Thought Provoking article! Thanks for sharing Bear!
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Bear Guy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The Real Reason We Need to Stop Trying to Protect Everyone’s Feelings > By Ryan Holiday <http://observer.com/author/ryan-holiday/> • 09/10/15 > 10:30am > [image: (Photo: LearningLark/Flickr)] > <https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/4141067126_02b1877c15_b.jpg?quality=80> > > (Photo: LearningLark/Flickr) > > Like every kid, I was forced to read *Fahrenheit 451* > <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1451673310/?tag=ryanholnet-20> in high school. > > If you’d asked me what it was about before last week, I would have told > you: “Firemen who burn books.” > > And if you’d asked me why on earth they did that, I would have answered > just as confidently: “Because a tyrannical government wanted them to.” > > There is a trend afoot to conveniently remember the works of authors like > Ray Bradbury and Aldous Huxley as warnings against distant totalitarianism > and control. But this only scratches the surface of what these books are > about. > > Earlier this year a community college student in San Bernardino protested > being required to read a Neil Gaiman graphic novel in one of her classes. > It was too graphic, apparently. Her father—who does not seem to understand > that his daughter is a separate human being (an adult one no less)—told *The > Los Angeles Times* > <http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-student-protest-graphic-novels-20150615-story.html> > , “If they [had] put a disclaimer on this, we wouldn’t have taken the > course.” A mom in Tennessee has complained that the gynecological > information in the book in the bestselling nonfiction science book, *The > Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,* is too pornographic > <http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-is-henrietta-lacks-book-pornographic-20150908-story.html> > for > her 10th grade son. > > While these conservative complaints about the content of books is > unfortunately as old as time. We’re also seeing surge in a different type. > > A Rutgers student has proposed putting trigger warnings > <http://www.dailytargum.com/article/2014/02/trigger-warnings-needed-in-classroom> > on *The Great Gatsby*. Robin Thicke’s song “Blurred Lines” was banned on > many college campuses > <http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/nov/13/blurred-lines-most-controversial-song-decade>for > promoting rape. Last year, Wellesley students created a petition to > remove an art project > <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116493/tony-matellis-naked-man-statue-shouldnt-shock-wellesley-students> > featuring > a lifelike statue of a sleepwalking man in his underwear in the snow > because it caused “undue stress.” Controversial speakers (many > conservative) have been blocked from speaking at college commencements. > Pick up artists—never convicted of any crime—have had their visas revoked > due to trending Twitter hashtags > <http://observer.com/2015/08/julien-blanc-most-hated-man-in-the-world-shares-his-surprising-side-of-the-story/> > . > > In August, Jezebel ran the headline > <http://jezebel.com/holy-shit-who-thought-this-nazi-romance-novel-was-a-go-1722465991> > “Holy > Shit, Who Thought This Nazi Romance Novel Was a Good Idea?” I remember > thinking, “Um, probably the fucking writer who spent a lot of time writing > it.” Whether they succeeded at making anything good, I cannot say, but > should they be shamed for trying? It’s not as if there aren’t good books of > Nazi love stories. In fact, there is one called*The Reader!* > > The people in these examples are certainly a bit ridiculous—but by no > means bad. None of them see themselves as censors, naturally. They were > beingsensitive > <http://observer.com/2014/10/rage-profiteers-how-blogs-harness-our-anger-for-their-own-gain/> > , outraged > <http://observer.com/2014/02/outrage-porn-how-the-need-for-perpetual-indignation-manufactures-phony-offense/>, > protective or triggered. And to be fair, most of their complaints and > protests stop short of actually saying “This should not be allowed > anywhere.” > > But that distinction matters less than they think. > > Let’s go back to *451,* which I found myself re-reading recently. It > begins with Guy Montag burning a house that contained books. Why? How did > it come to be that firemen *burned *books instead of putting out fires as > they always had? > > The firemen have been doing it for so long they have no idea. Most of them > have never even read a book. Except one fireman—Captain Beatty—who has been > around long enough to remember what life was like before. As Montag begins > to doubt his profession—going as far as to hide a book in his house—he is > subjected to a speech from Beatty. In it Beatty explains that it wasn’t the > government that decided that books were a threat. It was his fellow > citizens. > > “It didn’t come from the government down,” he tells him. “There was no > dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no!” > > In fact, it was something rather simple—something that should sound very > familiar. It was a desire not to offend—of an earnest notion to literally > have “everyone made equal.” And it’s at the end of this speech that we get > the killer passage: > > “You must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can’t have > our minorities upset and stirred. Ask yourself, What do we want in this > country above all? People want to be happy, isn’t that right?…Colored > people don’t like *Little Black Sambo*. Burn it. White people don’t feel > good about*Uncle Tom’s Cabin*. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on > tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the > book. Serenity, Montag. Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, > to the incinerator.” > > And before *you* get offended, let’s clarify what Bradbury means by > minorities. He’s not talking about race. He’s talking about it in the same > way that Madison and Hamilton did in the Federalist Papers. He’s speaking > about small, interested groups who try to force the rest of the majority to > adhere to the minority’s set of beliefs. > > I don’t mean to cherry pick. I see no need to pile on to college students > as being particularly responsible for the “coddling of the American mind > <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/>.” > (Great piece, read it.) Though I do find it ironic that we require kids to > read this book in high school and just a few years (or months) later, > they’re leading the charge on exactly the kind of well-intentioned > censorship Bradbury was talking about. I don’t mean to say that these > examples come close to the kind of overt censorship that every reasonable > person dreads. But I do mean to say that they come from the same place—and > very alarmingly—ultimately end together in a much worse place. > > In the 50th anniversary edition, Bradbury includes a short afterword where > he gives his thoughts on current culture. Almost as if he is speaking > directly about the events above, he wrote: *“*There is more than one way > to burn a book. And the world is full of people running around with lit > matches.” > > There’s that saying: The road to hell is paved with good intentions. When > it comes to censorship, one might say that the road to thought and speech > control is paved by people trying to protect other people’s feelings. > > It’s important to realize that today, we have a media system paid by the > pageview and thus motivated with very real financial incentives to find > things to be offended about—because offense and outrage are high-valence > traffic triggers. We have another industry of people—some call them > Social Justice Warriors > <http://observer.com/2015/08/meet-the-woman-behind-the-most-hated-man-in-the-world/http://observer.com/2015/08/meet-the-woman-behind-the-most-hated-man-in-the-world/> > —who, despite their sincerity of belief, have also managed to build huge > platforms by inventing issues and conflicts which they then ride to > prominence and influence. One might call both of these types Rage > Profiteers > <http://observer.com/2014/10/rage-profiteers-how-blogs-harness-our-anger-for-their-own-gain/> > . They get us riled up, they appeal to our notions of fairness and > empathy—who likes to see someone else’s feelings hurt?—without any regard > for what the consequences are. > > Of course, the real and fair solution is much less politically correct but > effective. It’s to stop trying to protect people’s feelings. Your > feelings are your problem, not mine—and vice versa. > > Real empowerment and respect is to see our fellow citizens—victims and > privileged, religious and agnostic, conservative and liberal—as adults. > Human beings are not automatons—ruled by drives and triggers they cannot > control. On the contrary, we have the ability to decide not to be offended. > We have the ability to discern intent. We have the ability to separate > someone else’s actions or provocation or ignorance from our own. This is > the great evolution of consciousness—it’s what separates us from the > animals. > > What also separates us is our capacity for empathy > <http://ryanholiday.net/a-different-take-on-empathy/>. But how empathetic > the speech we decide to use is choice for each one of us to make. Some of > us are crass, some of us are considerate. Some of us find humor in > everything, some of us do not. It’s important too—but those of us that > believe it and live our lives by a certain sensitivity cannot bully other > people into doing so too. That sort of defeats the purpose. > > There is a wonderful quote from Epictetus that I think of every time I see > someone get terribly upset about one of these things (I try to think about > it when *I* get upset about anything): “If someone succeeds in provoking > you, realize that your mind is complicit in the provocation.” > > He said that some 1,900 years ago. Even then we felt that it was easier to > police the outside than examine our inside. > > Control and discipline of one’s own reactions make for a successful person > and a functioning society. I don’t think you want to live in a world > where that isn’t the expectation of each of us. I don’t think you want to > see the things that will need to happen when the burden of making sure > everyone is happy and not offended is put on the government—or worse, a > corrupt and bitter blogosphere. > > But that seems to be the road we’re going down. Even though we’ve been > warned. > *Ryan Holiday is the bestselling author of *Trust Me, I’m Lying: > Confessions of a Media Manipulator > <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1591846285/?tag=ryanholnet-20> > *and **two other books* <http://www.amazon.com/Ryan-Holiday/e/B007LUHFH8>*. > He is an editor-at-large for the *New York Observer* and **his monthly > reading recommendations are found here* > <http://www.ryanholiday.net/reading-newsletter/>*. He currently lives in > Austin, Texas.* > http://observer.com/2015/09/the-real-reason-we-need-to-stop-trying-to-protect-everyones-feelings/ > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
