The idea of the talismanic apology
Jun. 8th, 2017 02:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rainwatersparkI've seen this idea floated around on the internet—that if someone (e.g. a content creator) hurts a reader through negative representation of a marginalized group, that content creator MUST apologize specifically for having hurt those people.
I've seen insincere apologies before; however, I feel like this idea sometimes goes too far, in an unproductive way. The words "I'm sorry [for what I did] + [acknowledgement that I thoughtlessly hurt X group]" seem to have become some sort of obligation, otherwise you are Problematic(TM) And An All Around Terrible Person.
I have a different viewpoint. I don't know whether it's because of my autism or some general unusual way of thinking, but I don't particularly care for the author to apologize to me—and I've been irritated-to-hurt by a lot of books on numerous axes (race/culture, sexual orientation, and ableism, namely).
What I'd usually like, instead, rather than an apology consisting specifically of "I'm sorry I hurt you," is some kind of acknowledgement by the author that they've listened, that they understood what they did wrong, and that they'll do better in the future.
Again, not sure if because of autism or whatever, but I don't always trust apologies. I've seen authors apologize for harmful rep but then still promote their books without mentioning the problems. I mean, yeah, it'd come off as less effective marketing, but the point of social justice is to prioritize marginalized groups. If I see authors ignore the problematic aspects of their books, even if they've apologized for them already, I don't trust them as being sincere. I don't trust that they actually have realized what they did wrong. The point is, to me, the words "I'm sorry" don't always connote "I recognize my mistake and I'm trying to learn from it." Sometimes it just seems like a quick band-aid the content creator slaps on so the controversy can die out and they can move on. But, again, that's not the point.
In my opinion, "I'm sorry" can sometimes be harder to say than "I'll do better next time." And just to take a personal example—my parents and I have occasionally (not frequently, I'm glad to say) had very bad arguments. My parents often don't apologize to me by saying "I'm sorry for hurting you," but in the aftermath, they clearly convey that they regret what happened, they care about me, and they want to do better in the future. And that's enough.
Or, at least, why can't that be enough?
Why is "I promise to do better next time" apparently not good enough for some people if the author doesn't also say "I wrote something very bad that hurt a group of people and I am sorry for that"?
Again, I don't care if authors never apologize for having hurt me with their harmful books. What I really want to see instead is, "Okay, I've come to understand that what I wrote is ableist/acephobic/whatever and I promise to do better in the future." I care about results; how authors get to those results is less important to me.
I've seen insincere apologies before; however, I feel like this idea sometimes goes too far, in an unproductive way. The words "I'm sorry [for what I did] + [acknowledgement that I thoughtlessly hurt X group]" seem to have become some sort of obligation, otherwise you are Problematic(TM) And An All Around Terrible Person.
I have a different viewpoint. I don't know whether it's because of my autism or some general unusual way of thinking, but I don't particularly care for the author to apologize to me—and I've been irritated-to-hurt by a lot of books on numerous axes (race/culture, sexual orientation, and ableism, namely).
What I'd usually like, instead, rather than an apology consisting specifically of "I'm sorry I hurt you," is some kind of acknowledgement by the author that they've listened, that they understood what they did wrong, and that they'll do better in the future.
Again, not sure if because of autism or whatever, but I don't always trust apologies. I've seen authors apologize for harmful rep but then still promote their books without mentioning the problems. I mean, yeah, it'd come off as less effective marketing, but the point of social justice is to prioritize marginalized groups. If I see authors ignore the problematic aspects of their books, even if they've apologized for them already, I don't trust them as being sincere. I don't trust that they actually have realized what they did wrong. The point is, to me, the words "I'm sorry" don't always connote "I recognize my mistake and I'm trying to learn from it." Sometimes it just seems like a quick band-aid the content creator slaps on so the controversy can die out and they can move on. But, again, that's not the point.
In my opinion, "I'm sorry" can sometimes be harder to say than "I'll do better next time." And just to take a personal example—my parents and I have occasionally (not frequently, I'm glad to say) had very bad arguments. My parents often don't apologize to me by saying "I'm sorry for hurting you," but in the aftermath, they clearly convey that they regret what happened, they care about me, and they want to do better in the future. And that's enough.
Or, at least, why can't that be enough?
Why is "I promise to do better next time" apparently not good enough for some people if the author doesn't also say "I wrote something very bad that hurt a group of people and I am sorry for that"?
Again, I don't care if authors never apologize for having hurt me with their harmful books. What I really want to see instead is, "Okay, I've come to understand that what I wrote is ableist/acephobic/whatever and I promise to do better in the future." I care about results; how authors get to those results is less important to me.
