So I have been struggling with myself lately. I dislike hypocrisy, most especially when I sense it in myself. I love Evelyn Beatrice Hall's quote, "I may disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Yet there are words, phrases and idioms that when I hear them in public send me into a frothing rage. Most especially these words center around mental health. The one most on my radar, sadly the one I hear most often, is "retarded". I have verbally berated multiple co workers about using this word in my presence or at all. I have tried to explain to them the meaning of the word and how their improper use of it creates a hateful environment.
It fails, they still say it. Sometimes they catch themselves and apologize and I am left wondering if I am even right in the first place for bringing it up. Is it my place to say something? Should I just go to a superior and tell them? Problem is, I have heard managers use the same language and laugh it off when I call them on it. I am certain this will be a problem I will fight all my life, mostly because I have a big mouth.
But now we come to the meat of my thesis. Am I a big fat hypocrite for stomping on these peoples right to say what they want? Is there a line to draw? Luckily I am not the only one facing this struggle. France over the last months has revisited a decades old discussion after the "Charlie Hebdo" attacks and subsequent arrests for "Hate Speech". If you aren't up on things, check out this concise report http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2015/02/10/384959376/the-french-debate-free-speech-versus-hate-speech Here in Canada our Free speech is covered first and foremost in the Charter of rights and freedoms in Section 2 which grants every Canadian: a)Freedom of conscience and religion, b)freedom of thought, belief, expression and opinion(including free press), c)freedom of peaceful assembly and d)freedom of association. In New Brunswick this is bolstered by Human rights act.(linked here) http://www.gnb.ca/hrc-cdp/08-e.asp
Of course, our laws are imperfect. The language of them leaves much of the definition to the reader and the courts have gone both ways on questions about Free speech vs. Hate speech depending on the skills of the lawyers or the distastefulness of the content. I mean, it is easy to say that someone denying the Holocaust is full of hate but what about someone who is questioning the duality in buses in poor old New Brunswick. Does the tone of the speech mean anything in this debate? If someone eloquently speaks about something hateful does it make it less hateful.
I feel therefore I speak up I guess. "Free speech ends when it impedes others from having a peaceful and harmonious life" is the best definition I have found to encapsulate my thoughts on the subject. I have become more passionate about the difference between hate and free speech in the last few years. My daughters disability has heightened my tension when it comes to Ableism. My hotheadedness when it comes to the issue scares me from time to time. I fear for the person who first uses the word in the presence of me and my daughter. My hope is that talking it out here in this forum will help me to better understand my own foibles and fallibility.
I am blessed to live in a country that has these rights. I am lucky to have lived on the fringes of this until lately. It is much easier to look at a thing objectively when it doesn't directly affect you. I am also lucky enough to have the ability to come home and forget the ignorance that can surround and abuse my senses from time to time. I can just tune it all out and put on JJ and let all my cares slip away for a while. Until someone poops or is hungry...
No comments:
Post a Comment