Microaggressions : is a joke really a joke?

Duration of activity: 40 -80 minutes

20 min to discuss the worksheet in groups
15-20 min wrap up of the plenary discussion on the worksheet
20 min preparation of role plays
10 minutes presentation of role plays
10 minutes wrap up of the discussion on the role plays

Learning objectives:

Identify how gender and sexual stereotypes are manifested in the school environment
Encourage young people to become aware of various incidences of discrimination and micro-aggression in the school environment
Explore actions to be taken to combat gender stereotyping and gender inequalities in the school environment

Materials needed:

Flipchart paper for each group, with markers
A worksheet with questions for each group to discuss
Props for the role-plays afterwards, if the young people need them (dress-up, household items etc.)

Recommended prior reading:

Suggested step by step process

PART 1:

Explain that the purpose of the activity is to explore how inequality or discrimination on the basis of gender or sexuality are manifested in the school environment. At this point don’t mention the word micro-aggression as the aim is for the young people to arrive at this conclusion themselves. Explain that in this activity we will first have an initial discussion in small groups where we can identify incidences of sexual and gender-based discrimination/abuse and then the groups will act out a short role play of how we can address discrimination or unhealthy behaviours in the school environment.
Split the group into small groups of 4-5 people. The groups have around 20 minutes to discuss the worksheet and identify incidences of discrimination and inequality.
As the groups are working on the task, go around the groups and help out, prompt the group with questions to provide food for thought or just observe what is going on.
Once the groups have finished, invite the group back to plenary and discuss the following:
Facilitation questions for reflection and debriefing:
Which of the incidences that you read did you identify as discriminatory on the basis of gender or sexuality? What types of inequalities did these examples outline?
Were there some incidences that you were not sure if they were discriminatory or not? Which ones?
How about jokes? When people are joking are they being discriminatory or is it just ‘playing’ and ‘fooling around’?
In what were the incidences of discrimination you identified based on gender or sexuality? For instance is the girl who is being constantly interrupted by her boyfriend experiencing gender-based discrimination? Or Johnathan who got the LGBTIQ+ brochures on his desk? Martinez who is still called a he? Pedro who was called a virgin? In what way is this discrimination/negative attitudes related to gender or sexuality?
How serious are the incidences we discussed? Do you think that such comments are abusive or some innocent comments? Why/why not?
What is the intention of the people who are using these comments? Are they aiming to hurt others or are these comments ‘good natured’? Do you think that the people who are using these comments are aware of whether their comments may be hurting other people?
How do you think that the people who are recipients of these comments feel when they hear such things?
In reality most people who are using similar comments are not intending to hurt others and most of the time they are not aware that they are being discriminatory or hurtful to others. These comments and behaviours are often referred to as ‘micro-aggressions’ – acts that may not be intended to hurt but which have a negative and toxic effect on others.
What gives rise to this type of micro-aggression you think?
How does micro-aggression affect people? What type of attitudes does micro-aggression cultivate?
Are we aware of micro-aggression incidences you think? Do we easily recognize them as harmful and unhealthy behaviours or do we tend to bypass them? Why is this so?
Is micro-aggression something that happens in our school, our community? Can you think of a few examples that you may have witnessed (if you will mention an example, please mention it in a general context and ANONYMOUSLY, in order to avoid exposing any participant)? Also remind the young people of the ground rules for respect and confidentiality.

PART 2:
Let’s explore further how micro-aggression takes place in our environment (i.e. how gender stereotypes, gender inequality and discrimination against LGBTIQ+ persons are manifested) and what we can do to prevent it. You have 20 minutes to think of an example of micro-aggression which you will then enact in the form of a role-play. What is important is to try to offer a ‘solution’ in the end, i.e. how would the person in the story react to such an incidence? Which other people can help to put an end to this behaviour?
Each role-play needs to have a duration of maximum 2 minutes. Remind the groups that the theatrical improvisation must be a group effort and everyone needs to be involved in the process. The groups can also make use of some of the materials/props or make their own props, if they want to.
While the groups are working, you can go around the groups and assist with the brainstorming. If you feel that young people are putting some persons on the spot or exposing them in any way, discreetly bring back the discussion to a more general level.
Once the groups have finished with their rehearsals, gather them back in plenary to watch each other’s improvisations.
To save time, save reflection and discussion in the end of all role plays.

Facilitation questions for reflection and debriefing:

How did you feel during this activity?
Did anything make a particular impression on you?
For those of you that were the recipients of such behaviour, how were you feeling?
Would you say that the incidences portrayed in the role plays were realistic, i.e. have you witnessed similar incidences taking place in the school environment?
What do you think the majority of your peers think of such incidences? Do they tend to consider them as the ‘norm’ and bypass them as incidences that just happen?
What can be done to achieve more equality and safety in the school environment and fight gender and sexual discrimination? What ideas did we see in the role plays?
Draw three columns on the board, named Personal Action, What peers can do, What others (teachers/adults etc.) can do. Ask the group to classify possible ways of handling such incidences under each column.
What was the key learning from this activity that you are ‘taking home’ with you?

Take home messages and activity wrap up:

Microaggression are defined as unconscious expressions of sexist or racist bias. They come out in seemingly ‘harmless’ or ‘unoffensive’ comments by people who might be well-intentioned.

Micro-aggressions which result on sexual and gender-based discrimination or negative attitudes arise from the well engrained gender norms and our heteronormative perceptions about others. Catcalls, lewd jokes, mockery, sarcastic comments, disrespectful behaviours are often bypassed as something unintentional, common and “insignificant”, with the expectation that people at the receiving end of this behaviour should just let go. In reality such behaviours, no matter how unintentional or ‘harmless’ they may seem, they do constitute a form of sexual and gender-based violence and could have a devasting effect on the lives of others, especially considering that they are experiencing such behaviours on a daily basis. It is like a pointillist painting: one small dot layered on top of another. No one alone represents anything that means anything, but put together over time, they make up a vivid, powerful and coherent picture. The frame that bounds our lives is one in which the performance of masculinity and patriarchy continues to be more important than the rights, needs, dignity and safety of girls, women, people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions and sexual characteristics and all people at risk of SGBV. Responding to these situations of insult, humiliation, threat and risk, is not considered an option, even if it is the most rational response and one that, in men, is often seen as ‘normal’ and ‘ justifiable’.^[1]

Addressing micro-aggressions and ‘nipping them in the bud’ is crucial in preventing such attitudes/behaviours escalating to worse forms of violence. To address micro-aggressions we need to:
Acknowledge, respect and safeguard every person’s right to express their gender identity and sexual orientation as they self-define it. Every person has the right to be themselves and create relationships with others in any way that feels right for them.
Avoid making jokes about a person’s appearance, bodies, gender , gender identity or sexual orientation. In reality, there is no such thing as a meaningless joke and by ‘joking’ about such personal matters you run the risk of hurting someone in the process.
Apologize if you realize you may have said something that may have hurt someone. We all make mistakes, consciously and not, and need to own up to them when we do.
Hold other people accountable when they make negative comments about others. Reflect what you’re hearing : ‘I noticed that……’. Be assertive and respectful. Use ‘I’ statements so you don’t put them on the defensive, for instance ‘ I didn’t feel comfortable hearing you say that. Even though you may not have had any bad intentions, I think it may have hurt someone’
Ask the person who experienced the micro-aggression if they want to talk about it. Explain that it is not their fault and that they have done nothing to provoke this. Express your interest to be there and provide support if they need it. Encourage them to also reach to others, friends/family/helplines who can provide support.
Ask other people to help such as teachers or the school management.
Ask teachers to create ‘ground rules’ for the class and the school environment which explain how young people can treat each other with equality and respect.
Ensure that young people have support systems within the school: for instance access to a school counsellor, information on resources/helplines/NGOs who can help etc.

Tips for implementing the activity:

Remember that ‘classifications’ are only indicative and may not be agreeable with everyone in the group. The aim here is not to find out exactly the ‘right’ way to classify these incidences as innocent or harmful but instead to highlight all the grey areas that may exist- what one person may consider innocent may be considered harmful by someone else. The most important thing is to highlight how little bits of what a person may consider ‘innocent and harmless’ constitutes a puzzle, which when looked as a whole it can be very harmful indeed (as mentioned in the metaphor with the pointillist painting).

If you are pressed for time, you can only do the first part of the activity and skip the part with the role-play. If there is a bit of time left, it would be useful to wrap up the activity with asking the group to offer some suggestions on what they can do to prevent and handle microaggression in their environments.

Adapting the activity for online implementation

● There are various options in adapting the first part of this activity. One option could be to send the worksheet to participants beforehand so they complete it prior to the workshop. You can then discuss each statement one by one in plenary.

● Another option in a synchronous mode is to break the group into smaller groups in breakout groups and attach the worksheet in the chat. Participants can download it on their PCs or mobiles and work on the statements individually. You can then hold a discussion in plenary following each statement and their answers.

● If you want to work in plenary instead of breakout rooms, you can ask participants to ‘vote’ using the thumps up icon.

● Alternatively, the worksheet can be turned into a digital quiz. Each statement can be presented with the options ‘not an incidence of discrimination/prejudice’, ‘somewhat discriminatory but harmless’, ‘serious/harmful incidence of discrimination’, ‘not sure/it depends’, as possible answers to choose from. Remember that the important thing is not to have ‘right’ answers (therefore do not score answers as right or wrong in the quiz) but to develop a discussion on how microaggressions are indeed incidences of discrimination, which are often harmful for the recipients, no matter how harmless they may appear.

● The activity can also be turned into a voting competition, where pre-designated (rotating) ‘judges’ (volunteer participants) can vote on a specific scenario. So that participants don’t feel they are put ‘on the spot’, you can have 3-4 ‘judges’ voting on a particular scenario. Judges can vote either by a thumbsup, a coloured piece of paper that they raise up to the screen or by coloured side effects on their background. For the next scenario you can proceed with choosing different judges and so on.

● For the second part of the activity that entails a role play, you can go around it in again different ways. One option, if you don’t want to go ahead with the role play, is to break out the participants in smaller groups so they can discuss incidences of micro-aggressions in their environments in a more comfortable/intimate setting. You can ask them to develop a short story with the characters involved, which they can then read out in plenary. Then you open up the discussion in plenary, asking participants to first individually think of different possible endings to the story that was read out, and then brainstorm in plenary about possible interventions that could have taken place.

● Alternatively, if the group does feel keen and positive, you can go ahead with the role-play as envisaged in the activity, improvising on the different dynamics of the incidence that participants bring up.

Soraya Chemaly (2018). What men need to know about sexist microaggressions https://www.damemagazine.com/2018/11/28/what-men-need-to-know-about-sexist-microaggressions/