Stop tone policing.

Tone policing is generally defined as “a conversational tactic that dismisses the ideas being communicated when they are perceived to be delivered in an angry, frustrated, sad, fearful, or otherwise emotionally charged manner” (Dictionary). It can be used by anyone against anyone else, but we see it leveraged often against someone when they discuss the harm that has happened to them, and usually by the ones that created the harm.

Hello again and happy Thursday (I double-checked this time, it's actually Thursday).

I introduced the topic of tone policing in last Saturday's Study Hall, which got a love of responses (and a lot of love, thank you all for making this a safe and supportive learning environment). I realized then that we hadn't really dived into it here yet, and that it's an important part of dismantling interpersonal racism. We've touched on several other related topics in previous newsletters, but today I'm teasing it out in full. If you're a new reader, I highly encourage reading the related posts for more context!

Thank you to everyone that's chipped in to support our work. If you'd like, you can give one time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). Or, subscribe monthly or annually on Patreon. I really appreciate it.

Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Don’t tone police. Instead, use the opportunity as a time for self-reflection.
Name tone policing when you see it happen against marginalized communities.
Create a culture where you work / live where expressing difficult emotions is normalized.
If you identify as a person of color: Consider how tone policing might show up in your relationship with yourself. How can you reclaim space for your emotions today?

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

It’s also something that thrives in the digital space. Because people tend to be more defensive and meaner online than they would in person (KQED), conversations in 2020 are primarily happening online. It’s no surprise to see tone policing pop up so frequently.

Tone policing is one of many ways that dominant culture “polices” people of color (read more in a previous newsletter). It is often used – whether subconsciously or intentionally – to put this person “back in their place.” It doesn’t just attempt to discredit what the person is saying. It implies that they are not worthy of the time and attention until they play by the rules of the oppressor. And these rules are rooted in sexist and racist ideals of how marginalized people are “supposed to act” in society today.

For people of color, particularly Black people, these rules are referred to by “respectability politics.” The term was coined by Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham in her book Righteous Discontent, which outlined the Black women’s movement in the Black Baptists church (Harvard). It explains how Black people were told that if they could prove that they can overcome the “wild savages” tropes white people enforced about their identity, they may deserve equal rights (The Undefeated).

This notion is invalid on many fronts: first, it operates off the false assumptions that white people shared to reinforce ideas of slavery and discrimination. More on this in a previous newsletter. But it’s also a rule that always works in the oppressor’s favor. What this may look like depends on the viewer, not the subject. And does this imply that every white person is the depiction of perfection all the time? How is it that white men can be angry, but Black men, according to respectability politics, cannot? Most urgently, why does respect need to be earned instead of granted based on our collective humanness?

Racial tone policing is a form of microaggressions that people of color experience often (read more on microagressions in a previous newsletter). Comments like “I just don’t understand why you’re so angry all the time,” or “people would listen to you if you were a bit more polite,” are common forms of tone policing. Black people will be referred to as “aggressive,” which attempts to justify control or dominance. More straightforward, many people will say, “I don’t like your tone,” which is usually used in a foreboding way. You better not keep going, or else…

"
The underlying tone in many of these well-meaning messages is that, even in speaking about my experiences with racism, microaggressions, and discrimination, there is a right way and a wrong way to share. I am told that if I modify my message to be more palatable to the masses, my message will be better received. This demonstrates that people will dismiss your experiences unless it fits in the box of how they want to receive it.
Dr. Janice Gassam Asare, author and founder, for Business Insider.

But it can also be straight-up aggression – people will take more violent action because they believe that someone’s tone is putting them at risk. Consider the Amy Cooper story. The initial video showed that she called the police on Christian Cooper for “threatening” him when he clearly wasn’t. But further investigations found that she actually called the police a second time, indicating that Cooper had “tried to assault her” (NYTimes). She went beyond using words to police his “tone” to bringing in actual police with a clear intent to cause harm. Without the video, which has gained over 45 million views, we may never have known what happened to Christian Cooper. His “tone,” paired with a history of racism in law enforcement, could have cost him his freedom – or even his life.

Racial tone policing is especially toxic in the feminist space. Tone policing is often inflicted upon women by men, like, for example, when calling out toxic masculinity. Perhaps it’s why white women are often quick to apply the same harm against women of color. And echoing the “rules of the oppressor” point from before, why can’t women of color express their own sentiments of anger and frustration in a patriarchal system? Academic, writer and lecturer Rachel Cargle explains this well in her article on white supremacy in feminism:

"
When women of color begin to cry out about their pain, frustration, and utter outrage with the system that is continuing to allow our men to be murdered, our babies to be disregarded, and our livelihood to be dismissed, we are often met with white women who tell us perhaps we should “say things a little nicer” if we want to be respected and heard.

Rachel Cargle in Harper’s Bazaar.

Often, these external signals can start to influence how people of color express themselves in the future. This is a form of internalized racism, or a “personal conscious or subconscious acceptance of the racist view of dominant society” (TAARM). For me personally, this looks like me being too afraid to share my feelings because I don’t want to come off as aggressive or blaming myself for not thinking about my words more carefully when someone labels me as “angry.” As you can imagine, this often leads to me diminishing my own voice, often to protect myself from perceived harm from people around me. There was a point in my life where I would have never started this newsletter. More psychologists call for practitioners to address the adverse effects of internalized racism, along with external racism, due to the subtle differences (Society of Clinical Psychology).

What’s most heartbreaking to me is that tone policing can strip people of their emotions. Oftentimes, people experience a form of tone policing when they are experiencing difficult emotions. And if there’s a time that we deserve grace, I believe it’s then – when we feel vulnerable and exposed, overwhelmed or frustrated, afraid or fearful. People who wield tone policing as a weapon are insinuating that their discomfort is more important than others’ distress. They are often in a position of relative power and privilege, granting them more safety inherently.

Remember that the histories and narratives of people of color do not need to be packaged for white consumption to be valid. Stories of pain or heartbreak, overcoming adversity or joy, do not need to be packaged in a way that feels approachable or useful to anyone, regardless of race. Attention on racial issues is accelerated when someone inflicts violence against a Black body on video, shared and reposted for the world to see. Not through peaceful marches, published books and works of art, thoughtful critique on television shows, or when calls for accountability are sent following protocol at a company. So what is more important – the pain people experience or the pain dominant culture experiences when they’re forced to witness it?

And if their tone challenges you, use it as an opportunity for self-reflection. What is their language challenging inside me? Where is my emotional response to this coming from? If I feel this way, how must this other person feel at this moment? This is not another burden for people of color to carry, but yours to reckon with. Regardless of what you do, get out of the way: liberation will not wait for any approval.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Tone policing is generally defined as “a conversational tactic that dismisses the ideas being communicated when they are perceived to be delivered in an angry, frustrated, sad, fearful, or otherwise emotionally charged manner” (Dictionary).
Tone policing is one of many ways that dominant culture “polices” people of color. It is often used – whether subconsciously or intentionally – to put this person “back in their place.”
The histories and narratives of people of color do not need to be packaged for white consumption to be valid.

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Nicole Cardoza 10/17/20 Nicole Cardoza 10/17/20

Study Hall! Tone policing and language.

Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.

Welcome to our weekly Study Hall. Each week I answer questions and share insights from each of you in our community. This week I dove deeper on some pressing topics from our community.

If you subscribe to just the weekly digest, this is the email you will receive. You can click through to read all original pieces via the archives, and get the recap in one place. Change your email preferences by updating your profile information here.

As always, your support is greatly appreciated. You can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $7/mo on our Patreon.

Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.
Discuss with a friend: how did you learn about slavery growing up? How does that inform your perception on the civil rights movement of today?

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

We've published 136 newsletters on racism over the past 136 days. Here are the newsletters we published this week.

10/16/2020 | Abolish the grand jury.

10/15/2020 | Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism.

10/14/2020 | Make the outdoors more equitable.

10/13/2020 | Support Chinatown during COVID-19.

10/12/2020 | Honor Indigenous Peoples’ Day.

10/11/2020 | Support climate justice.

Read all previously published newsletters on our archives >

Q+A

I have to say, the language in this is super harsh. I feel if the writer was nicer with their tone they'd get more of us white people to actually do better.
From Make the outdoors more equitable on 10/14/2020.

This is tone policing, a personal attack against someone for expressing emotion to detract from the validity of the statement itself. This can be wielded against anyone, but it's particularly harmful when it's leveraged in conversations on inequity – including race.

"At its best, tone policing is an irritating behavior pattern that blocks meaningful conversation. But at its worst, tone policing is an insidious and sometimes hard-to-grasp method of reinforcing elitism and structural racism". Naomi Day, Medium

The stories we publish here are valid regardless of how they make you – the reader – feel. And to be in this work we must be committed to making space for the pain and trauma that individuals experience, and how they choose to express it. Honoring both the message and the tone is a way to acknowledge another's humanness. In contrast, placing your own slight discomfort above the suffering of another is a form of oppression. And there's no space for that here – in this work, and particularly in the discourse of this newsletter. I'm proud to share a wide range of stories and perspectives.

Q+A

There's no Chinatown in my community. How can I help other Chinatowns?
From Support Chinatown during COVID-19 on 10/13/2020.

If you can't support one in your direct community, consider adding a visit the next time you're in a city that includes one! And although there might not be a Chinatown per se, I can imagine there are Asian American-owned businesses that have also experienced some type of anti-Asian racism or bias since COVID-19 launched. Go and support them.

We also have additional resources in a previous newsletter on standing against this rise of anti-Asian racism. You can stand for representation at your business, in your local city council, your child's schools, and other community touchpoints.

Q+A

I noticed you used ACB as an acronym for Judge Amy Coney Barrett. I'm worried conservative are doing this to make her feel like the next RBG, which is a major NO for me. How can we stop this association?
From Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism on 10/15/2020.

Whew I hear you on this! I can imagine that many are quick to insert Judge Barrett into the same fervor of appreciation and respect that Justice Ginsburg gleaned in her tenure. And a three-letter abbreviation does help.

But I think these abbreviations are more akin to how social media dominates how we stay informed. With constraints around tweet and Instagram copy length (and subject lines, which is where I abbreviated to ACB) it's difficult to share without the abbreviation, especially when many include the word "Judge" in front as a sign of respect. We are quick to shorthand, not just to show our affinity and familiarity, but for brevity's sake, too.

We've also got many men historically that have the same monikers – MLK, FDR, LBJ, JFK, and RFK, for starters.

CLARIFICATIONS

10/15/2020 | Understand Judge Amy Coney Barrett's stance on racism.
As I built the case for Judge Barrett's stance on racism, I wanted to focus on how racism influenced issues such as abortion, immigration, etc. But as I did that I somehow forgot to include the issue that sparked me to investigate this the first place:

Judge Barrett was a judge on a 2019 case involving a Black Illinois transportation employee who sued the department after he was fired, citing that his supervisor had "created a hostile work environment and called him the N-word" (NPR).

When ruling on whether race played a factor, Judge Barrett stated that "being called the N-word by a former supervisor was not sufficient — in the context of that one particular case — to support a claim of a racially-based hostile work environment".

Many people are using this to say that Judge Barrett believes that the N-word is not racist. From what I understand watching the confirmation, it was more of a statement that this was the only racially-motivated example of a hostile work environment submitted for the judges' consideration, and there weren't more examples to substantiate the claim. It's still messed up, but not as damaging as the highlights I read. This encouraged me to dive deeper.