The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2021

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | JULY-AUGUST 2021 41 the term as “verbal and nonverbal interpersonal exchanges in which a perpetrator causes harm to an individual target, whether intended or unintended.” These encounters make the recipients feel overlooked, disrespected and devalued because of their race, gender or sexual orientation. Any single micro- aggression in isolation may be minimally impactful. But the cumulative impact can be detrimental to the emotional and psychological well-being of the victim. As societal norms and legal protections against overt dis- crimination have evolved, scholars of microaggression contend that while people may no longer participate in overt or bigoted behavior, they may engage in unconscious or subconscious behavior that reflects their implicit biases. No matter how subtle or innocuous such actions may seem, they contribute to a toxic work environment. A Toxic Taxonomy The study of microaggressions now recognizes a taxonomy of four broad subcategories: environmental microaggressions, microassaults, microinsults and microinvalidations. Environmental microaggressions appear in the form of exclu- sionary policies and practices in institutions, including uni- versities, religious organizations and all levels of government, creating a “hostile” workplace. The underrepresentation of minorities in leadership positions, for example, can constitute an environmental microaggression. Microassaults are conscious and deliberate actions, subtle or not, meant to harm the intended victim through name-calling, marginalization or purposeful discriminatory actions. They are most closely aligned with traditional forms of racial, sexual or gender-based prejudice—such as giving rewarding assignments to less qualified candidates who happen to belong to a man- ager’s group, while denying career-enhancing opportunities to minority employees. For instance, instead of sharing the work- load and developmental opportunities, a section chief routinely taps his white male “superstar” to take on the most challenging, high-profile taskings, such as control officer for a VIP visit, and then rewards him with a Superior Honor Award. Paradoxically, victims of discrimination often find it easier to deal with microassaults than more subtle microaggressions. Because the blatant racism is clear, they do not need to expend psychological energy and suffer stress deciphering intent. Verbal microassaults include name-calling and jokes that disparage a group, harming the victim’s reputation and well-being. Because of strong public condemnation of such behaviors, Sue and Spanierman posit that microassaults are most likely expressed in conditions that afford the perpetrator a degree of protection—such as when they are issued anony- mously, in the company of those the perpetrator believes share their views, or when the perpetrator loses control (e.g., they are drunk or angry). Microinsults convey rudeness or insensitivity and demean a person’s identity and humanity. Yet they are not always con- sciously intended to insult, particularly when they are common- place utterances. For example, who hasn’t heard “That’s so gay!” used in reference to something that is out of the norm, weird or odd? Or take the embassy newsletter that runs an article about “contributions to society” of an enslaved person during Black History Month. Such clumsy or derogatory expressions reinforce stereotypes and negative perceptions of a person’s identity as part of a minority group. Eye-rolling and other nonverbal cues by aggres- sors convey that one does not respect or validate an individual, group or idea. Body language and facial expressions can send a message to both the targets and bystanders that the target of the microinsult does not belong in a given social group or work environment. Among the types of microaggressions, microinvalidations are perhaps the most insidious. Sue and Spanierman define these as communications that negate or nullify the thoughts, feelings or experiential reality of the marginalized group. Microinvalida- tions come into play through the assertion that the dominant Eurocentric culture, heterosexuality or gender identity within the workplace is the norm, and everything else is deviant. When a colleague says something like “He speaks good English,” it reinforces the notion that the target is an outsider, a foreigner. And while it may be well intended, telling an African American colleague that “I have lots of friends who are Black” can come across as a defensive maneuver to obfuscate one’s racism. Similarly, “queer blindness”—ignoring the lived reality of LGBTQ colleagues—makes them feel less included, not more. Microinvalidation occurs in other ways, too. For example, at post an African American human resources officer (HRO) No matter how subtle or innocuous such actions may seem, they contribute to a toxic work environment.