Courtesy and respect should be your first go-to
Typically, when communicating in just about any form or in any arena, courtesy and respect are safe routes to take.
In fact, courtesy and respect should be the first go-to in all of our communications. Whether that be personal, family, work, professional, advertising, and politics. Yes, even in politics.
If that were the case, there would very probably be a lot more “civil” discourse in all aspects of our lives.
That being said, there are times when ignorance and intolerance result in malicious word choices. In some cases those choices are easily identified as discriminatory, racist, and hateful.
And at those times, by all means, take exception. Object, protest, or be outraged by what is clearly intended to be offensive or hateful. AND, speak out against it!
When faced with willful and intentional offense, it is the duty of us all to stand up and say that ‘this is not right’ and that ‘this will not be tolerated’.
But, it’s not a perfect world.
We also need to use common sense and logic in analyzing and interpreting what we see and hear.
People are only human, and humans are not perfect. In fact, in many ways we are quite flawed.
Putting aside the cases where offense is maliciously intended – hate and intolerance based media – maybe we need to be a little more selective in our hair trigger outrage.
And this is where our current society falls far short of the mark.
There is a growing trend to jump to conclusions without logic, facts, or sober thought. More and more this is being seen in all aspects of our day-to-day communications, and is severely exacerbated by, and in, social media.
These “perception-based” reactions are based primarily on personal opinion, political correctness, and hyper-sensitivity.
And so, the question becomes, “…is this the newest, and possibly most lethal, form of censorship”?
Is political correctness and hyper-sensitivity the NEW censorship?
Context is everything!
Let’s look at a few cases where exception was taken with the use, or choice, of a word or words. We will not look at the results of the exceptions, but will offer another perspective.
Dove’s Facebook ad shedding t-shirts to reveal diverse women (2017)
- The Incident:A thirty second clip showed models shedding t-shirts and – presumably morphing – into another woman. The sequence went from a black model in a dark brown t-shirt, to a red-haired model in a white t-shirt, to a presumably Latino model in a brown t-shirt. The product being promoted was a body wash.
- The Reaction:Social media, and then mainstream media, blew up by taking offense to what they perceived to be Dove’s suggestion that a black woman would be more beautiful if she turned white. Dove immediately withdrew the ad and apologized publicly.
- An alternative perspective?It was very interesting that social media reacted to the perceived offense that black women would want to morph into a white woman – a red-haired very pale white women – but took absolutely no offense at morphing the pale-ginger into a more light brown skinned model. Could it be possible that Dove was simply suggesting that Dove Body Wash could make a women’s skin – ALL women’s skin – softer and more beautiful?
Lorne Grabher’s License plate (2017)
- The Incident:Nova Scotia’s Lorne Grabher has owned a personalized license plate displaying his Austrian-German heritage family name for 27 years.
- The Reaction:Grabher’s personalized Nova Scotia license plate – GRABHER – was cancelled by the Nova Scotia Registrar of Motor Vehicles after receiving “a complaint last December over the name and how it could be considered a ‘socially unacceptable slogan.'”
- An alternative perspective?Is it possible that Lorne Grabher is just proud of his family name and wanted to use it to personalize his automobile? But, because concern for the status and treatment of women is a grave concern within our society today, should Lorne Grabher be held responsible for the actions or thoughts of someone with ill intent? And if you answer yes, maybe Lorne Grabher should be forced to change his name? I think not.
Nick Troller’s ASIMIL8 license plate (2017)
- The Incident:Manitoba resident Nick Troller’s Star Trek inspired license plate ASIMIL8, mounted on his car in a license plate holder reading, “We are the Borg. Resistance is futile”. Troller ordered the license plate in 2015.
- The Reaction:After complaints from the Indigenous community that the word was offensive, the Manitoba government rescinded Troller’s license plate in April of 2017 for being offensive to Indigenous people.
- An alternative perspective?While there is little argument that Indigenous peoples might find the word “assimilate” offensive, the question to be asked is do we ban the use – over even appearance – of a word over concern that someone might take offense. Unlike Grabher, who has used his personalized plate for over a generation – Troller requested his plate new only a short time ago. Should the Government of Manitoba ever approved it? I’m not sure. But, should it be rescinded? Again, not sure. However, if we revert to the earlier concept of courtesy and respect, maybe Troller would consider voluntarily withdrawing his license plate?
Note: Nick Troller took the Government of Manitoba to court in an effort to keep his personalized license plate. He was unsuccessful.
Brian Jean’s poor word choice re Quebec government position on Bombardier (2017)
- The Incident:Alberta Conservative Party Leadership candidate, Brian Jean refers to Quebec government’s position on the current Bombardier issues as “…ridiculous and retarded”.
- The Reaction:Reaction was surprisingly mild on this slight; however, the use of the word “retarded” was used by party opponents to gain political leverage and was widely covered by the mainstream media. Jean was roundly condemned for using the word “retarded”.
- An alternative perspective?It is entirely possible – and reasonable to expect – that Jean could have chosen a better word; however, was his use of “retarded” offensive? Politicos thought that it could be spun as offensive and took the opportunity to lambast Jean. Needless to say, social media and mainstream media got on that bandwagon. But, if you search the definition of “retarded”, you will see that one definition of the word is, “…stupid or foolish, very foolish”. Even the contemporary Urban Dictionary defines “retarded” as profoundly stupid. In context, the word was correct. Maybe not the best choice as a descriptive, but correct.
Object, react, and even be outraged – but DO NOT apply blanket censorship!
I will refer the reader back to the beginning of this article and repeat the idea that courtesy and respect “should be the first go-to in all of our communications”.
But when we slip, when we make a mistake, when we err; consider spending a little more time and thought is analyzing the perceived offense and ask yourself whether there was ever any malicious intent?
If you sincerely believe that there was, then be all means be outraged.
But, if there was no malicious intent, consider that indiscriminate censorship might be every bit as offensive as the original perceived slight.
Stephen G. Largy is the President and Senior Consultant at tqSkills
tqSkills Thinkshops™ programs are based on “Encouraging thought…” to change how we live and lead. Positive change will not occur before we learn to change the way we think.
