As I was putting this post together, I was made aware of a stunning example of the Tone Argument in action. One of the mainstream feminist sites featured an interview with a prominent male ‘ally’ who, someone mentioned in the comment section, had previously attempted to murder an ex-girlfriend. When this information was disclosed, others in the comment section reacted with horror. The moderator then closed the comment section due to its “ugliness of tone”. Imagine the temerity of those commentors, being outraged over a feminist website giving column space to an attempted murderer!
That, and a followup comment stating that anyone who threatened or swore at her would be banned, was the only real response from the moderator/interviewer. She did not address people’s concerns. She only criticised how those concerns were stated. That is the essence of the Tone Argument.
The Tone Argument:
A dismissal of somebody’s words based not on content but on tone. See:
- “You’re too emotional.”
- “You’re being too academic.”
- “Don’t talk down to me.”
- “Stop shouting.”
- “Show some feeling.”
The Tone Argument says: I don’t have to listen to you unless you phrase yourself in just the right way. And of course, the cunning trap of the Tone Argument is that there *is* no right way. The same statement can be too angry for one person and not angry enough for another; too simplistic, too complicated, too critical, too condescending. Too ‘ugly’. (Is there a ‘pretty’ way to object to the glamorisation of an attempted murderer?) There is no perfect way to critique something.
The Tone Argument is often referenced in discussions of prejudice (such as racism, sexism, transphobia, or many others). It tends to occur when somebody tries to point out that a speaker has inadvertently said something bigoted or hurtful, and the speaker reacts by dismissing them for a ‘reason’ like the ones above.
In the situation above, the moderator is of course well within her rights to set limits on what kind of language she allows on her website. What brings her over the line into Tone Argument territory is using the subjective ‘ugliness’ she perceived as an excuse not to engage the substance of people’s comments: whether this was an inappropriate person to be interviewing and upholding as a ‘feminist ally’.
The Foot Analogy:
When discussing the Tone Argument, a comparison that comes up time and time again is one person standing on another’s foot. The person whose foot hurts might yell. The polite response is not, “Don’t yell at me,” but “Oh crap, I’m sorry, I’ll get right off your foot.”
Further traps of the Tone Argument:
- Any criticism, by its very nature, is going against the status quo. That makes it hostile. No matter how delicately I try to say, “Hey, that joke was pretty racist,” the person being called out can feel attacked. There is no polite way to confront a person because confrontation in and of itself is impolite.
- If I do somehow manage to seem nice, sweet and polite, it then seems as though I don’t really mind what was said. A lot of people refuse to take a criticism seriously unless they are faced with evidence of hurt: anger or tears.
- If I’ve been hurt by a sexist or homophobic comment I may just want to yell because my metaphorical foot hurts. I might not have the energy or motivation to fight sexist jokes for the hundredth time that week. Someone using the Tone Argument is assuming that my end goal is to get them to listen, but it may just be to vent and blow off steam.
- The Tone Argument implies that the person wielding it knows best. It’s all very well to say “You’re being so hostile,” but if I’m engaging in any kind of discussion on prejudice I’m likely to be hyper-aware of my tone to begin with. I know how my tone sounds. Being told how to speak – by someone who was being offensive just a minute ago, no less – is condescending and patronising.
- The Tone Argument changes the subject from whatever hurtful thing might have been said, to the hurt feelings of the person who said it. It implies that they’re only willing to be nice to people if their feelings are put first.
- The Tone Argument overlaps with existing stereotypes: women are perceived as ‘hysterical’, black people are perceived as ‘angry’. It’s all been said before and – trust me – adds nothing new to the conversation. Addition: these stereotypes really do affect how people are perceived. Tone is so subjective in part because how a person interprets something is affected by their unconscious biases.
Tone Argument 102:
Times when the Tone Argument is Actually Useful:
- When used on yourself. Try not to be an outright asshole. Not because that makes anyone more likely to listen to you (honestly it doesn’t make much of a difference) but because not being an outright asshole is generally just a good thing to aspire to.
- Addition: When used on yourself, and you are speaking from a position as an ally. It’s all very well to say, “Hey, you just stood on that person’s foot,” but there is not the same justification for yelling when you are not the person experiencing pain and hurt. When people are acting as allies, it’s inappropriate for us to make the issue about us.
