AIBU worry that the next generation are not actually that "accepting"

[Bonsaibreaker]

Long story short but chatting with 14 yo DD this evening about many subjects and a family members "views" came up. For background this family member in my view is racist and homophobic.
DD stated FM should be cancelled. Never allowed to speak, voice their opinion ever.

I pointed out to DD that freedom of speech means just that. We can all hold opinions others don't like but we are all free to voice, protest and gather regardless.
DD is of an age where discussion/debate is not an option apparently and if you are offended by another's views you just cancel them instead of debating or accepting their view as different to yours.

This worries me as instead of challenging different opinions the next generation are just silencing them.

YANBU = yes we are growing an intolerant society

YABU = They deserve to be cancelled

I read some interesting research about student bias in giving feedback on lecturers recently. Apparently student feedback tends to be hugely biased racially and sexually (more so than feedback generally)- white male lecturers are given much better feedback than black and/or female lecturers, although on any objective standard (such as student outcomes) they were no better. This was the case even where students thought of themselves as unbiased and opposed to prejudice.

I found it very interesting as an example of the harmful effects of thinking of yourself purely as good and others as bad. Were the students so sure of their lack of bias that they didn’t reflect at all? Certainly there’s a world of difference between patting yourself on the back for your lack of prejudice and actually acting without prejudice.

Kanaloa

And from what op says in her updates, the daughter hasn’t said that. OP says in the opening post that she has said that, but later states that her daughter in fact doesn’t want to ‘cancel’ the uncle but she (the op) thinks her daughter should ‘debate’ him. That’s the issue

I have explained what DD means when she says cancel uncle. I have also said DD does not have to debate her uncle if she chooses not to. This wasn't about her uncle it was about her view that people with thoughts and opinions that do match her own should be cancelled, not debated with and not voice their opinions at all.

Newley

There are a few inaccuracies in your post that I have already explained.

DD is 14 not 16
Uncle does not visit our home.
DD is not left to tackle her uncles comments on her own. In fact I have already said she doesn't have to tackle him at all.
The issue is she feels there should be no debate ever with anyone one who has opposing views.

My late father-in-law had worked as a colonial policeman and grew up at a time when male homosexually was illegal. My children, now adult,. understood he had grown up in a different era. He was always courteous to NHS staff and was a strong supporter of the EU. People are complicated...

They are free to speak but not free of consequences when their speech does real harm to people in a more vulnerable position than the speaker. That’s why it’s a hate crime

It's a modern iteration of the shunning that was commonplace within religious communities.

@NewlyGranny

Nobody has to debate anybody; nobody has to listen in silence to someone they disagree with, unless it's a formal debate or panel show and you're in the audience or a panel member awaiting your turn.

Freedom of speech is no guarantee everyone will be listened to; people are free to walk away if they don't like what they hear or aren't interested.

And of course intelligent, thoughtful people are open to growth and changing their ideas if they acquire new experiences or information and encounter reasoned arguments.

The trouble comes when ideas and attitudes are fixed and the person is always on transmit, never receive. That can be at any age, but is commonest, in my experience, in the very old and very young.

If FM is going to spout racist tropes in someone else's house, the householder has a right to change the subject or chide FM for being repetitive.

I've found it helpful to say something like, "We've heard your thoughts on this many times and you've heard ours. If you haven't anything new to share, perhaps we could just assume nothing's changed and talk about something that new?" And introduce a topic.

But 16yo shouldn't be left to tackle racist talk alone, lest it be perceived as teenage rebellious nonsense that nobody else holds with. FM should be the one feeling isolated in their views, not DD.

Well said

Not everyone has the capability or capacity to engage in critical thinking, which is required in order to debate and challenge harmful views and self reflect.

If people only hear views they agree with, they don't learn how to make calm rational arguments against those views.

Fingers in ears and "la la la i can't hear you" when you meet a racist/homophobe/transphbe whatever, means that those views are still out there, but you can't counter them. That is stupid and dangerous.

@user1470132907

They are free to speak but not free of consequences when their speech does real harm to people in a more vulnerable position than the speaker. That’s why it’s a hate crime

Are hurt feelings real harm and is that a hate crime?

That's a very dangerous road to go down.

@Avarua

Opinion is the lowest form of knowledge.

I absolutely will be using this saying moving forward in my life. That's brilliant.

I disagree with cancel cultute. But I also disagree with the thinking that I have to "debate" why people think I'm inferior to them because I'm black.

I'm also fed up of having to "justify" why black people or women or whoever deserves to be treated equally.

It isn't my job to educate ignorant and thick people. I don't understand why someone would fall over themselves to insist that racists/sexists/homophobes etc do not cause harm or distress to others it is a personal opinion..

Avery I said my uncle does not go out of his way to cause distress or harm. I didnt say every racist or homophobe doesn't.

If you are going to quote me do so it context otherwise you look like a dick.

You didn't reference your uncle in that post.

If you're resorting to insults, you've lost the argument.

Whether or not someone goes out of their way to cause distress or harm, that is what racist/sexist/ableist/homophobic attitudes do.

You didn't reference your uncle in that post.

So my OP and subsequent 10 posts don't matter?

It is only an insult if you belive you took my quote out of context. Did you?

I'm not really sure what you're wanting me to say?

Yes. Very typical really.
Usually topical.
"Read in the paper veterans are homeless while immigrats are given 4 bed houses and full benefits"
"It's always black people in gangs or drug dealing"
"I mean each to their own but its not natural two blokes'
He told my son to stay away from a certain area where we live as its a "black" area and dangerous. Yes it has very high levels of crime and very multi cultural but FM does not understand racisim plays a huge part in poverty/lack of opportunity he believes its "cos its a black area" How does this fall into the category of not causing harm to others?

I still haven’t seen one person explain what the value of continuing to give attention to this man is. After 20 years of op trying to ‘debate’ him he still thinks it’s unnatural to be gay and is racist.

It’s hard enough to help someone change who actually wants to change. This man doesn’t.

I do by the way understand pointing out things to people. For example I have occasionally said something like ‘I think the correct term is x because of such and such’ when someone has used an offensive or very outdated term.

But debating someone who openly airs racist and homophobic views that he KNOWS you dislike because you’ve told him is really just pouring fuel on it and encouraging him. Obviously he isn’t going to stop suddenly after 20 years and think ‘actually everyone deserves the same chance as me’ so why give the attention.

@Kanaloa I thought the OP’s point was that while her DD says she wants to cancel everyone who expresses hateful views, her real life behavior contradicts this, because she loves and enjoys spending time with an elderly uncle who’s racist and homophobic.

In other words, real life is far more complicated than cancel culture suggests and that’s the dilemma. Cancel someone you love, try to change them with rational arguments, or do nothing?

@NewlyGranny

I do think the silencing culture is an outgrowth of SM practices where you can block to your heart's content and eliminate voices that disagree with you. It's taking this entitlement and trying to apply it in real life that creates the problems.

Excellent point.

In other words, real life is far more complicated than cancel culture suggests and that’s the dilemma. Cancel someone you love, try to change them with rational arguments, or do nothing?

Can't they just agree not to discuss these topics? That's a reasonable way forward

@mustlovegin. That too, of course!

@Bonsaibreaker

Tractot

What do you mean I have gone too far?

Not your DD's role to debate him. The point about not shutting out views is good however

@Bonsaibreaker

Kanaloa

And from what op says in her updates, the daughter hasn’t said that. OP says in the opening post that she has said that, but later states that her daughter in fact doesn’t want to ‘cancel’ the uncle but she (the op) thinks her daughter should ‘debate’ him. That’s the issue

I have explained what DD means when she says cancel uncle. I have also said DD does not have to debate her uncle if she chooses not to. This wasn't about her uncle it was about her view that people with thoughts and opinions that do match her own should be cancelled, not debated with and not voice their opinions at all.

Just read the update... this is not U...

this trhead somehow loads weirdly for me so now im confused

Not your DD's role to debate him. The point about not shutting out views is good however

I never said it was her role.
Please read the thread. I have explained that this is not about her debating her uncle but her views on debate and cancel culture.

If people only hear views they agree with, they don't learn how to make calm rational arguments against those views.

Fingers in ears and "la la la i can't hear you" when you meet a racist/homophobe/transphbe whatever, means that those views are still out there, but you can't counter them. That is stupid and dangerous.

Totally agree with this.
Frighteningly even more so with the way the internet "listens" to your views and gives you lots of "feeds" of only groups that agree with you - so people become more and more entrenched in their own thinking as they only hear the views of others that agree with them.
I whiled away many, many hours in my teens and 20s debating all sorts of things with other people. It is how you learn and how you help other people learn. It is about listening to what other people's experience is, what their thoughts are, and conceding they might have a point about a, b, and c, and that you can see what they are saying, but that with X, Y, and Z, what they are saying can clearly be proven to be wrong, or that it is offensive (and explain why it is offensive), or whatever issue you have with what is being said.
Sticking your fingers in your ears and refusing to engage with anyone who has different views from you is a very narrow way of thinking, and quite worrying if lots of people start to do that.