So are we now seriously entertaining the idea that people are being *provoked *into acting like racist assclowns?
Since it was brought up earlier, let’s talk about the guy who yelled “FHITP” and ended up fired from his job. If were the mother of an impulsive teenaged son with an embarrassing mouth problem, I would definitely be using what happened to that guy as a handy teaching moment. Just like I would if we were talking about a neighbor who was arrested for shop lifting, or the friend of a friend who got expelled from school for vandalism. “You don’t wanna end up like them, do ya?! Okay, so get your head on straight and act like you’ve got some home training then.”
Believe it or not, people do learn from seeing what consequences come to those who deviate from socially acceptable behavior. It’s why most people don’t audibly fart and pick their nose in public, but often do so at home.
Scenarios I would welcome full court press internet shaming. In each case, the video recording is so crystal clear, so there is no denying that what we see is what’s actually what transpired:
A person camping out in front of their neighbor’s home every morning so that they call the kids “little abortions” when they leave to go to school. They do this every day, rain or shine, and the police can’t do anything because the guy isn’t breaking any laws.
A person who shows up to the same place of business every day just to scream racial epithets at the customers that enter the building. The person stands on the sidewalk, so they can’t be accused of trespassing. The business owner knows the person is a relative of a competitor.
A person who follows a black customer in an upscale department store, demanding to know what a “nigger” could possibly be doing in such a place. The target is visibly scared and upset, but the person keeps pestering, as if trying to provoke a violent response.
In all these scenarios, only a fool would deny that there isn’t harrassment occurring. It is all perfectly legal, too, but it nonetheless induces harm.
Explain to me again why these people shouldn’t have their faces broadcast out in public, so that others may be informed about the creeps in their midst? Sorry, but “their feelings will be hurt!” isn’t a very compelling argument since they are hurting other people’s feelings. “It’s not going to make anything better!” isn’t a convincing argument either, especially since simply having others pay attention to a problem and express sympathy and outrage can be therapeutic. And I’m seriously doubting that if a community was alerted to the likes of Number One, no one would rush to the victims’ side and provide moral support (like escorting the kids to school). “No one should lose their job over their free speech!” is just a ludicrous argument. If you wouldn’t hire Number Two if you knew that’s how he spent his free time, why woud it be so wrong for you to fire him? “Shaming can get out of hand!” ignores the fact that so can harrassment. If Number Three isn’t afraid that his target won’t hit him upside the head with her purse, then why should the public be afraid that someone else will hit him upside the head?
As far as the lady in the OP goes, her name is still unknown AFAIK. I’m guessing she still has her job (iif she has one), and no one but perhaps her closest neighbors and associates are pointing and laughing at her. Big whoop. That sounds like a pretty small price to pay for mouthing off to a complete stranger for no reason.
I don’t think us pro-criticism folks care about thoughts – we care about actions. If someone acts like a racist in their basement, without anyone else being affected, we don’t care. We’re not going to search out those folks.
But if someone says something racist to a customer at their workplace? Or a co-worker? Or on public transit? Or yells something as they drive by on a public street? Then we think it’s reasonable to record it and criticize and call them out. They have the freedom to do it, and bystanders have the freedom to record it and to tell others about it.
I don’t know what “we” are doing. I was responding to a specific assertion that if there is any way that you will do or say a racist thing, then you are therefore racist, and therefore losing your job and friends is somehow something you deserve.
“Is any behavior” is a moving of the goal posts. Some behavior sure. Some random rant? No.
And you are conveniently forgetting or are just ignorant of what public shaming gone viral can do.
Mugshots for criminals and a workplace bully are different. What you and others don’t realize is that the internet has magnified the outrage and in many cases in an arbitrary fashion.
You said lose her job for a few years. That’s messed up.
Do you dispute the idea that throwing racist tirades is an indicator someone is racist? Because I believe that was what type of speech being referred to.
Regardless of your answer to the question above, do you have a philosophical problem with employers choosing not to employ people who throw racist tirades?
So then we quibble about what qualifies as bad enough behavior to warrant calling out publicly. We might disagree on some specific instances, but then it’s probably not a particularly wide difference in philosophy – just in the particulars.
Calling out publicly (which sometimes leads to public shaming) is a tool, and like any tool it can be used well and used poorly. But if someone’s behavior is bad enough that their employer no longer wants to employ them (whether for moral reasons or because they feel their presence now harms the business), that’s the fault of the bad actor, not someone who publicly called out the bad behavior.
So play it out then. Do you think they ought to lose their jobs? Their friends? That encouraging those outcomes is a net positive? Then I want to know what you imagine happens next.
To be clear, I think someone yelling something racist to a customer, etc etc, is a bad thing, and that there should be socially-imposed consequences. I just don’t think that nationally and permanently assigning notoriety to and hobbling all future successes of the offenders in perpetuity is a good way to get things done. It feels a lot like death penalty advocacy to me: any small degree of social good that might exist in a well-run state execution program is impossible to ferret out as those benefits are always extolled by those who clearly have an emotional/ethical investment in hurting evil people that trumps any true evaluation of the situation.
Nope. But let me repeat myself, bolding the part that is actually relevant:
was responding to a specific assertion that if there is any way that you will do or say a racist thing, then you are therefore racist, and therefore losing your job and friends is somehow something you deserve.
Nope. I think it’s great. But I also think that advocating for turning assholes or racists into unemployable pariahs is not a reasonable solution to the problem of assholes or racists in society.
I don’t know, and I don’t particularly care – I know that I wouldn’t want to be friends with such a person, and if I ran a business, I would fire such a person. Barring a sincere apology and desire to change, at least (see below). Others may feel differently.
One thing that’s missing from this discussion is the response from the target of the criticism. An oft-cited example (for sexism, not racism) is the European space scientist who wore a shirt with imagery many found objectifying of women in a press conference about a robotic space agency mission. He received a lot of harsh criticism about his choice of shirt.
But what happened next? He gave a very sincere apology. And the critics almost uniformly accepted his apology and praised him personally, noting that mistakes are possible and should be criticized, but individuals can and should learn from these mistakes, and when they do, they should be praised for it.
That was a very good outcome from public criticism. Feelings were made public, the target responded sincerely and expressed contrition, and lots of opportunities for learning were made. No one was fired. If someone goes on a racist rant in public and then gives a very sincere apology, acknowledging the harm and the wrongness of their statements (and a desire to change), I think they’ll get a positive and welcoming response. Lots of people with racist beliefs (most of them, probably) don’t realize that their beliefs are racist. Racists can reform, and many do. Public criticism could be the spark for some of them to re-examine their beliefs, as it was for that European space scientist. And with a decent response, the harm they’ll experience professionally won’t be as long-lasting.
“National and permanent notoriety”. I’m scratching my head, trying to think of examples of a private citizen who has been shamed to this level.
And the only one I can think of is Rachel Dolezal. But that’s because the woman doubled-down after she was exposed. If she had confessed to her lies and distortions immediately, no one would know her name.
I’m wondering why no one has weighed in on my hypotheticals. I can kinda-sorta get why the lady in the OP’s level of offensiveness may not trigger the “outrage” meter for your typical Doper, given the typical Doper’s sensitivities (or lack thereof). But surely we can all imagine a scenario that would be triggering. Is it really the consensus that no matter what the situation, if someone is harrassing you, you should keep the situation private, because talking about it might bring shame on that person and get them in trouble? Because that’s insane to me. I can’t believe that’s really what Dopers sincerely believe.
That’s not what’s being said, you say? To my ear, yes it is. Because even if a story doesn’t circulate online, it can still find its way to a person’s employer if the right people hear about it. And a lot of you seem to think having an employer know what’s going on is the worst crime in the universe. A person can harrass you and your family and your friends cuz it’s his God-given right to harrass whomever he wants. But laws no, don’t fire him! He’s apparently also entitled to a job! And laws no, don’t pass around his image. Because someone may point and laugh at him and hurt his feelings. And laws no, don’t you say dare say a bad word about him! Because he might overhear you, which will just make him hate even more. If you do any of these things, you’re just as bad as the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
Let’s put it this way iiandyiiii, would you hire a rapist or a murderer or a thief who has been released from prison? If you wouldn’t personally should anyone hire them? How about someone convicted for arson, assault, or something else? Should those people be wards of the state for the rest of their lives? Should they be dependent on private charity?
Ok. If we can accept that criminals ought to be able to earn a living and maybe even have a friend why can’t we accept that some random person ranting and raving on the street doesn’t deserve to lose her job, all of her friends, and all that she owns because someone’s outrage-o-meter went off?
Secondly, we have the issue that people are damn right nutty, no offense to nuts, with their partisanship nowadays. Trump supporter? You must be a closet racist, misogynist, bigot, etc-o-phobe. That deplorable should be fired or ostracized.
What if you are a member of a religion that has a holy text that says certain sexual practices are abhorrent? If you believe that or support that why should you have a job?
What if you don’t support a position strongly enough? That lack of support and money should be shamed! At some point we have a mob based totalitarian society. People getting their heads cracked with bicycle locks due to political differences is where this inability to act as an adult leads.
One problem with internet shaming is there’s no way to control the dosage or the purpose of the remedy. It may simply be a slow week for a lot of people. The victim may seem particularly sympathetic. The “bigot” may trigger bigotries of our own by being old or unkempt or fat or saddled with a certain accent or vernacular. They may even be or seem to be a member of a recognizable minority themselves. And what kind of crowd do you think will be jumping on that bandwagon? Shaming just seems less just and effective when the shamers are into it for reasons that reflect their own pathologies more than a preference for a better world.
Well, that’s not what your OP was. Your OP was wishing the consequences included losing her job for a few years and losing all her friends. That’s completely different than hurt feelings.
Perhaps my upbringing has influenced my desire for things to be let go and the past to be the past. I grew up in a diverse neighborhood. Some ethnic tension. I had friends of all sorts of ethnic or racial or whatever you want to call it background and sometimes words, even racially charged words would be exchanged, fists might fly for a few minutes. Then it was back to being friends and getting on with the day. Honestly, this quest for Cosmic Justice!!! is tiresome.
I think there are two more positions:
4) Someone can be wrongfully accused. Things can be shown out of context, quoted out of context, or the wrong person videotaped, and cause an innocent person to get their life ruined.
There are two sides to the sword. Internet vigilantism may feel good when it’s against a racist or sexist, but it’s not so good when it comes in the form of doxxing or 4chan-like harassment like in Gamergate, etc. The same Internet vigilantism that is used to shame a Klansman, can be used to harass a feminist or Muslim or lesbian.