The paradox of tolerance

There is this thing called the paradox of tolerance. It states:

“If a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant.”

Basically, we need to understand deeply what it is that we value, so that we know when something shows up that causes harm.

I’ve been thinking about the things we tolerate this week, because the Broadcasting Standards Authority has begun public consultation on proposed changes to the Broadcasting Standards Codebook.

The one that stood out for me is that the BSA proposes to update “the discrimination and denigration standard guidelines to clarify its application to content which reinforces negative stereotypes.”

Unfortunately, what then sprang immediately to mind was Mike Hosking.

Specifically, his choice last year to call Meghan Markle “a shallow, self-absorbed, attention-seeking, woke, bandwagon-riding hussy” on air.

Calling a woman a hussy is toxic and yes, it is denigrating specific to gender.

Inferring a group of women protesting against violence after Sarah Everard’s murder were “sad & pathetic”, & operating out of “peak stupidity” is also toxic, as is endlessly raging at a woman who decided not to regularly interview with you (but is still available.)

It’s weird that these men can write & speak about women like this on a national platform.

It’s weird that brands who conceivably sell to women are okay with it.

It’s weird that other men in media who have women as their audience are all fine their colleague talks like this.

It’s weird that the media workplace culture means women in media have to hear it - and let it go.

It’s weird that this level of consistent, demonstrable, clear toxicity is actively encouraged to drive engagement, whether it’s radio, television, print or digital media.

It’s weird the people who read opinion articles and say “great, go to print” are the same people who edit reports on other kinds of toxic harm regularly, who see the impact of misogyny, racism, homophobia, transphobia.

We’re so used to a world in which casual denigration occurs that we don’t blink.

It is important to note that these things, these words don’t occur in a vacuum. They aren’t isolated. Together, they contribute to an entire culture in which toxic, denigrating, derogatory things are said - and done.

There’s a reason normalising behaviour falls at the base of this pyramid. 

It forms a larger picture in which one in five women experience sexual assault, and one in three women experience physical or sexual violence from a partner in their lifetime, in NZ.

That’s not “just a joke.”

We have Broadcasting Standards for a reason. They are supposed to prevent harm.

The right to freedom of expression does not mean freedom from criticism or freedom from consequence. It shouldn’t, because normalisation is something that people who behave in toxic ways in all settings count on. 

The paradox of tolerance means that we need to call out the things that don’t align with our values.

If we’re talking about broadcasting standards, in 2022 all listeners (and all readers and watchers, for that matter) deserve better than having to accept misogyny, sexism or denigration because it’s not subject to accountability.

I don’t think any of us can say we haven’t read something in the paper in regards to the PM that is profoundly recognisable as incredibly toxic.

I don’t think any of us can say we are unaware of the absolute bile in the various comments sections about Dr Siouxsie Wiles.

How we talk about women absolutely influences how we treat women, which absolutely influences how we harm women.

Failure to call out language used & harm inflicted means that ingrained toxic culture remains exactly that – ingrained.

“Misogyny can afford to be selective because its fundamental goal is enforcement. Women who know their place do not need to be put in it.” - Kate Manne

We consistently see the ways in which men are protected, their actions excused, their harmful words a badge of honour – literal signs, in some cases.

We know how often “cancel culture” is wielded as a weapon to avoid accountability & consequences.

We know how often powerful women endure spiteful backlash from men because of their power & competence.

“Women associated with the Covid-19 response such as politicians, healthcare professionals or experts are…framed as “representative of transgressive women who are then targeted with highly misogynistic framing, including death and rape threats.”

We know that negative stereotyping does far more harm than good.

The BSA said last year that Mike Hosking’s actions weren’t a breach of broadcasting standards.

I wonder how much the world would change if more people were told No - because the consequences of their behaviour are too great to tolerate it.

The deadline for submissions on the review of the discrimination and denigration standard guidelines to clarify its application to content which reinforces negative stereotypes is 5:00pm on 8 March 2022.

You can make a submission here.