The high cost of Freedom of Speech
in Civic. Tags: Freedom of Speech.
Let's talk about the cost of Freedom of Speech. There has been all sorts of "news" lately about people applying for jobs or college and having their MySpace of FaceBook profiles perused only to then be turned down. Something about this really bothers me, and I am wondering where we have gone awry that we can so blatantly judge people's professional abilities by their weekend antics. It saddens me, almost sickens me, that any of us can sanctimoniously deem someone unworthy because there is a photo of them at a party being drunk and silly.
Our private lives are our private lives, even when we make them public. But there are a few things that really come leaping to mind when I think about this.
If we can't judge someone for being gay, why can we judge them for seriously cutting loose on weekends. If we can't judge someone for having dark skin, why can we judge them for being scantily clad at a party?
And really, don't we all live in glass houses. I know such pictures exist of me, and many fabulous memories with people i love and trust enough to fully cut-loose when i need to. I'll do my best not to throw stones - or allow others to throw stones - because i love the view from my glass walls. Because of my glass walls, i am able to see the full complexity and power and depth and magic of the human spirit.
There is also, however, the question of "smart," and "stupid." First, we have all behaved in a way that someone on the outside looking in could deem stupid. But, I am lucky enough to be surrounded by REALLY smart people. And i have cut loose with these really smart people. And when they cut loose, it is creative and wild and powerful and wonderful. And when they do stupid things, I know it really just balances things out.
What do you think? Is it our own fault for making our private lives public? Or is that the ultimate act of trust and we're letting each other down? Are we ready, as a society, to admit that we are all complex creatures capable of a wide variety of behavior - and that, even so, we are all pretty much the same?
Here's a picture that our own Matt Freedman took of me in some crazy face paint and a silver jumpsuit for a fashion show of Burning Man fashions made by a friend of ours. It would be easy to look at it and judge it. But I look at it and see a life blessed with creative talent, brilliant friends and magical adventures.
I guess I'm glad that I'm the boss, and that my freedom of speech is free. And my freedom to be me. And that fact that my hippie mom made me listen to Free To Be You And Me when I was a kid, because that created the cornerstone of who i am and what I beleive we owe to each other.
Your thoughts? - xo - Alyssa
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Choices and not
I agree with your overall point, but I think you're using the wrong framework to attack the issue.
If we can't judge someone for being gay, why can we judge them for seriously cutting loose on weekends. If we can't judge someone for having dark skin, why can we judge them for being scantily clad at a party?
There is a big bright dividing line between being gay and having dark skin on one hand, and cutting loose and not wearing clothes on the other. That line is, simply, choice. Generally speaking, society as a whole says that it's ok to judge people by the choices they make, but not by the not-choices they are born with. And that's truly, deeply fair, in a lot of ways: I think there ought to be a bright line there.
Of course, we then have to separate out how much of each choice we make is really the result of (or an expression of) our genetics, biology, and early childhood conditioning in various ways. So then it's not so simple again.
On the other hand, if we can't judge someone by what they do on the weekend, can we judge them for the racist things they say online? I think we can - must - judge them for the latter choice - so why not the former?
So then we can draw another bright line: that of victims, and no victims. Just like the government ought to keep out of my sex life except to protect the vulnerable, people ought not judge each other for victimless activities, undertaken responsibly and with full understanding of the consequences. Bigotry has victims; being naked, not so much.
Anyway, so there's a bit of a proposed framework for this discussion. It's probably inadequate.
The other part of the problem is that when we judge people online, we frequently do not judge them holistically. All we see is one provocative picture, phrase, impression - and we often jump from there to a global assessment of who the whole person is. The solution, as always, is MORE speech, so that people can get the best idea of who you are overall.
Chosing Choice and judgement
You are right that CHOICE is the paramount difference here. For sure...
I'd love it if you'd start a discussion on the discussion board. I'm interested in why people think that they can judge someone by a photo, or an outfit, or anything else. And i am as guilty as most, we probably all are.
I'm not sure that i agree with your assertion that while bigotry has victims, being caught naked doesn't. It does. Neither should, and certainly inbred bigotry of race and religion is worse, but..... When people are "caught" naked, a whole host of assumptions are applied to them and then used to judge them. And it's just silly. As you said, it's not holistic.
Last summer we were hiking with a bunch of good friends in Eastern Washington. It was dusty and must have been 400 degrees. At the end of the hike we found a crystal clear river and it took me no time at all to strip down and go swimming. Nothing ever felt so goo. It is now not hard for me to imagine someone snapping that picture and pasting it all over the Internet. I can see the headline now, JUST CAUSE Founder Found In Naked Frolic With Four Friends. In some ways, I'd welcome the chance to dialogue about it, but all the same, the furor would be insufferable. What is wrong with that moment? NOTHING! It is something I would do, with a bunch of good friends, and is as much a part of me as anything else. Yet there are many who would say that, because of that, I must be..... insert judgemental and derogatory statements of your choice.
I'm not saying that judgement is inherently bad. It is the only way we have to evaluate situations and make decisions. What I am saying is that attaching moral declarations to isolated events is dangerous. Is there a difference between a photo, and a rant online. Yes, a huge one. A photo is a photo, you have no idea what the thoughts and situation was that led to that isolated moment. A racist rant online is full of thoughts and intent.
And even so, I'd try to find a way to step back and look at the bigger picture, intent and context. But yes, they are different.
I'm just throwing stuff out there as it occurs to me, and hoping the community will pick up threads and sew with them. Warms the cockles of my heart to see it working.
Frameworks
I'm not sure that i agree with your assertion that while bigotry has victims, being caught naked doesn't.
You are misunderstanding what I said, which was:
people ought not judge each other for victimless activities, undertaken responsibly and with full understanding of the consequences. Bigotry has victims; being naked, not so much.
My being naked does not hurt you. (Let's leave the question of whether it hurts children out for the moment - recognizing that there's very little evidence to support that very widespread belief among Americans.) That's all I was saying. So, granting that "judgment is [not] inherently bad" - indeed, I would argue that it is neither good nor bad, but merely factual - the point is in figuring out how to judge people fairly.One principle we can use is choice/not choice. Another, among things which are choice, is does this choice have victims or not? And then yes, on top of it all, we must appreciate people holistically before we judge them, whenever possible.