Notes on: Rollock, N. (2011) 'Unspoken rules of
engagement: navigating racial microaggressions in
the academic terrain'. International Journal
of Qualitative Studies in Education.
DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2010.543433
Dave Harris
This draws on the counter narrative tradition and
explores a fictional academic setting [it's quite
like a D Bell sci-fi 'fable'].
Current policy is based 'on a narrow and
unsophisticated version of racism which is seem to
exist only in overt forms' (1), such as racist
incidents. This does not address institutional
racism although this has a key role. In HE there
are obvious signs of underachievement such as low
proportions of the BME staff and relative
underachievement, together with a lot of 'symbolic
commitments to antiracism' (2), but a general
silence about whiteness.
She means 'a power and privilege that is invisible
and goes unseen'. It has a role in maintaining
'the normality of racism and how this benefits
white members of society', allowing White people
to proceed without being conscious of their own
positioning so that they benefit from
institutional and social arrangements that seem to
have nothing to do with race [and she cites among
others Picower]. Even
the notion of white privilege is not sufficient,
and Gillborn supports Picower in referring to
whole ways of being, a whole 'range of
ideological, emotional and performative "tools of
whiteness"' that white students use, but that
exist unconsciously and even despite explicit
commitments to race equality.
Whiteness is often disguised and misrecognised as
in Bourdieu, and thus becomes acceptable. Racial
micro-aggression is one way in which it manifests,
'seemingly slight but persistent daily
re-occurrences that serve to remind POC that they
are judged to be different' [usually inferior].
She draws on Sue of
course, with a slight amendment to add a British
version of America as a melting pot to 'when you
come here you have to follow our rules' (3).
There can also be more subtle acts —
'interrupting, ignoring or questioning the
validity of the contributions of BAME individuals
while accepting the same suggestions or ideas from
their white counterparts'. Black women face
'constant intrigue' about the hair and its
styling. These practices 'wound, constrain and
denigrate the validity of the presence of POC',
but are not seen as racist not just because they
are subtle but 'because of an inherent
misconception that "nice" people cannot be
racist'. However, like Ladson Billings 1998, she
wants to exist that '"denotations are submerged
and hidden in ways that are offensive though
without identification"' [which she traces to
post-modernism and post-colonialism]. Such racial
micro-aggressions are maintained persistently and
casually in daily life.
Most researcher has occurred in the USA, for
example with Soloano and Yosso ( 2000) in three
university environments where 'racial battle
fatigue' led to doubts about capabilities,
frustrations and in some cases leaving the
University altogether. Giles and Hughes (2009)
reported POC academics also facing fatigue and
stress. The UK research so far has been confined
to white schools.
CRT is an important theoretical framework
stressing counter narrative and she intends to use
it here to show her racial differences are denied,
simplified and how racial micro-aggressions have
consequences. She deploys two primary fictional
composite characters, a black professional couple
and she makes use 'of notes to complement and
extend arguments made in the main body of the
text'.
[A conversation ensues]
Jonathan is too tired to go to work because he is
fed up with tiny insignificant episodes that wear
him down. Soray says that these are called
micro-aggressions.
Jonathan complains to the head of HR who says he
can appeal, although he is cynical because few
black staff are in the Department [supported by
official stats], appealing would be seen to cause
trouble and would reinforce the stereotype,
jeopardise his application for professorship. The
reported incident concerned a colleague who did
not want to discuss the episode he was complaining
about, which arose after a particular dispute
about opening windows or relying on air
conditioning. The colleague complained, there was
a reference to health and safety, further
complaints of insensitivity, angry denunciations,
complaints about the white partner not being able
to exercise choice. The decision was to split them
up. He suspected racial tensions but did not dare
ask.
[Then we get into science fiction, with the story
of particular vials of liquid that are '"racial
truth serums". The pretext is to rerun the
conversation with the head of HR, this time to
give a fairer account, identifying the racism in
the partners complaint. The serum makes white
folks race aware, and makes them listen to black
people instead of deciding for themselves in
advance. Other episodes follow, pointing out that
there is no race equality training in HE, that the
couple get more and more aware of racial
micro-aggressions [citing Sue again], that jobs
implicitly specify white candidates — '"White
world person-specification"' (11).
She think she's demonstrated that racism is
complex and nuanced and embedded. She has
'exploited literary and standard academic licence
to do this'. She asks us to imagine alternative
reality and thus to contribute to social justice
projects via the fiction of racial truth serums.
What would be the consequences — would white
people become determined to restrict them or
regulate them? She sees herself as 'explicitly,
defiantly and with courage "fighting back"' (12) Interesting.
|
|