lab. According to the lab’s website, its research focus is two-fold: “gendered racial microaggressions,” and “racial microaggressions”:

• Gendered racial microaggressions: “subtle and everyday nonverbal, verbal, behavioral, and environmental expressions of oppression based on the intersection of one’s race and gender…This definition was adapted from the racial microaggressions literature to capture the intersectional nature of subtle discrimination that is often based on one’s gender and race.”
• Racial microaggressions: “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”

Various searches of the UT site produced no list of specific microaggressions. Therefore, microaggressions as found on the University of Cincinnati website are helpful in considering UT's potential future in this arena. The University of Cincinnati is the school from which new UT Chancellor Beverly Davenport recently arrived after serving as interim president, prior to which she was senior vice president for academic affairs and provost (in fact, her photo is still on the UC Office of Equity & Inclusion website).

What follow is an example of one of 36 racial microaggressions listed on UC’s website. It is divided into theme, the actual microaggression, and the negative message supposedly sent by the microaggression.

• Theme: Denial of individual racism: A statement made when Whites deny their racial bias.
• Microaggression: “I’m not a racist. I have several Black friends”; “As a woman, I know what you go through as a racial minority.”
• Message: I am immune to races because I have friends of color. Your racial oppression is no different than my gender oppression. I can’t be a racist. I’m like you. (Note: The full list of microaggressions on the University of Cincinnati website can be found here: http://sph.umn.edu/site/docs/hewg/microaggressions.pdf).

The University of Tennessee has a research lab specifically studying microaggressions. The new chancellor came from a university that on her watch focused on such subjects. The continuing diversity conversation is driving discussion about UT and freedom of speech.

Given those factors, how do microaggressions as defined by the UT lab relate to UT’s civility principles and free speech? Of UT’s 10 civility and community principles, two in particular are significant in this discussion:

• No. 3, Dialogue: “We value and encourage, and facilitate free exchange of diverse ideas and points-of-view along with free speech and expression. However, we discourage uncivil speech or expression that infringes upon the ability of others to express themselves.”
• No. 10: Response: “We encourage all community members to speak out against incidents involving bigotry and other types of incivility so the university can fulfill its responsibility of responding in a fair, timely and consistent fashion.” (Note: the complete list of UT civility and community principles site: http://civility.utk.edu/principles/).

If microaggressions are uncivil speech or expression, and can be subtle and unintended, how can a student or faculty member possibly know what they can or mustn’t say for fear of committing an act of bigotry or other type of incivility?  What student comments or questions go unspoken or unasked because of this uncertainty? What faculty comments are, intended or unintended, unacceptable?

Common sense dictates that there are people who, as they turn to ask someone a question or begin to make a statement in class, will stop and ask themselves if they want to endure potentially being labeled as a racists, sexist, etc., for committing a microaggression.

That’s not diversity: it’s bringing about silence through intimidation, intended or unintended.

Are there insults and statements that are beyond the pale? Certainly.  There are indeed people with discriminatory and even hateful attitudes. But is UT really a hotbed of student and faculty injustice? Must students and faculty wonder if their words are being scrutinized at all times for microaggressions and other “uncivil” behavior?

That’s a subject also worthy of study.

Diversity and inclusion isn’t a one-way street. Otherwise, it’s not diverse, it’s not inclusion, and it bears little relation to freedom of speech.

(The University of Tennessee Microaggressions Research Laboratory website: https://microagressions.utk.edu).

George Korda is political analyst for WATE-TV, appearing Sundays on “Tennessee This Week.”  He hosts “State Your Case” from noon – 3 p.m. Sundays on WOKI-FM Newstalk 98.7. Korda is a frequent speaker and writer on political and news media subjects.  He is president of Korda Communications, a public relations and communications consulting firm.