Editorial: Why do we demand apologies? | TribLIVE.com

Editorial: Why do we demand apologies?

In this Feb. 5 photo, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., listens to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union speech, at the Capitol in Washington. In Omar’s Minnesota district, both Jews and Muslims voiced concern about an inflammatory tweet on Israel that had the congresswoman apologizing within hours. While some Jews said she was being unfairly judged, others said they feared she was being slow to learn from previous criticism.

We need to stop demanding that people apologize.

Every day, people in the public eye say things that are mean or stupid or wrong. They are sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, ableist, partisan, homophobic, classist and varieties of discriminatory for which we have no “ist” words. They may be vague microaggressions that only register if you know where to look or they might be yards tall and outlined in can’t-miss-me neon. They could be said out loud, recorded, written in an article or Tweeted to the world.

Offense is out there. Intentional or not. Hateful or neglectful. Overt or benign.

And when it happens, there are immediate, vociferous calls for apologies. Then there is the wait. Will the comment be “walked back?” Will there be an apology? A real one? Or an “I’m sorry you were offended” pseudo-contrition?

We have to realize that we can lead by example, and we can criticize and scold people for the things they say, and we can condemn roundly the words they drop like bombs in the public discourse. But we have to stop demanding the apologies.

Because an apology at gunpoint means nothing.

A racist who is told he will face financial ruin if he doesn’t apologize is still a racist. An anti-Semite who will lose an election is still an anti-Semite. All of the questionable character traits or definitively awful personal opinions will still be there after a disingenuous apology.

We drag these “I’m sorry’s” out of celebrities and politicians like we do out of recalcitrant children, pushing them forward, making them hug it out with the wronged party and grumbling the right words said in all the wrong tone, making it very clear there was no epiphany where the penitent realized the error of their ways.

Why don’t we just let them stand by their words? Why try to rewind the clock? We gain nothing by a fake apology. In fact, we lose the ability to make our own well-informed choices.

If we know this actor is a misogynist, why demand he pretend otherwise when we can choose to avoid his movies? If we know this politician is an anti-Semite, why repeatedly coerce change when we can cast a vote and end the problem?

We need to save our breath — or ink, or our digital effort — for fixing the wrongs, not threatening the words.

Categories: Opinion | Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.