Is it wrong to remain silent after hearing an insult?

Potentially annoying, but potentially necessary?

Source: StockSnap/Pixabay

Many of us have been in a situation where we hear someone use a slur when talking about a member of a minority group. Such insult can take many forms, including racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic or transphobic, but it is generally accepted that all such insults are harmful, whether or not they are heard by a member of the targeted group.

Assuming we disagree with the insult and the sentiment behind it, what should we do after hearing one, especially in the context of a conversation? Should we object, which can be very uncomfortable depending on the context, or even make a gesture that signals disagreement, like shaking our heads or rolling our eyes? Or is it enough to say nothing, refusing to agree with the offending statement (without directly refuting it)?

In a new article in the journal Philosophy and phenomenological researchphilosopher AG Holdier argues that, if we remain silent, not only are we complicit in the harm caused to the targeted group, but we are also directly do harm (although less than the person who uttered the insult) by performing what he calls “insulting silence.”¹

The sound of silence

Silence can be very suggestive. Just think about being in a romantic relationship and asking your partner if you look good in what you’re wearing — or saying “I love you” for the first time — only to receive nothing in return. The reason silence is so meaningful in these situations is because a verbal response is expected, so the silence that fills the void eventually takes on a life of its own.

If you hear someone utter an offensive slur, remaining silent may be interpreted as a sign that you agree with the sentiment expressed. Of course, this depends on the context of the situation: if you are part of a large group, all of whom hear the insult and remain silent, it may not be reasonable to conclude that everyone present was agreement with her. However, they might easily shake their head or roll their eyes, which is not “silent” in the sense that it is a response, even a non-verbal one, so their refusal to do so must suggest their feeling to with regard to the insult. .

However, if you’re in a direct conversation with the person saying the insult, the normal back-and-forth flow of conversation may demand some sort of response – and like the injured romantic partner above, giving no response to an offensive insult. when expected, especially given its controversial nature, can send the message that you are okay with the insult.

The perspective of insults

Even if no one in the targeted group hears the insult, by remaining silent in response you are confirming the beliefs of the person who made it, what philosopher Elisabeth Camp called the “insult perspective.” For Camp, the insulting perspective indicates that the person using it believes that the targeted group is of low social status and unworthy of the respect and consideration enjoyed by members of the speaker’s own group.²

Although the insult itself is more directly harmful when heard by a member of the targeted group, the insulting perspective is itself harmful in a more pernicious way. This not only motivates the use of insults, privately and publicly, but can also encourage physical violence against targeted groups, as well as political movements aimed at limiting their rights or excluding them from civil society. This position is similar to what philosopher Jennifer Lackey calls the “duty to object” to false or offensive statements, not only to avoid harm to vulnerable people, but also to keep these ideas out of the popular conversation and prevent them from spread.³

Insulting silences

By remaining silent after hearing an insult, especially in a social context where a response is expected, you are engaging in what Holdier calls a confused silencewhich “signals allegiance to a murky perspective.” Even if you disagree with the insult out loud (or even if you nod), your silence, especially in response to a provocative statement, can speak volumes: it not only assures the speaker that you share his beliefs, but it also tells everyone listening that you share them as well.

While many philosophers argue that silence in response to insults indirectly harms the targeted group, Holdier goes further to argue that it directly harms the targeted group by affirming the offensive perspective in the conversation itself – putting your agreement on the record, so to speak, even if it’s not true, and helping the offensive beliefs spread.

The next time you are around someone who makes a racist comment, sexist joke, or other insult against a maligned community, say or do something. It may be uncomfortable, and it may even be scary, but think about what the other person will think of you if you don’t — and what your silent acquiescence says (and does) to the people it puts down.