Sure — it’s a valid point, but here’s the thing. If the unthinking actions of another person can open up a festering psychological wound that causes you distress you have two options.

You can attempt to change the behaviour of everybody else, something which could theoretically be possible given enough time — but in the short term is more likely to generate more micro-aggressions. Or you can recognise the sensitivity you have (which may be there for good and valid reasons) as a maladaptive strategy for your own wellbeing.

It’s not necessarily about being liked — it’s about liking yourself. If you’re operating with a world model which has become emotionally maladaptive (for whatever reason) then the best thing to do is change it. That isn’t easy, but it is necessary. It is far easier to call foul, disengage and lay the blame at the feet of others — your limbic system approves of this action. It’s the path of least resistance.

My issue with the rise of micro-aggressions doesn’t come from a place of privilege and dismissal, it comes from a deep seated worry that we’re setting future generations of young people to fail. Endorsement of this concept and it’s promulgation will lead to skyrocketing anxiety and exacerbate distress rather than remove it. CBT and focusing on yourself as an individual is the way to remove anxiety — group identity politics won’t do it. It’ll play into existing biases and supercharge your unhappiness without your consent.