arguments – The Concordian

About five months ago, I was having dinner with a few friends and we had a conversation. Usually, our outings involve take-out, staying in, watching bad movies, playing cards, with the occasional serious conversation over an ice-cream run.

This specific group has a tendency to forgo all seriousness when together, choosing instead to resort to a lot of high-pitched noises and endearing labels (such as habibi with a strong annunciation of eee). Yes, my 6-feet-tall broad-shouldered boyfriend and his two best friends turn into cute little mischievous fairies at our weekly get-together. I absolutely adore them.

Anyway, the point is having a serious conversation with them is rare. But there we were, sharing horrible McDonalds, and discussing the difference between a thought and an opinion.

At the risk of becoming contradiction-personified, I’m putting forth the argument that not everyone is allowed to have an opinion about something while writing an opinion piece.

Here’s my basis: an opinion is educated, while a thought is merely a thought. What this means is everyone is entitled to think anything they want, whether it’s educated, humane or whatever “right” means. But if you want to have an opinion about something (and call it an opinion), you have to be educated about the subject.

In a simpler example, I can’t say pork is not good if I have never tried it. You won’t go to the local librarian to ask about medication. Taking that into consideration, why would a thought from someone who has nothing to do with the topic matter? Opinions need to come from educated places, not from entitled egos. That’s the first layer of “having an opinion.”

The second layer requires a level of humanity that I understand to be hard for some to achieve. I completely get how hard it must be to not be unkind to people you don’t know. I understand how impossible it is to keep your nose in your own business instead of prying into others’ lives. Yes, I get it, it’s too hard to not impose your unsolicited thoughts on others. Just to be clear, I am being sarcastic.

Being entitled to an opinion isn’t equated with freedom of speech. Something I learned in Canada, that I believe should be the basis of freedom of speech worldwide, is that the law literally says freedom stops when it becomes harmful and slanderous to another person. This means you can’t hide behind “it’s my opinion” to justify your racism, islamophobia, discrimination or unkindness.

“Gay people are not natural” or “religion says homosexuality is a sin and that’s why it shouldn’t exist” are not phrases that fall under opinion. Are you an expert in gays? Yeah, no. You might be an expert in whatever your religion is, but that is why there’s a separation of state and church in most of the world; your interpretation of a religion should not dictate someone else’s life, especially when said religion is so self-contradictory—but this is a different story. There is a consensus though, at least in Abrahamic Religions, that it’s God who judges. It’s very simple, it’s not under your jurisdiction to decide how someone else should live.

You’re allowed to think whatever you want. But once you voice it and present it as an opinion to be taken into consideration, there’s a social responsibility to preserve humanity. The ideas that are put forth influence the way a society functions; sharing an “opinion” that is based on discrimination perpetuates racist and discriminatory behaviour.

Instead of calling it an opinion, start by simply calling it a thought.

Remember that right and wrong is subjective, and again, at the risk of contradicting the purpose of this piece, here’s some advice: whatever your “right” or “wrong” is, if it devalues the existence of someone, their right to be, keep it to yourself.

Graphic by @sundaeghost

Balancing silence and rage in discussions

The difficulties of facing arguments with those who hold different opinions

There is no winning or losing when it comes to a discussion. At least, this is what I try to tell myself after every heated argument with a friend or relative. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to convince myself of this with much success.

It is easy to get carried away when a subject you are passionate about is brought up by somebody whose opinion conflicts with your own. While some may react rapidly with directness, others may feel the need to remain silent, fearing the aftermath of a disagreement.

Comedian Tina Fey recently wrote a segment for Saturday Night Live following the events in Charlottesville, Va., denouncing white privilege and white supremacy through satire. In the skit, she jokingly said that people should just eat cake in response to white supremacists. A lot of controversy emerged in response to the segment as many criticized Fey for encouraging people to ignore racism rather than take action against it.

Disregarding racism gives it the space to grow and the time to strengthen, eventually leading to atrocities such as the ones seen in Charlottesville on Aug. 12 which led to the death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer.

Closer to home, according to a Statistics Canada report, the number of Islamophobic hate crimes reported to police in Canada increased by 60 per cent from 2014 to 2015.

Facing racism and bigotry can be terrifying, but reminding yourself of the experiences their victims go through should be enough to motivate you to try changing someone’s mind. Regrettably, some may see it as a hassle or a useless fight to confront a narrow-minded person, and prefer to silently avoid conflict.

While I strongly encourage people to stand up for their beliefs, I have not always done so in my own life. France, my home country, only legalized same-sex marriage in 2013. In 2010, when I began to discover my sexuality, homosexuality was still rather taboo in France, especially in the countryside where I am from. I hid my very own traits from most, making sure not to show signs that would reveal who I am. Yet, it was hard to ignore the comments, the degrading names, the unfounded criticism or the blatant disgust some people around me expressed toward openly queer people. Unfortunately, directly calling them out was challenging. Avoiding confrontation can sometimes be the safest solution, and it is sometimes the only thing that can be done.

This tendency to avoid conflict has unfortunately become even easier in our social media age where you can effortlessly choose the content you want to see or ignore. Yet, interacting with people who hold differing opinions is a good way to understand why they don’t agree with you. Furthermore, focusing on one issue and ignoring other issues around social matters such as gender identification, religion, women’s rights, healthcare or historical truth is not a way to be actively open-minded.

Over the years, I’ve become more and more outspoken about some of my opinions. An example would be a three-day long argument my roommate and I had about whether taking in refugees in Europe and North America was a good thing. The opinions he had on the matter were the gasoline fueling my fire. Occasionally during the argument, we would lose track of the points we were making or try to use irrelevant information as evidence—we just wanted to be right. After three days, we both agreed on one single thing—you need a strong will to learn and have a productive, mind-changing discussion.

Simply believing that opinions will evolve and shift over time is the worst way to seek change. Protests that turn violent and arguments that focus on winning rather than proving a fact-based point aren’t good solutions either. It is important to speak with people of different backgrounds and ask them about their own experiences. And while a person’s experience may not be enough to change your view, complementing it with research from diverse sources will allow a productive exchange of ideas.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin