Review by Lucy Rycroft-Smith

22 May 2016, 19:00

I Find That Offensive

Free speech, Claire Fox says, means allowing people to hold and express racist, sexist and homophobic views. It means not clamouring for an apology every time an institution falls foul of mollycoddling its “customers”. It means public figures being allowed to stay silent on public issues as well as expressing (a wide range of) views about them. It means people can wear a black face, Native American headdresses, or make culturally stereotypical references. Or, in Fox’s words, “being a Gamergate supporter or being infamous for scathing, sharp-tongued and unapologetic attacks on PC feminists, even calling them bullies, are perfectly legitimate political opinions”. Ouch.

Is it this simple? Of course not. This book, as Fox readily admits, is about a paradox. We are a society developing away from discrimination and towards understanding privilege more than at any other time in history. We have more possibilities for people to debate and disturb new ideas than ever before. Yet, in our legitimate fight against prejudice and bigotry, we have also been swept along on a tide of linguistic narrowing, victimhood, and extreme sensitivity to mental trauma (defined, crucially, by the receiver).

We have a network of communication that allows us to discuss vital social and global issues instantaneously – and it is more often than not used to silence or harass. Opinions that are not fashionable can get you sacked. But while we can often agree on what isn’t acceptable – some opinions are ill-informed, illogical, or abusive – this is not a clear line. Narrowing the goalposts of what is acceptable means almost everyone at some time will speak or write out of turn. Should they apologise? Grovel? Resign? Does this affect their ability to do their job, to teach?

Free speech does not mean everyone’s opinion is equally important. But it does mean offence will happen as a by-product of uncomfortable ideas. Fox argues that we have bred a narcissistic generation completely unaccustomed to solving problems on their own and who have been brought up to think that their self-esteem and right to protection from mental trauma is more important than almost anything else. She cites examples of students weeping and demanding consequences as a result of hearing views they find offensive, and lays blame squarely at the previous generation’s door for their part in raising Generation Snowflake.

I began by reading this book like an errant teenager with a borrowed soft-porn novel. It seemed deliciously rebellious to consider that students worried about the Rhodes statue should simply “grow up, sod off and realise that airbrushing history is the not the way smart young people should react to complicated events of the past”.

But I applauded its sound logic, which calls out the mollycoddling of young people that has led to the near criminalisation of the offence of causing psychological harm. Something feels wrong when students are demanding “safe spaces” and shutting down debates because of the “threat” of words and views.

This a brave book, and Fox shows she has intellectual balls in spades by dealing with international terrorism as well as Twitter witch-hunts, the government’s anti-bullying campaign as well as feminist in-fighting. She calls for an end to “hounding”, astutely exploring the idea that we are all just endlessly turning the intellectual tables on each other by claiming victimhood and competing for attention by using what’s convenient and omitting what isn’t. This, she asserts, “weakens the case for arguments based on political principles, objective analysis and philosophical insights”.

Particularly brave is the criticism of teachers, parents and media who have emphasised the lifelong harm that bullying can do to children and their relentless focus on self-esteem, which will be unpopular to the point of sacrilege with some.

But the final chapter – a letter full of advice – is simple and touching, and a lovely contrast to the cynicism of the first two. In it, Fox says: “develop your own philosophy of freedom . . . one that disentangles radicalism and progressive fights for equality and justice.”

If you’re someone prepared to confront your own world view at every turn, you’ll enjoy this book. If not, you might find it difficult reading.



More Reviews

Twenty things to do with a computer (Forward 50)

Back in 1971, when computers in schools were barely conceivable, Seymour Papert and Cynthia Solomon produced a revolutionary paper....

Find out more

Gerry Robinson’s blogs of the week, 10 January 2022

Creating the safe, happy space where children are inspired to talk @EmmaDee77 For those who haven’t been paying attention,...

Find out more

Huh: Curriculum Conversations Between Subject and Senior Leaders

Though not aimed at a primary school audience, this book raises important questions every sector of education should be...

Find out more

Sonia Thompson’s blogs of the new year – 4 January 2022

Three blogs old and new to reflect on at the start of the new year, chosen by Sonia Thompson

Find out more

Dan Morrow’s blogs of the week, 6 December 2021

This week's top blogs cover lesson observations, curriculum interconnectivity, teaching like a champion, and the impact of recent Ofsted...

Find out more

The Juggling Act by Toby Salt

Even if you are not currently in leadership, I’d advise you not to skip this review. Back in 1999,...

Find out more

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One comment

  1. James

    Free speech should be just that – a fundamental societal tolerance that enables anyone, without fear or favour, to express a personal view and have that view openly commented on / challenged by others.

    A integral dynamic of the demise of Free Speech is the demonstrable demise of tolerance; which now puts one at risk of public condemnation and loss of reputation for anyone who openly expresses disagreement with the increasing menu of what is not allowed to be discussed.

    History shows that attacks on free speech together with the device of condemnation is characteristic of totalitarian regimes that leads to widespread acts of inhumanity against the ‘condemned’.

    In many ways the ‘I am offend’ movement has morphed into a 21st century version of the Middle Ages Inquisition that will likely continue to spread if left unchallenged.

    Therefore and though I do not often se eye to eye with aspects the positions that Clare Fox adopts, I whole heartedly welcome her new book and the courage it took to challenge the vociferous ‘I am offended crowd’.