(See
post/e-mail above)
(Even I am kind of sick of thinking about this, so I think I will take a break)
In case you don't know anything about this:
for the interview with JF Stephens and Tim Shriver
for the interview with Ann Coulter
Matt and
I have actually not talked about this a lot, mostly because we’ve been really
busy over the past week with work and church and childcare. But we did discuss
it a little yesterday, and raised the following points:
1. I had
really hoped the phrase “politically correct” had died a natural death several
years ago, but it appears to have been resurrected. To me, to gripe about some
new term and label it the politically correct term, is to (1) completely dismiss
the issue, (2) give a reason to never expand your mind or consider that there might
be a way of speaking that is better or preferable to the way we’ve always said
it, and (3) expect carte blanche to say whatever you want, without ever thinking
about it.
2.
Language does evolve, right? Matt said he is a fan of the concept of political
correctness and I suppose I am too – the general idea that words that are
acceptable at one point in time or for one age, may not be appropriate in
another time. … Remember when black people started using the term
“African-American?” Remember how upset people were, how many people thought it
was ridiculous and separatist and whatever other significance people attached
to it? And wow, doesn’t all that upset seem pretty silly now? I bet even Ann
Coulter probably says African-American sometimes, and not grudgingly or under
the gun of the “word police,” but because … it is now a commonly accepted term.
Some people prefer African-American, some prefer black, and the sun continues
to come up each morning and we all try to get along with each other.
3. On
that note – No, there is likely no direct long-term detriment to my son David
because Ann Coulter called Barack Obama a “retard.” As Matt says, the issue has
now been raised, and perhaps people who did use the r-word thoughtlessly now
realize that it is still hurtful; further, that Ms. Coulter’s reaction and
refusal to even consider the issue have shown everyone (again, I guess) what an
unreasonable person she is. And who will defend her? Who is going to say, "Yes it’s
okay to call the President stupid by comparing him to a mentally retarded
person, Ann Coulter should absolutely do that because it’s the right thing to
do and if someone feels hurt then too bad for them?" … Folks may raise this as a
freedom of speech issue, and I suppose they can, but who on Earth is going to
defend what she actually said? As I said in my e-mail to Piers Morgan, just
because you have the legal right to say something, that doesn’t mean you
should. Just because the government shouldn’t censor you doesn’t mean you
shouldn’t occasionally censor yourself.
For
example: It might be easy for me to sit here in the mountains in North Carolina
and say, boy that Ann Coulter is really pretty bitchy. I could post on facebook
or tweet (once I have a twitter thingie), “That Ann Coulter sure is a bitch.”
But that doesn’t really say what I’m actually thinking, right? Writing all this
has taken considerable time and thought, but it is more accurate and
deliberate, and I think/hope it could result in thoughtful discussion and even
change, than if I simply/only called her a name.
4. Matt
said he thinks we can rely on time to sort out the winners and losers in the
political correctness game. African-American has stood the test of time, less
so “Afro-American.” A friend recently posted on facebook about discovering that
in her nephew’s class they say they sit “criss-cross applesauce” instead of
Indian-style and that instead of Easter Eggs they will celebrate with Spring
Spheres. One of her friends responded that he hoped my friend understands this
is the ultimate result of the liberal agenda to not offend anyone, etc. Again,
labeling the issue and dismissing it, such that there’s no opportunity for
thoughtful discussion and problem-solving. Criss-cross applesauce has actually
been around for a while, and I will stand on the steps of the United States
Capitol and proclaim that I think it is better then “Indian-style.” On the
other hand, I’m betting Spring Spheres will not survive, because over time
there will be some sort of general consensus, within our social contract with
one another, that there’s some other term that’s better, perhaps even Easter
Egg.
5. I’m
trying to follow Ms. Coulter’s opinion to a logical conclusion: Okay, if
there’s nothing wrong with the word retard, and you would never use it toward
my son who has Down syndrome, does that mean you might call my other (typically
developing) son a retard if he does something you don’t like? I mean, he’s in
kindergarten and his handwriting sucks; should I call him a retard or say his
handwriting is retarded, and will that make his writing better? Of course not,
right? Because although I may technically have the legal right to do so, it’s
just not a good idea. In a particular situation, I might choose to say more
specifically what I mean (“Hey, kiddo, let’s practice making that ‘S’ a little
straighter”) even though retarded is shorter and easier and I don’t have to
actually think about it. Why bother thinking about it, really? Why worry about
the long-term consequences of calling somebody a name, when I can just do it
and get it over with? Why … you know, parent or think or take responsibility
for what I think and say?
6. Don’t
call anyone a retard, okay? Don’t use a term that’s hurtful, and for Pete’s
sake say what you mean. Do you mean you don’t agree with the President’s
policies? Well, say that instead. Do you mean that you think a rule or law or
IRS requirement or whatever is unfair or unjust? Then say that instead, instead
of calling it “retarded.” Don’t act like an insolent thoughtless teenager – say
what you mean and try to be nice. Is that really such a crazy idea?
7. On a
related communication note, just … think about what you are getting ready to
say and why you are saying it. That’s not such a bad idea, right? And I’m not
even talking about offending someone or being politically correct. I’m talking
about saying what you mean instead of what’s easiest or (maybe) what you’ve
always said. We are all going to screw it up sometimes – heaven knows I’ve posted
something on facebook and later realized that it could be interpreted much
differently than I intended, particularly that something I thought was funny is
probably just negative, mean, or plain unnecessary. Even this blog, into which
I usually put a fair amount of thought, sometimes doesn’t come out as well as
I’d like. If someone calls you out on something, consider (don’t accept, simply
consider) that there could be even a grain of validity in what they’re saying.
Listen, consider, ask them (in the spirit of personal growth) what might be a
better way of saying it. I’m not saying you have to agree with them, but maybe
just think about it a bit. Don’t dismiss them by saying they’re “just too
sensitive,” and they “shouldn’t be offended.” I promise, as a human being and a
clinical social worker, that telling someone they shouldn’t feel the way they
feel generally does not do a whole lot to change the way they feel over to your
way of thinking.
("consider/don't accept/consider" - credit D.H.)
Here’s
another idea, one I’m still working on myself: if you are not 100% sure of
exactly what you want to say, maybe you should … not say anything. At least for
a minute or so. I imagine most of us are usually not in the situation of a
time-limited TV interview or a Presidential debate – usually we can take a few more
seconds to prepare a fully-formed thought, rather than opening our mouths and
letting words fall out, just to be saying something.
No comments:
Post a Comment