Biden is an interesting use case in change and acceptance. There is an age of plasticity to microaggressions and a stultification. I intend to be as plastic as possible for as long as possible. This blog helps, as did the show - https://www.philosophytalk.org/shows/microaggressions .

I made some remarks earlier regarding this subject. Still don't quite get the distinction being made. To my mind, Microaggression is little different from other discriminatory attitudes and behaviors. Prefixes such as micro and macro are fancier labels, attached to terms and intended to bestow an air of intellectual sophistication and social respectability. One cannot, however, make a silk purse from a female pig's ear. (My tablet will not accept the colloquial term for that appendage) So, call this what you will. It remains abhorrent and insulting---just a devious means of belittling others for whom one has less respect. Is it a form of unlawful discrimination? I don't think so. Not yet anyway. Could that change? Maybe so---if the politically correct crowd decided to attach it to the me-too movement. If that seems petty or far-fetched, consider the motive(s) for microagression. Birds and feathers flocking, and all that.

Had an epiphany of sorts about this tired subject. Dealing with microexpressions. These are split-second looks which convey notions about how/what we are feeling about things/people/situations..There appears to be some correlation with your microaggression thesis.. I asked my source about this. Will see what they think. My suspicion is, as often, it is all connected..Stay tuned. There is no subatomic stuff here. Only pragmatism.

I find myself musing upon these terms. I mean, they just sort of burst upon the linguistic scene. See, it is pretty clear (I think) that microaggression(s) has/have been around for at least as long as humans have possessed minds, bicameral; unicameral or any other which might be imagined. Perhaps they spring from master's theses or doctoral dissertations? Or, from books written by intrepid thinkers who have attained such rites (rights?) of passage? Discrimination, whether lawful or unlawful, is a form of aggressive attitude and/or behavior. Whether it is micro or more depends upon degree.
In any case, it can be viewed as a character flaw or badge of courage, depending on where one stands.

I have been examining what I have called contextual reality. I don't rabidly assert origination of the term, although throughout a varied reading history, I have not encountered it. If I were to attempt a definition, it would be something like: contextual reality is that which refutes "how things probably are, not how they might possibly be", by basing one's conclusions on belief(s) instead of facts. On balance, this is the sort of reality upon which positions are held; causes established and driven, and so on. In principle and/or practice, this is not new. Anymore than microaggression is new.
Thought is an old activity. We tend to engage it when not doing something more useful...

Amendment:
In the previous comment, I made reference to where one stands. One must, of course, stand for something, lest he fall for anything. Key to success for this stance is being certain that what one stands for is worth the support. Yeah, that's right. Don't try to raise a sunken ship. Remember the Andrea Doria...

Thanks, Laura. Acknowledgement noted.
I am pitching my notion of contextual reality to some other sources. Did not know much of Ken Taylor's reference project before--- have not yet read the book, though I intend to. There feels like a parallel of sorts. Terms mean whatever their originators intend them to mean...often, more than they imagined; occasionally, more than ever hoped.
Harold.

When working in government, I experienced what this blog calls microaggression. I only mention this now because, then, I was not well-schooled enough to 1. Understand what was going on, and 2. To counter the aggressive behavior with a credible defense. The result: a minority female got a promotion to mid-management, that I could have gotten, on the basis of experience and seniority, had I been other than white and male. Due to the politically charged nature of equal opportunity work, then, (and probably now...), it was not politically correct for white people to hold high-level jobs in that occupational slot. Whether male, or female, they did not last long....sooner, not later, they were expunged. Now, granted, this had much to do with small-p politics. But, being real, it was about race and appearances. And, a personnel practice known as prepositioning. It was a foregone conclusion I would not rise any higher than I did. Not even after serving as administrative law judge---a fiduciary sideline that earned me no more money, yet required independent thought and integrity.. In retrospect, that helped me try harder and think better. All good.

On the downside, I harbor resentment for microaggressors . Devious people, who function within the boundary of integrity, contextually speaking, of course. My story was mostly about race, for the reasons stated. Microaggression is so much more..Yeah. It is meaningful. So what?

.

Here's what: life hands you a bushel of rotting lemons. You pick out the best ones and make lemonade.

There was a piece today in a blog I visit, concerning virtue signalling. I left a comment which was quickly answered. i asked if in the blogger's opinion, virtue signalling and microaggression were related. I think they are. Anyway, the blogger gave a stock account of microaggression. Textbook. He then disavowed virtue signalling as a kind of microaggressive behavior,. Neither of us said anything about intention. Again, his response to my question was worthy of a third or fourth year philosophy student. My long view sense is undeterred. Why? Because braggadocio and intimidation assume different forms under different circumstances. And, bragging is nothing less than a level of intimidation, which is aggression, in its' own right. Textbook answers are fine. They do not, however, contribute much to independent thinking.

Let us theorize that microagression, virtue signalling, discrimination (all kinds) and other anti-social attitudes/behaviors are, propositional attitudes, i.e., intentional, 100% and nothing more than the self-promotion and aggrandizement we always knew they were. If this is not so far-fetched, neither is it so to conclude that humans are, at bottom, self-indulgent morons. There is little to argue after that. Futurists who think and speak of long-life, transhumanism and immortality are equally foolish. The circle of life is there for good reason...though reason is but a human construct. We conjure up all kinds of excuses for the behaviors we abjure...place all sorts of labels on them. If death is preferable to dishonor, this must mean we have no purpose for leading honorable lives? So, dreams and musings of long-life, etc. are vain imaginings. Allah-u-abha, all.