Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Weaponizing politeness

Being asked to moderate your tone is called "tone-policing" by social justice warriors. If I was prepared to enter a Wikipedia edit war, I would correct their entry on tone-policing, which currently says tone-policing is
an ad hominem and antidebate appeal based on genetic fallacy. It attempts to detract from the validity of a statement by attacking the tone in which it was presented rather than the message itself.
If that was correct, then any attempt to establish terms for debate is a logical fallacy. But the truth is tone-policing is only a request for common courtesy.

When SJWs say they reject tone-policing, they are engaging in their own form of tone-policing: they're saying they may speak rudely because they are oppressed, but others may not speak rudely to them. The tactic is often effective with polite people, who shut up and wonder if they were being rude by being polite. They end up like a computer in a 1960s sci-fi show: This does not compute! This does not compute!

Social justice warriors reject politeness because they fear what politeness is meant to create, a level playing field where everyone may speak. Suspecting they cannot compete as equals, they demand a quiet audience for their views. Their goal is to turn a debate into a lecture and their opponents into students. They cannot imagine a world where people treat each other as equals.

Related: The Terrible Sea Lion: Persistent Politeness is Loved by Friends and Feared by Foes