Читать книгу Uncomfortable Ideas - Bo Bennett PhD - Страница 12

When we get caught up in ideology and political correctness, we overlook the downside of our actions. Yes, there are downsides to just about every action even if one pretends there are not. I spoke at a conference for skeptics recently that adopted a “color communication badge” policy originally created for those on the autism spectrum. In short, conference attendees had the option of placing a sticker on their badge that indicated the level of social interaction they wanted. For example, according to the posted policy:

Showing a red square sticker means that the person probably does not want to talk to anyone, or only wants to talk to a few people. The person might approach others to talk, and that is okay; the approached people are welcome to talk back to them in that case. But unless you have been told already by the badge-wearer that you are on their “blue list,” you should not approach them to talk.

The reason for implementing this kind of policy at a convention where the percentage of those on the autism spectrum is unlikely to be much different from the general population, is stated in the same policy:

Color communication badges also help all people, abled or disabled, to more easily and effectively let people know whether they want to be approached for conversations or not. This can create a positive impact on the social atmosphere where communication badges are being used.

While this policy sounds great for those on the autism spectrum, there is a significant downside for those not on the spectrum that, from a social psychological perspective, I would argue is more damaging than helpful. Social interaction is not easy for everyone, but “difficult” has never been a good reason not to do something or persist at improving. Communication is like a muscle; if we don’t use it, we lose it. We might try to read people and get it completely wrong, but this is how we learn. We might have a difficult time communicating to others in a non-awkward way that we don’t want to be talking to them, but with each interaction, we get better at it—unless we avoid all potentially uncomfortable interactions through “communication badges.”

Electric mobility scooters make it easier and more effective for able-bodied people to shop in the mall, but most of us can agree this is not a good idea if we care about maintaining our ability to get around unassisted (think of the Disney movie Wall-E). Likewise, unless the entire world agrees to implement communication badges, we will lose our ability to easily and effectively interact with others who don’t use this badge system. Refusing to implement an “accessibility” policy for any reason is generally not an idea that’s very popular. Defenders of such policies think they have the moral high ground by protecting the disabled, but don’t realize that they are also creating the disabled.

Uncomfortable Idea: In our efforts to be accommodating we can do more harm than good to those we are trying to help. There is a fine line between accommodation and coddling that we often cross when attempting to be politically correct.

Another example of the unintended consequences of avoiding uncomfortable ideas has to do with identity politics, or a political style that focuses on the issues relevant to various groups defined by a wide variety of shared personal characteristics. Some of the more common characteristics include race, religion, sex, gender, ethnicity, ideology, nationality, sexual orientation, gender expression, culture, shared history, and medical conditions. We celebrate marginalized groups that focus on promoting equality for their group, but we don’t like the idea that this kind of deliberate self-classification based on superficial traits could have some significant unintended consequences.

•Focusing on the needs of a single group, requires that less attention be given to all the other groups. This leads to the other groups feeling even more marginalized, ignored, and even threatened, which can result in a backfire effect leading to animosity toward the group demanding the attention.

•While it may feel cathartic to commiserate with a group of people just like you while demonizing those who are not like you, focusing on our whiteness, blackness, maleness, femaleness, gayness, straightness, or any other “ness” robs people of their individualism and is the polar opposite of the proven strategies that have been used to reduce prejudice and bring groups together. These proven strategies include focusing on similarities and common objectives.

•There are literally thousands of marginalized groups, most of which lack the numbers, finances, social support, and organization to get the attention of the masses. By focusing on basic human rights, equality, dignity, and fair treatment, we can address the needs of virtually all the marginalized groups, not just the loudest or the most disruptive.

Identity politics may help specific groups accomplish certain goals, but not without costs.

Uncomfortable Idea: Identity politics is a dangerous game where the unintended consequences could be even greater prejudice against the group.