Diversity

Diversity (pronounced dih-vur-si-tee (U) or dahy-vur-si-tee (non-U))

(1) The state or fact of being diverse; difference; unlikeness; nonuniformity.

(2) The inclusion of individuals representing more than one national origin, color, religion, socioeconomic stratum, sexual orientation etc.

(3) In mathematical logic, the relation that holds between two entities when and only when they are not identical; the property of being numerically distinct.

(4) In politics, the social policy of encouraging tolerance for people of different cultural and racial backgrounds

(5) In politics as multiculturalism or more specific legislation mandating diversity, an attempt to redress historic discrimination.

(6) In biology, as biodiversity, the degree of variation of life forms within an ecosystem.

(7) In zoological taxidermy, as species diversity, the effective number of species represented in a data set.

(8) In genetics, as genetic diversity, the total number of genetic characteristics in the genetic makeup of a species.

(9) In agriculture, as crop diversity, the variance in genetic and phenotypic characteristics of plants used in agriculture.

(10) In electronic communications, the principle of the deployment of multiple channels or devices to improve reliability.

(11) In electrical engineering, as diversity factor, the ratio of the sum of the maximum demands of the various part of a system to the coincident maximum demand of the whole system.

(12) In law, a term often used in equal-opportunity legislation when codifying specific metrics.

1300–1350: From the Middle English diversite (originally "variety; range of differences" and by the late fourteenth century "quality of being diverse, fact of difference between two or more things or kinds; variety; separateness; that in which two or more things differ" (usually in a technical or neutral sense), from the Old French diversité (difference, diversity, unique feature, oddness (and when used in a degoratory sense "wickedness, perversity; contradiction") (which survives in the Modern French as the twelfth century diversité), from the Latin diversitatem (nominative dīversitās) (contrariety, wickedness, perversity, disagreement (and in a secondary sense "difference, diversity")), the construct being  diversus (past particle of divertere) (contradiction, difference; turned different ways (and in Late Latin "various") +‎ tas.  The Latin tas suffix was from the primitive Indo-European tehts, from the Ancient Greek της (tēs) and Sanskrit ताति (tāti).  In English, the construct uses the suffix ity which is used to form abstract nouns indicating a state of being.  Suffix is from the Middle English ite, a borrowing from the Old French ité and directly from the Latin itatem (nominative itas).  As used as a suffix denoting state or condition, in Latin it was built with a connective i + tas.  Fowler’s Modern English Usage (1926) notes that in English, a word with the ity suffix usually means the quality of being what the adjective describes, or concretely an instance of the quality, or collectively all the instances whereas a word with an ism appended means the disposition, or collectively all those who feel it.  Diversity is a noun, diverse is an adjective (and collective a noun) and diversely is an adverb; the noun plural is diversities.

Diversity: The path to DEI

Diversity had the distinct negative meaning "perverseness, being contrary to what is agreeable or right; conflict, strife; perversity, evil" in English from late fourteenth century but was obsolete after the seventeenth (although the twenty-first century critiques of wokeness and political correctness has seen "diversity" again used in this way in certain quarters).  Diversity as a virtue in the political construction of nation-states was an idea which grew as modern democracies developed in the decades after the French Revolution (1789) because it was thought essential to prevent one faction from arrogating all power (and discussed in The Federalist (now usually called The Federalist Papers) 85 essays published in 1788 and written by some of the Founding Fathers of the United States to advocate ratification of the constitution).  The word however was also used under the Raj where many of the British colonial "fixes" (at which they excelled) used existing divisiveness (which they encouraged and sometimes even created) as part of the principle of "divide & rule".  Diversity under the Raj was real, cross-cutting and multi-layered but for from the modern sense in which ethnicity, gender and sexual identity are the typical determinates, this use emerging as now understood in the early 1990s, the original purpose being to provide for the "inclusion and visibility of persons of previously under-represented minority identities".

Projecting diversity: Lindsay Lohan in rainbow T-shirt, the T-shirt of the T-shirt created through Yoshirt's portal.

Although the use of diversity (in a positive sense) as applies to race, gender etc. appears to date only from 1992, the term "affirmative action", as government policy designed to promote or achieve diversity in various aspects of life, was first used in an executive order signed by US President Kennedy in 1961.  That was a decree which required that government contractors "…take affirmative action to ensure applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin".  Such policies have become widespread, especially since the 1980s and, in the west, are applied exclusively for the benefit of groups or individuals thought disadvantaged.  Beyond the west, other countries have adopted such policies although sometimes they’re applied for the benefit of a defined majority.  Increasingly, in the US, affirmative action policies are being challenged, sometimes by groups themselves defined as "diverse".

To demonstrate a corporate commitment to workplace DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion), always include a brunette in photos. 

In the West, not all approve of diversity positive initiatives.  In March 2018, the University of Sydney Union issued a statement noting the application of an affirmative action policy to its debating team would promote diversity and prevent domination by “affluent, white, privately educated students”.  The union’s press release was prompted by a report in the Murdoch press that the new affirmative action policies will mean the university would be sending not necessarily its best team to the annual debating tournament, but one “…meeting quotas for women, people of colour, and others oppressed by the white male supremacy”.

Former senator Eric Abetz

Anxious always to expose conspiracies by communists, LGBTQQIAAOP agitators, Trotskyists, trade unionists and other malcontents, then Senator Eric Abetz (b 1958; senator for Tasmania (Liberal) 1994-2022) labelled the move “Stalinist dogma’’ dressed up as progressive thinking, adding the union’s move was evidence of “stifling political correctness’’ which threatened to “damage the future generations who are taught this nonsense as fact’’.  The former senator was perhaps not someone good at recognizing white privilege or understanding its implications for those from diverse backgrounds but he did take a Churchillian stand defending the nation when the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands declared war on Australia so there's that.

The young ladies of Alpha Gamma Delta: ἐννέα κόραι, ἑπτὰ αὐτῶν ξανθαί (ennéa kórai, heptà autôn xanthai).

Alpha Gamma Delta (ΑΓΔ and clipped usually to "Alpha Gam") decided to adopt “DEI best practice” in choosing their webpage banner, including not one but three brunettes.  Dating from 1904 when the first chapter was founded at New York’s Syracuse University, AGD is an international women's fraternity and social organization with over 200,000 members, some 200 collegiate chapters and over 250 alumnae groups.  There is an on-line shop (Alpha Gam Boutique) with lines of hats, T-shirts, stoles, tank-tops & such and there's the helpful facility of "custom chapter orders".

Variation

Variation (pronounced vair-ee-ey-shuhn)

(1) The act, process, or accident of varying in condition, character, or degree.

(2) Amount, rate, extent, or degree of change.

(3) A different form of something; variant.

(4) In music, the transformation of a melody or theme with changes or elaborations in harmony, rhythm, and melody.

(5) In ballet, a solo dance, especially one a section of a pas de deux.

(6) In astronomy, any deviation from the mean orbit of a heavenly body, especially of a planetary or satellite orbit.

(7) In admiralty use as applied to nautical navigation, the angular difference at the vessel between the direction of true north and magnetic north; also called magnetic declination.

(8) In biology, a difference or deviation in structure or character from others of the same species or group.

(9) In linguistics, any form of morphophonemic change, such as one involved in inflection, conjugation, or vowel mutation.

1350-1400: From the Middle English variation (difference, divergence), from the Middle French variation, from the Old French variacion (variety, diversity) and directly from the Latin variationem & variātiōn (stem of variātiō) (a difference, variation, change), from the past participle stem of variare (to change) (the source of the modern English vary).  The use in the context of musical composition wasn't common until the early nineteenth century.  Variation is a noun and the (rare) adjective is variational; the noun plural is variations.

The available synonyms themselves show an impressive variation: deviation, abnormality, diversity, variety, fluctuation, innovation, divergence, alteration, discrepancy, disparity, mutation, shift, modification, change, swerve, digression, contradistinction, aberration, novelty, diversification, mutation, alteration, difference.  Apart from the English variation, European descendants include the French variation, the Italian variazione, the Portuguese variação, the Russian вариация (variacija), the Spanish variación and Swedish variation.

Ginger, copper, auburn & chestnut are variations on the theme of red-headedness: Lindsay Lohan demonstrates the possibilities.  

Glenn Gould and the Goldberg Variations: 1955 & 1981

Published in 1741, JS Bach’s (1685-1750) Goldberg Variations consists of an aria and thirty variations.  Written for the harpsichord, it’s named after German harpsichordist & organist Johann Gottlieb Goldberg (1727-1756), thought to have undertaken the first performance.  The work is now thought part of the canon of Baroque music but before 1955, was an obscure piece of the Bach repertoire, a technically difficult composition for the hardly fashionable harpsichord and known mostly as a device for teachers to develop students’ keyboard skills.  Even for aficionados of the Baroque, it was rarely performed.

Glenn Gould (1932—1982) was a Canadian classical pianist, his debut album on the then novel twelve-inch vinyl LP an interpretation of the Goldberg Variations, played on the piano.  A quite extraordinary performance and a radical approach, played at a tempo Bach surely never intended and with an electrifying intensity, it was beyond mere interpretation.  The work was also his swansong, uniquely for him, re-recorded in 1981 and issued days before his death.  Eschewing the stunningly fast pace which made its predecessor famous and clearly the work of a mellower, more reflective artist, for those familiar with the original, it’s a masterpiece of controlled tension.

In 2002, Sony re-released both, the earlier essentially untouched, the later benefiting from a re-mastering which corrected some of the technical deficiencies found in many early digital releases.  Although critics could understand Gould thinking there were aspects of the 1955 performance which detracted from the whole and why he felt the second version a better piece of art, it’s still the original which thrills.

Esthetic

Esthetic (pronounced es-thet-ik)

(1) An alternative spelling of aesthetic (mostly North American).

(2) In US commercial use, a term applied to cosmetic surgery (as esthetic surgery) and other fields in the beauty business.

1920s: A re-purposing of an existing word (originally in the form “esthetic surgery” by a US doctor as a means of product differentiation (plastic surgery for cosmetic rather than reconstructive purposes).  Esthetic is an adjective (and when used as an alternative spelling of aesthetic the comparative is more esthetic, the superlative most esthetic) and esthetician is a noun; the noun plural is estheticians.  The alternative spelling esthetic began life as one of those Americanisms which annoy some but it reflected simply the wholly sensible approach in US English that it’s helpful if spelling follows pronunciation and esthetic remains the alternative spelling of aesthetic, used predominately in North America although, as the internet has achieved for so many variants, it is now an internationalism.

Often, when an image appears in which a celebrity seems somewhat “changed”, Instagram lights up with speculation about possible esthetic surgery.  If there’s enough interest, this will spread to the mainstream celebrity sites which will deconstruct the possibilities and sometimes publish interviews with esthetic surgeons who will offer an opinion.  Once, esthetic interventions were almost always denied but now they’re sometimes admitted and even publicized.

In the early twentieth century the US cosmetic surgery industry (even then inventive and profitable), re-purposed the word; linguistic differentiation to create product differentiation: “esthetic surgery”, the business of performing surgery for aesthetic purposes rather than reasons strictly medical or reconstructive and the most significant figure in this was the German-Jewish cosmetic physician Jacques Joseph (1865–1934), now remembered as the “father of modern cosmetic surgery”.  Under the auspices of first the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS, 1931) and the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS, 1967), the business of esthetic surgery has since boomed and related (even if remotely) professions such as nail technicians, the lip-plumpers and the body-piercers also append “esthetic” to their advertising; the first “estheticians” were the skin care specialists (exfoliation, massage, aromatherapy, facials and such) but the title soon proliferated.

Forbes on Miami Swim Week 2024

With their coverage of Miami Swim Week (MSW 2024; South Beach, Miami, 29 May-5 June 2024), Forbes must have delighted etymologists looking for case studies.  MSW is self-described as “The premier fashion event of the year!” which may elicit a wry smile from some in New York, Paris, London or Milan but the phase “swim week” is no perhaps too modest from an event which has grown from being in 1998 essentially somewhere for manufacturers and retailers to display the new season’s swimsuits to a place where, in addition to hundred of vendor spaces and multiple runways (no catwalks at MSW) there are seminars, panel discussions and “beach lifestyle events” like yoga + mimosas; MSW is now very much a “vibe occasion”, noted for vendor hospitality and after-parties.  It has of course also moved with the times and those times have changed from when DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) was achieved with a smattering of brunettes among the bronzed blondes on what then were the catwalks.  Now there is obvious ethnic diversity and some “plus-size” models (up to a certain point) and it’d be interesting to have an artificial intelligence (AI) engine review the footage of the last few MSW and similar events to calculate if there’s appears to be an industry “quota” for those not of the (still secretly) desired body type and skin color.  The suspicion is there may be such quotas and those numbers are “creeping up”, presumably to plateau at some “threshold of plausible acceptability”.

What Forbes explored in the headline: "Aesthetics meets Esthetics" was one of the panel discussions conducted at the Gabriel Hotel as part of the Art Hearts Fashion run of show which included runway shows from men’s swimwear line Hunk and The Black Tape Project with its conceptualized futurist swimwear designs.  On Friday, the intriguingly named “Snatched Plastic Surgery” hosted an intimate panel discussion exploring the symbiotic relationship between body trends and fashion.  On the panel were industry experts including designers & fashion house CEOs, magazine editors and a plastic surgeon specializing in cosmetic procedures (esthetic surgery).  The symbiosis explored was about (1) the part esthetic procedures (not all are surgical) contribute to demand for clothing which reveals more of the body’s surface (ie skin) of which swimwear is the most extreme example and (2) the demand for such procedures generated by the desire to wear such clothing.  There are technical aspects to that which involve the intricate details of surgeries which make certain cuts of swimwear wearable by those who would otherwise be precluded but that didn’t appear to make the panel’s agenda.

Structural determinism in action: At MSW 2024, rosettes came in sizes to suit the coverage required (or desired).

What MSW 2024 did reveal was that the trend which disproportionately was over-represented in the coverage continued to be the most minimal but one notable return was one of the industry’s older fig leaves: the rosette.  Having lost the association with high-society and neglected in political campaign wear (except in the UK and to some extent in New Zealand) since the advent of digital advertising, rosettes in fashion were last seen at scale (and occasionally en masse) in the years around the turn of the twentieth century but on the MSW runways they were back.  Although coverage in the press was limited, whether as a three dimensional attachment or a printed motif, rosettes appeared often on the swimwear designed actually to be worn in the water but what caught the eye of photographers were the most minimal, most of which would be unlikely long to survive secure in the surf.  Still, that was unlikely to have been a design objective and as a static display or worn while walking (carefully), they probably work well.

MSW 2024: External superstructure was more apparent al la the exposed plumbing in some of the architecture of mid-century modernism.

The other thing the critics noted was the increasing migration of the “cage bra” look to swimwear.  If well designed, the exposed superstructure can genuinely function as a structural device but the real attraction was that it permits the volume of material (already hardly generous) further to be reduced.  That certainly is a design objective but one which creates the problem of having less surface area with which to work to create something, hence the attraction of making the superstructure a feature.  It’s essentially an underwire which is shaped rather more than is required to fulfil the functional purpose and sometimes even a little wider (a rare case of a minimalist bikini’s component getting bigger) so accessories can be added or more of the fabric covering is displayed.

Racialism

Racialism (pronounced rey-shuh-liz-uhm)

(1) The belief that humans can be categorized as belonging to distinct races, each race being characterized by fixed and heritable traits (obsolete).

(2) In technical use, any system of categorization which uses race (however defined); in technical use, what used to be called scientific racialism (and later race realism) is still practiced but the term is no longer applied except as a critique.

1882: The construct was racial + -ism (the adjective racial dating from 1862).  Race (in this context) was from the French racisme, dating from 1902, from the mid sixteenth century Middle French race from the early fourteenth century Italian razza of uncertain origin.  The word gained the various senses of (1) a group of sentient beings, particularly people, distinguished by common ancestry, heritage or physical characteristics (most notably skin color or tone), (2) an identifiably distinct group of people distinguished from others on some basis (which could be cultural or religious).  Noted first in 1928, use of the word racism became common by the mid-1930s and was widely applied to the legal and social systems in some countries by at least 1940.  The –ial suffix from the Middle English, from the Old French, from the Latin -ālis (the third-declension two-termination suffix (neuter -āle) used to form adjectives of relationship from nouns or numerals) and was used to form adjectives from nouns.  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek ισμός (ismós) & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, sometimes through the Latin –ismus & isma (from where English picked up ize) and sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Ancient Greek (where it tended more specifically to express a finished act or thing done).  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form abstract nouns of action, state, condition or doctrine from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).  Racialism & racialist are nouns & adjectives and racialistic is an adjective; the noun plural is racialisms.  Racism & racist are nouns and adjectives; the noun plural is racisms.

The word "racialism" was coined in 1882, based on the existing use of "race" as a synonym of "nation, tribe, ethnic group"; the later senses emerged from circa 1890 from the use of "race" for racial categories.  The use in 1882 was essentially neutral and descriptive and referred to “tribalism” but in less than a decade it assumed the meaning “political system advocating superiority and exclusive rights based on race” but that would come later to be replaced by the more overt “racism” & “racist”.  The later attempt to repurpose the word for (allegedly) scientific purpose with a meaning closer to the 1882 original (including as race-realism) was unsuccessful.  In the West, expressions of racism became first unfashionable in polite society and later unacceptable.  This change in attitude unfolded over decades in the twentieth century and progress was socially and geographically varied, the clustering of populations by class, education and ethnic diversity (the formalization as DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) came early in the 2000s) probably the most significant factors accounting for the difference.  Racism does seem to be endemic in the human condition and while it can be suppressed by collective social disapprobation or rendered unlawful, apparently just about everywhere when people with recognizably different features or characteristics (in appearance, linguistically, culturally etc) co-exist, some degree of conflict is likely to ensue.  This can be something so low-level it’s usually imperceptible such as the interactions between the Italian, French, German & Romansh speakers in Switzerland or more violent, as recent events in Sudan and Tunisia demonstrate.  It’s not going to go away and the management of it varies from place to place between the multi-cultural policies in the West and the “ethnic cleansing” (something of a euphemism in that it included mass-murder) associated with the wars in the Balkans in the early 1990s.  The most obvious modern manifestation of racialism is “racial profiling” which ranges from filtering processes which exclude certain applicants from the employment selection process to police selecting for “stop & search” only those perceived to be of a certain ethnicity to persons of Middle-Eastern appearance receiving heightened levels of attention from airport security staff.

Winsor Newton Black Indian Ink.

Racialism and racism are not unrelated concepts, but have different meanings and implications.  Racialism is practiced as a spectrum and explores the existence of differences between racial groups (as defined) and this can be in genetics, specific capabilities, traits, or characteristics.  It can be merely descriptive (even down to the cellular level) bit inevitably comes often to be used to suggest there might be races which are superior or inferior to others based on these differences.  Racism however, takes a belief system (usually of racial superiority) and imposes systemic oppression, discrimination, prejudice, and unequal treatment of individuals or groups based on their race, ethnicity, or nationality.  The most obvious examples involve the exercise of power and privilege by one racial group over others, leading to social, economic, and political disparities.  So seriously corrosive has race come to be seen in the West that some guides now recommend race never be mentioned by white people although there is a convention words & phrases using proscribed terms can be used the those in the group referenced, hence the ongoing popularity of the infamous N-words among sections of the African American community.  That doesn’t however mean it’s now permissible for white people to use the phrase “white trash”, even as a self-descriptor because of its origins which essentially equated whites of the lowest socio-economic status with that of blacks although it does continue to be used both as a term of disparagement and one of group identity.  Helpfully, the guides suggest “Chinese whispers” should become “telephone whispers” and “Indian Ink” is best called “carbon-based ink” although under the original name it remains widely available.  In cricket, the “chinaman” delivery is no longer mention and if one is sent down, it’s correct to call it “left-arm unorthodox spin” or “left-arm wrist spin”, both of which are by comparison a bit of a mouthful but the sport seems to cope with the fielding position known as “deep backward square leg” so most should adapt.  The “French cut” seems to have survived.

Like the once linguistically innocuous but now controversial “niggardly”, “racialism” can still be used but caution is advised and it might be a word best left to experts in instances when the technical context is obvious.  Geneticists for example have determined the only “pure” human beings left are certain black Africans (resident mostly in sub-Saharan Africa) while the rest of the planet’s population carries between 1–2% Neanderthal DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid, the so-called “building blocks” of life) with East Asians tending to slightly higher numbers) as the eventual consequence of Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) interbreeding with early, anatomically modern, Homo sapiens after sapiens migrated out of Africa.  All this is believed to have happened some 50,000–60,000 years ago, mostly in the Near East and Eurasia and those sapien populations were fully modern humans, not transitional forms.  Deliciously, this means all the white supremacists are a Human-Neanderthal mix so, using the term a few of them seem still to like, they can (though the biology is dubious) be thought: “sub-human”.

Sub-Saharan African populations generally have little to no Neanderthal ancestry although there are traces due to later back-migration and in discussing the phenomenon, use of “racialism” can be appropriate although perhaps not on social media.  Also racialist is another discovery from the DNA labs: a genetic mutation found in Africans, possession of which offers some degree of protection from malaria and that would have been a product of natural selection among those who lived in places where the disease was endemic.  Using the available data, it’s believed the interbreeding process is best understood as introgression (movement of a gene from one species to another) resulting from limited, episodic interbreeding, the relatively small genetic contribution retained through selection although many Neanderthal genes would over generations have been purged because they proved maladaptive.  The byword though remains “caution” because of heightened sensitivities in the age of identity politics and terms like “race realism” and “scientific racism” (once seen in the literature of a number of disciplines) have long been proscribed because they became tainted by pseudo-sciences which (unsurprisingly) all supported notions of white superiority.

Article on news.com.au reporting Sydney Sweeney’s (b 1997) photo-shoot for Cosmopolitan magazine’s “Love Issue”.  Remarkably, it was three days before the page was taken down.

In what may be one of the “unexpected consequences” of institutions replacing humans with some implementation of AI (artificial intelligence), on 30 January, 2026, Rupert Murdoch’s (b 1931) site news.com.au ran a story with “Sydney Sweeney strips down in racist photo-shoot yet for Cosmo” appearing both as a headline (in bold type) and in the body of the article.  It would once have been classed a “typo” (a clipping of “typographical error”) and in days gone by a sub-editor wearily would have corrected it with a correct adjectival form (“raciest photo-shoot” or “most racy photo-shoot”), suggesting something a little risqué rather than anything to do with ethnicity.  Flesh and blood sub-editors are however an extinct species and content now is left to the writer, the “cut & paster”, the AI bot or a combination of all three.  So more typos seem now slip through although, presumably, as the AI sub-editors improve, the error rate will be cut.  What is intriguing is the speculation the erroneous use of “racist” (constituting or exhibiting racism) may have been the result of an AI bot making “an assumption” based on what it “learned”.  As constantly we’re reminded: “it’s all in the algorithm” and for very good reason the AI tools used by news organizations are built with both a “frequency bias” and a “recency bias”; in other words, a premium is placed on (1) that which most appears and (2) that which is “the latest”, the imperatives which underpin social media and search engines.

American Eagle's "My jeans are blue" campaign, of which not all approved.

Because AI can learn only from what it has access to in digital form, content which is most frequently encountered and most recent will tend to be prioritized.  The speculation is the AI may have been drawn to use of the word by the recent furore suggesting an advertising campaign in which the tag line was “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans” was “racist”, the usual suspects claiming the implication was someone with her physical characteristics (white) was being positioned as the “ideal of attractiveness”, thereby devaluing all those “not white”.  Because what was being advertised was denim apparel (including jeans), most probably just enjoyed the play on words but in the age of identity politics, those with a grievance rarely will miss an opportunity to be outraged.  As a class of phenomenon, it’s something quite specific in that it would pass without comment for anyone to note Usain Bolt (b 1986; holder of the world records for the 100 & 200 metre sprints) has must have the “great genes” needed to be the greatest sprinter ever and had there been a similar campaign with billboards saying “Usain Bolt has Great Jeans”, it would have won awards.  Of course what appeared on news.com.au might really have been a typo (sometimes, “a typo is just a typo”) but it would be interesting to learn if it appeared as a result of an association by AI and that it appeared twice (headline and in the body of the text) might hint at an element of automation.

An informal video clip posted to Instagram at the time of Syrn’s debut.

Ms Sweeney seems to have been unfazed by the attempt to create a moral outrage about her modelling for a company selling jeans and shortly after Cosmopolitan’s “Love Issue” appeared on the newsstands (they really still exist), she released her underwear line (Syrn, pronounced sye-rin), the publicity for which featuring many images of her showing the scanty garments at their best.  She wore them well.

Microaggression

Microaggression (pronounced mahy-kroh-uh-gresh-uhn)

(1) A casual comment or action directed at a marginalized, minority or other non-dominant group that (often) unintentionally but unconsciously reinforces a stereotype and can be construed as offensive.

(2) The act of discriminating against a non-dominant group by means of such comments or actions.

1970: The construct was micro- + aggression.  The word was coined by African-American Chester Middlebrook Pierce (1927-2016), a former Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.  Micro (small, microscopic; magnifying; one millionth) was a word-forming element from the New Latin micro- (small), from the Ancient Greek μικρός (mikrós) (small).  The origin is disputed between etymologists, the traditional view being it was from the primitive Indo-European (s)meyg- & (s)mēyg- (small, thin, delicate) and was cognate with the Old English smicor (beauteous, beautiful, elegant, fair, fine, tasteful), source also of the Modern English smicker and related to the German mickrig.   However, there’s a highly technical discussion within the profession, hinged around the unexplained “k” in the Greek and there’s the suggestion of pre-Greek origin on the basis of variation between initial /m/ and /sm/, as well as the variant forms μικός (mikós) and μικκός (mikkós).  Aggression, dating from 1605–1615, was from the French aggression, from the Latin aggressionem (nominative aggressio (a going to, an attack)), a noun of action from past participle stem of aggredi (to approach; attack) the construct being ad (to) + gradi (past participle gressus (to step)) from gradus (a step).  The Classical Latin aggressiōn (stem of aggressiō), was equivalent to aggress(us) + iōn derived from aggrēdi (to attack).  The psychological sense of "hostile or destructive behavior" had its origin in early psychiatry, first noted in English in 1912 in a translation of work by the Austrian neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud (1856-1939).  While not exactly synonymous, microassault and microinequity are similar concepts, the most closely related verb being microinvalidate (to engage in microinvalidation, to make a relatively small statement or action (microaggression) that negates another person's experience, thoughts or feelings).  Microaggression, microaggressiveness, microaggressor & microaggressee are nouns, microaggress, microaggressed & microaggressing are verbs, microaggressive is an adjective and microaggressively is an adverb; the noun plural is microaggressions. 

Dr Chester Middlebrook Pierce (1927-2016).

Microaggression is an adaptable and possibly infinitely variable concept that probably most belongs in sociology; typically, it's defined as any of the small-scale verbal or physical interactions between those of different races, cultures, beliefs, or genders that are (perhaps sometimes generously) assumed to carry no malicious intent but which can be interpreted as revealing an underlying (and often unconscious) bias.  The criteria can be both objective and subjective and it’s noted compliments or comments intended to be positive can be defined as microaggressions if interpreted as patronizing or perpetuating stereotypes (racial, gender, sexual orientation, class, occupational, geographical etc).  Probably, the only "safe" identity-based categorizations are now those purely statistical: average heights by nationality and such although such is the sensitivity, the recommendation of many is now wholly to avoid anything that possibly could be construed as a microaggression, the only exceptions being those directed at groups defined as "privileged" (white people, Christians, cisgender, heterosexual males etc).  Very much a "spectrum" word, microaggression began life as a defensive shield but has in recent years attracted criticism (from both left and right) because it was able to be weaponized in "cancellation culture".  The standard psychology texts suggest the behavior manifests in three forms:

Microassault: An explicit racial derogation which can be verbal or nonverbal which can include labelling, avoidant behavior and purposeful discriminatory actions.

Microinsult: Communications that convey rudeness or insensitivity and demean a person's racial heritage or identity; subtle snubs which may be unknown to the perpetrator; hidden insulting messages to the recipient of color.

Microinvalidation: Communications that exclude, negate, or nullify the psychological thoughts, feelings, or experiential reality of a person belonging to a particular group.

The concept emerged to address the underlying racism that endured even after overt, deliberate expressions of racism (at least against defined minorities) had become unacceptable in polite society.  It held that microaggressions generally happened below the level of awareness of well-intentioned members of the dominant culture and were different from acts of intentional bigotry (such as the use of racist epithets) because the those committing microaggressions often intend no offense and are unaware they are causing harm.  That wasn't exactly a Golgothaesque "forgive them for they know not what they do" but in the abstract did position the dominant (and not of necessity majority) culture as normal with minorities treated as aberrant or pathological.

Although the word’s origin lay in the politics of race and ethnicity, it proved readily adaptable to other areas such as gender, sexual orientation, mental illness, disability and age.  Within academic sociology, there’s a (typically) highly technical debate about the nature of microaggression and intersectionality at the cross-cutting cleavages of non-dominant groups.  As regards the media, the discipline had a well-refined model to describe how microaggressions were either reinforced or encouraged by a news and entertainment industry that both reflected and was controlled by the hegemony of the dominant culture.  The sudden shock of the emergence of social media has changed things (diversity of source and content) but the main effect has been to balkanize: While there are places where microaggressions will not be tolerated, there are others where such things are routine and some where microaggressions are about the mildest forms of racism and such.  To date, much work in exploring this area has been impressionistic and it’s not clear if the analytical metrics, where they exist, are sufficiently robust for theories to be coherent beyond the sense of constant "mission creep".  In a sense, social media and the development of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) are synergistic with the maintenance and critique of microaggressions one of many elements in the culture wars.

As an indication of the how things have changed, in 1939 the terms “paleface” and “redskin” were in 1939 appropriated for use in literary criticism by Russian-born (in modern-day Ukraine) Jewish-American literary critic and essayist Philip Rahv (1908–1973).  What in retrospect makes that most interesting was Rahv was not a kind of “proto-MAGA” (Make America Great Again) figure from the Republican Party’s far-right (a faction that definitely existed in 1939 although different labels were applied) but was of the “left”, emphasizing the virtues of cosmopolitanism and Marxist analysis, one irony in his casual use of “paleface” and “redskin” being his advocacy of “breaking down” ethnic and racial barriers.  He was in the early 1930s a member of the ACP (American Communist Party) but, trans-nationally, long-suppressed fissiparous forces had been unleashed by comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) and Rahv in 1937 was expelled from the ACP by the dominant Stalinist Popular Front faction, condemned as a “Trotskyite” (a follower the exiled Russian comrade Leon Trotsky (1879-1940; founder in 1938 of the Fourth International).  His political activities in the US for a while continued but by the 1950s he’d become one of “The God that Failed” ex-communists and, after a brief flirtation with the “New Left” (or rather what he thought the New Left should have been), he retreated to literature to wage a low-intensity campaign against structuralism.

One of General LeMay’s “civilizing influences”, the Boeing B-29 Superfortress Enola Gay that delivered the first of the two nuclear weapons (thus far) used in conflicts.  It’s now on display in the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum, Dulles International Airport, Chantilly, Virginia.

The splicing of the planet's “races” into “civilized”, “barbarian” and “savages” was very much a thing of nineteenth century European thought (although the notion existed also in Imperial China, the definitely very civilized mandarins there appalled by “barbarians” such as the British).  While the terms in this context probably originated in casual use, as the “scientific methods” of the Enlightenment became more generally applied, the notion was taken up, systematized and in some cases codified (with anatomical illustrations) by ethnographers, anthropologists, academic physicians, palaeontologists and others, the most notorious application probably the use in the pseudo-science of eugenics, a “discipline” to some so persuasive its echo continues on both sides of the Atlantic to be heard in the twenty-first century.  The concept of civilization (very much equated with “Western”) has long been a great concern of white supremacists and although the composition of “threats to its survival” does shift, it’s perceived always to be under assault.  Some have offered solutions.  US General Curtis LeMay (1906–1990; Chief of Staff of the USAF (US Air Force) 1961-1965) once remarked to a colleague: “Empirical evidence suggests the most successful way to civilize a nation is to A-bomb it…twice.”  It was said in making the observation he seemed “at least half-serious” and it had been Boeing B-29 Superfortresses under his command that in August 1946 had dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima & Nagasaki so the general likely felt entitled to be proud of his contribution to that civilizing influence.  A confessed Freemason, (a cult that can hardly be said much to have improved civilization), General LeMay was vice-presidential running mate on the 1968 ticket of notorious racist and segregationist George Wallace (1919-1998; governor (Democratic Party) of Alabama 1963–1967, 1971–1979 & 1983–1987) and, by historic standards, the duo enjoyed success, the AIP (American Independent Party) ticket gaining 13.5% of the popular vote, carrying five states for 46 votes in the Electoral College.

Allen's "Red Skins" and "Chicos": On supermarket shelves in Australia until 2020.

It is of course now unthinkable a figure of the left (liberals, progressives etc), Trotskyites or otherwise, would be so casually microaggressive as to take terms so vested with racism as “paleface” and “redskin” so they could, with no acknowledgment of the history, be re-purposed as devices in literary criticism.  However, “The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there” and in the US in 1939, to do such a thing was unremarkable, an indication of the cultural currents underpinning society with the use of language both a product and part of the construct.  Paleface (the construct being pale +‎ face) came from US English and appeared in the anthropological record as early as 1797 (the origin uncertain) but seems not to have entered general use until the early 1920s.  The origin is uncertain but it was supposedly a calque from a Native American language; the form presumably coined when those of the first nations encountered Europeans.  The earliest verified use of the word redskin (the construct being red + skin) dates from 1769 although despite documents from the 1580s referring to the skin-tone of indigenous Americans as “red”, that use by European explorers and settlers was not consistent and in some instances may have been a reference to the use of red “paint” used to adorn the face and upper-body.  “Paleface” has been used as an intended slur against white people (with little apparent effect) but “redskin” definitely is an ethnic slur offensive to Native Americans although the record suggest than until around the mid-nineteenth century it was neutral and merely descriptive before ascending the “linguistic treadmill”.  Use puts it now well beyond being a microaggression.

The re-brand, 2020.

Allen's "Red Skins" and "Chicos" were in 2020 re-named "Red Rippers" and "Cheekies" respectively.  In the US, it was in 2020 the NFL (National Football League) team the Washington Redskins retired the name used since 1933, adopting Washington Football Team before in 2022 settling on a re-branding as Commanders.  The team's administration, when announcing the name-change, made no mention of the preceding controversy, nor the pressure from corporations, something most analysts suggested prompted the change more than any of the representations by Native American communities.  According to the Allen's, the recipes for the lollies remained “unchanged” and thus far Streets’ Golden Gaytime (sold in New Zealand as the Cookie Crumble) ice cream snack has survived the linguistic treadmill.

  

Gaytime meme.

The meme features Eric Abetz (b 1958; Liberal Party senator for Tasmania, Australia 1994-2022, Treasurer of Tasmania since 2024).  A student of Leviticus, Mr Abetz does not approve of any form of gaynessness.  First sold in 1970, and in general use clipped usually “Gaytime”, the confectionery is a toffee and vanilla ice cream, dipped in compound chocolate with a heavy sprinkling of large “crumbs” of vanilla biscuit, all on a wooden paddlepop-stick.  Although by 1970 “gay” was in use in the context of “male homosexuals”, it had not in Australian society gained critical mass and there’s nothing to suggest the name was then chosen for reasons other than the historic association of “gay” with “happy” and certainly the connotations later attached to “golden” by the gay community would have been unknown to most.  The company in the 1980s anyway embraced the possibilities with advertising tag lines such as “It's hard to have a Gaytime on your own” and complaints about the name in the new century received scant support from even gay-rights activists.

In 1939, Rahv used “paleface” and “redskin” to distinguish between what he called “two poles”; his sense was of the diametrically opposed “north & south” but his model was stylistic and thematic rather than geographic (and really not quite an antinomy as some have suggested).  The polarization as defined by Rahv had him group writers according to their attitude, style, subject matter and such, Nathaniel Hawthorne (1804–1864), Herman Melville (1819–1891) and Henry James (1843-1916) classified as “palefaces” while Walt Whitman (1819–1892), and Mark Twain (1835-1910) were “redskins”.  In Rahv’s literary world view, palefaces had cultured and patrician attitudes, wrote in a mannered style using symbolism and explored “lofty” themes with great complexity.  The redskins wrote works of the rugged men of frontier life or the working class, criminals and “low lifes” in the unpleasant parts of towns and cities.  He didn’t seem to suggest writing in a colloquial and naturalistic way couldn’t be interpolated into thematically complex literary texts, just that it was inevitable a “down market” cast of characters and places they frequented would shape the work.  So Rahv saw palefaces as “civilized” and redskins as “barbarians”; presumably he’d have thought “savages” to be “non-literary” and thus “beyond the pale” as it were.  Of those Americans who came later, categorization must be speculative but can be fun.

Use of "Eskimo" definitely can be deemed microaggressive. While ice-cream lovers can still buy "Gaytimes", they had to adjust to the "Eskimo Pie" being renamed (variously "Edy's Pie" or "Polar Pie").  It remains to be seen if the use of polar bears in some of the new packaging triggers controversy.  The creatures do appear in aspects of Inuit culture and religion and it's not clear if permission for use has been sought.

William Faulkner (1897–1962) and Kurt Vonnegut (1922–2007) both seem redskins and Norman Mailer (1923–2007) clearly was no paleface though he might have thought being filed with the barbarians an effete slight on his savagery.  Gore Vidal (1925–2012) was a redskin who really wanted to be a paleface (and never stopped trying) while Philip Roth (1933–2018) was such a paleface he never quite mastered the “redskin mode” despite the occasional heroic attempt.  John Updike (1932–2009) was a paleface but the problem inherent in assigning writers with a hefty oeuvre to polarized categories is that at the margins their writing can “straddle” and sometimes those margins are wide.  That’s why plausible cases can be made arguing both Bernard Malamud (1914–1986) and Saul Bellow (1915–2005) at times at least “tended” to either pole.  What Rahv would have made of Faulkner in 1949 and Bellow in 1976 being awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature while Updike and Roth were ignored (despite the latter engaging in self-promotion not far short of Donald Trump’s (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) auto-advocacy to be the Peace Prize laureate) would be interesting to know but safely can it be imagined he’d have thought the entire Nobel Committee redskins after in 2016 they conferred the honor in literature on musician Bob Dylan (b 1941).  Maybe it was women of the Swedish Academy (the body that chooses the Literature laureates) who vetoed Roth; in all he wrote of women (and it was a lot), Roth revealed much about himself but little about them, despite the usually elegant internal logic.  Rahv was anyway appalled literature appeared to exist in such a dichotomy and, being an old Trotskyite who never quite stopped taking seriously Karl Marx’s (1818-1883) politics, longed for a world where folk wrote like Marcel Proust (1871-1922) or Thomas Mann (1875–1955), the latter at least acknowledged in 1929 by the Nobel Committee.

1958 Studebaker Scotsman advertisement.

There was in 1957 nothing unusual or offensive in Studebaker naming a car “Scotsman” and it would have been well-understood as a reference to the car’s low purchase price and (alleged) TCO (total cost of ownership).  Scotsman buyers could even save a little more were they prepared to forgo the extravagance of chrome bumpers and choose the "delete option" of painted units; Mercedes-Benz also once offered that on taxi versions of a number of utilitarian sedans, the most produced the W115s (1968-1976). Other manufacturers used the same concept as Studebaker: Citroën ID vs DS, Cadillac Calais vs de Ville etc, some including fewer features and simpler trim, some also changing the mechanical specification but the principle was always: same size, less stuff, lower price.  The name "Scotsman" was picking up on the reputation of the Scots for frugality and it would have been thought something neutral at worst and more likely positive, thriftiness in the early post-war US still generally thought a virtue despite the best attempts of capitalism to encourage consumer gluttony; as fat overtook the land, things would change.  Technically, such use would now fulfil the criteria of a “microaggression” even if deployed in a way making clear it’s being intended as a compliment.  Scots can of course use the trope of themselves and even if used by others, as race-based microaggressions go, it’s probably at the "lower range" of offensiveness, those applied to “white people”, rarely noticed and certainly not grounds for cancellation.  Still, by the 2020s, it’s highly unlikely a car company would now name a car a “Scotsman” and certainly not if it was a “stripper” (ie a low-cost model with minimal standard equipment).

The “Scotsman’s supercar”: 1968 Plymouth Road Runner, Car Life magazine, May 1968.

Quite when the term "stripper" (in that context) vanished from commercial use can’t be certain but it would have occurred later in the twentieth century and certainly after 1968 when Car Life magazine, reviewing the new Plymouth Road Runner, called the stripped-down, low-priced muscle car: “a sort of Scotsman’s supercar”.  As well as a relic of linguistic use, Car Life’s test was interesting because unlike many of its contemporaries that often conducted tests using vehicles tweaked by manufacturers or dealers for optimal performance, they used the genuine, stock-standard articles, bought from the showroom floor, that being a more realistic path to discovering if thing did "what it said on the tin".  What Car Life revealed was the Road Runner (when equipped with the standard 383 cubic inch (6.3 litre) V8)) was quicker than a typical 383 powered car using the same body (as would be expected given the lower weight and modifications to the 383 used in the model) but was unable to match the sub-15 second ¼-mile (402 metre) runs reported by many.  The basic Road Runner was actually representative of the performance of most of the era’s “muscle car ecosystem” while the storied cars that “out of the box” were able consistently to log ¼-mile ETs (elapsed time) in the 13 or 14 second bracket were relatively rare and a tiny sliver of what came to be classified as "muscle cars", some of which just "looked the part" although that did prove a lucrative market.  Of course, to solve any perception of inadequacy, a buyer could tick the box for the optional 426 (7.0) Street Hemi V8 and while that was expensive, as well a fixing any performance deficit, putting one in a Road Runner was the cheapest path to Hemi ownership, a compelling case at a time when a thousand dollars was a lot of money.

Channeling her inner Scotsperson: Lindsay Lohan in Royal Stewart tartan, Freaky Friday (2003), costume test photo (Walt Disney Pictures).

Despite the perception of many (encouraged bydepictions in popular culture), tartan in the sense of specific color & pattern combinations attached to specific clans is something of recent origin.  Tartan (breacan (pɾʲɛxkən) in Scots Gaelic) is a patterned cloth consisting of criss-crossed, horizontal and vertical bands in multiple colours.  The word plaid is now often used interchangeably with tartan (particularly in North America and when not associated with anything Scottish (especially kilts)), but technically (and always in Scotland), a plaid is a large piece of tartan cloth, worn as a type of kilt or large shawl although it’s used also to describe a blanket.  During the disputes between England and Scotland, the wearing of tartan became a political expression and the Dress Act (1746) was part of the campaign to suppress the warrior clans north of the border; it banned tartan and other aspects of Gaelic culture. The law was repealed in 1782 and tartan was soon adopted as both the symbolic national dress of Scotland and in imagery more generally.

The Royal Stewart was the personal tartan of Elizabeth II (1926-2022; Queen of the UK and other places, 1952-2022) and although historically associated with the royal house of Stewart (or Stuart), it has become one of the most widely used in commercial fashion and in that sense appears in parallel with the clan affiliation.  Commonly worn to formal events such as weddings, ceilidhs (social gatherings, the nature of which casts a wide net) or Burns Night (celebrating the life of Robert "Rabbie" Burns (1759–1796 and still in popular imagination Scotland's "national poet")), the modern trend is to pair a kilt with a Prince Charlie or Argyll jacket, traditionalists adding a Sporran (pouch), Hose (kilt socks) & flashes, Ghillie brogues (traditional shoes) and even a Sgian dubh (a small dagger tucked in the sock) although carrying the last item may be unlawful in some jurisdictions.  Lindsay Lohan in her screen test wore the dress in something of the way in the 1970s it became part of the punk sub-culture but for more conventional types there are also scarves, ties, sashes and such.  Remarkably, in the age of identity politics and sensitivity to cultural appropriation, the etiquette guides note there is no objection to non-Scots folk wearing their tartan of choice except when an event is clan-specific in which case only those in the lineage should don the fabric.  That said, even then, the consequence of a tartan faux pas will likely be less severe than wearing a Rangers shirt in a Glasgow pub filled with Celtic’s hoops.  Still, deployed with sufficient cultural insensitivity, improper use of tartan could be a microaggression.

Microaggression in Progress: A Mean Girls (2004) "mall scene".

Mean Girls was replete with instances of microaggressiveness.  We’re still (mostly) allowed (quietly) to be amused by some of these, but, a quarter-century on, there’s now a more hostile critique of subtle verbal or behavioural slights that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to marginalized groups, even if genuinely often unintentional; what seems subtle to some may to others be blatant insensitivity.  In satire, there's still some tolerance for such depictions although audiences are now expected to be as appalled as they are amused and, of course, as a satire of the gut-wrenching ecosystem that is high school social dynamics, subtle forms of relational aggression and passive-aggressive exclusion were not hard to find and can be categorized:

(1) Racial and Geographic Microaggressions: The line: “If you're from Africa, why are you white?” was an invalidation of an individual’s cultural identity on the basis of not according with another’s geographic & racial assumptions & expectations.  The school map of “the cafeteria cliques” includes “Cool Asians”, the labelling reducing individuals to their ethnicity and when paired with what is nominally a most positive teen modifier (cool), that operates as a racial micro-insult implying (1) most individuals of that ethnicity are “not cool” and (2) non-white students are in a sense monolithic and acknowledged as “acceptable sub-groups” only if they in some way adhere to “white people constructs” of “white normative standards”.  “Black hotties” operates at the same level, although “hot” (a type of “coolness”!) usually is positive, the implication here is that “hotness” inherently is a quality of certain white girls and a black girl can be deemed “hot” only compared to other black girls; she cannot, in the absolute sense, merely be a “hottie”, that descriptor operating only on white girls.  The surprised response “Oh you speak English?” when someone is introduced to a black student thought to be from Africa reveals the cultural assumption such an individual would likely lack proficiency in the language; it’s a classic micro-invalidation.

Microaggression weaponized ironically.

(2) Gender and Academic Microaggressions: When Cady expresses interest in joining the school math team, she’s told it’s “social suicide”, a pushback reinforcing gendered and social stereotypes that young women cannot be simultaneously be popular, attractive and intellectually gifted, thus the trope of intentionally failing math to gain a boy's attention.  The “I’m too pretty to do math” T-shirt plays with this and works well if worn by a pretty math nerd although, it'd be really subversive on a "not-pretty" girl.

(3) Backhanded compliments disguised as “niceness”: Such things can be the least objectionable of all microaggressions especially if there’s some equivalency in the power-relationship and the quip is witty, subtle and (ideally retrospectively) understood.  It can also be done “by proxy” such as when saying to one student “I love your skirt, where did you get it?”, only to wait until she’s out of earshot before turning to another and saying “That is the ugliest effing skirt I've ever seen.”  What this does is make an individual realize they may not be able to find sincere or truthful anything they’re told.

Aggression rather then microaggression: “Fetch” anyway likely never would have “happened”.  Although a convenient clipping of “fetching” (often in the form “quite fetching” or “most fetching” and meaning “charming; captivating; compelling” etc), by the early twenty-first century “fetching” in those senses had long since descended into the category of “dated”; it was an “old people” word, use thus “social suicide”.

(4) Image and fat-shaming: Because the social identity of the “Plastics” was so tied to rigid “beauty standards” (some group-imposed, some the prevailing norms), by use of the “Kalteen Bars manipulation” it was possible to induce weight-gain in Regina, an act of sabotage opening the possibility of subjecting her to micro-insults and non-verbal cues (staring at her body or pointing out strict dress-code rules that really can’t be adhered to by someone gaining weight) to signal there’s been a violation of group standards, requiring exclusion.  In that, the techniques are different from something like: “Gretchen, stop trying to make 'fetch' happen.”; that is pure aggression: A group’s hegemon maintaining control by suppressing another member’s attempt to assert their personal identity through something as seemingly innocuous as the introduction of a new slang term.  It was a type of linguistic imperialism, similar to the attitude of Spanish nationalist troops who occupied Catalonia and the Basque country after their victory in the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939).  Harshly they would tell those they heard talking in regional dialects: “Speak the language of the Empire, don’t bark like dogs!”