Tone Police: Silencing Persons of Color
By: Aniya Ingram, Southern University Alumni & Louisiana Progress Former College Fellow
As a kid my mother raised me on the sentiment, “It's not what you say, but how you say it.” As I got older, I realized how much my mother cared about what I thought and felt, but she refused to tolerate disrespect from a child that she raised. My experience in the legislative session made me realize that the sentiment only stood true in certain instances: 1) When people actually care what you think and feel, and 2) When what you think and feel does not challenge the hidden agendas and biases of those on the receiving end of what you say.
Tone policing is a tactic that people tend to use to dismiss the validity of an argument by critiquing the way it is presented, as opposed to addressing the content of the argument. The act of tone policing is especially insidious when applied to persons of color, as it perpetuates the notion that their grievances and perspectives are less valid due to perceived aggression or passion in their tone and delivery. In focusing on the “tone” of the message rather than its substance, those in power can effectively silence marginalized voices and avoid engaging with the uncomfortable truths they bring to light. In legislative settings, where passionate advocacy is necessary to challenge systemic inequities and injustices, tone policing is prevalent and often causes disputes among legislators and members of the public who participate in the legislative process.
During my tenure as a Louisiana Progress College Fellow I gained a deeper understanding of those ideas during trips to the Louisiana state legislature, where I spent most of my time observing committee hearings, legislators, and testimony from citizens who came to speak on bills. I saw the mannerisms, reactions, and participation of the members of the Louisiana House and Senate. I watched debates on hot-button topics and topics that gained less traction in the media. I learned a lot.
For instance, I quickly realized that despite the open discussion of bills among members, the vote outcomes had usually already been determined before the debate, and you could almost always tell when they knew their side would win. There's often a lingering tension in a legislative hearing. Valid opposition is met with silence, and the refusal of some legislators to acknowledge that validity is jarring. Smugness drawn on their faces, the majority needs not argue to win, just vote.
Some of the bills our legislators introduce are insensitive and inconsiderate to certain cultures and, at times, they’re outright racist. For example, in the February special session on crime, much of the legislation was targeted at an already marginalized group that generally lacks resources and access. During that session, the legislature voted to lower the legal age when people can be tried as an adult, loosen gun laws, and eliminate parole. That will make it easier for young offenders to be tossed in jail and left there to rot.
When it was made evident that the changes being sought would disproportionately and unfairly harm Black people, legislators who supported those bills became extremely defensive. They vehemently argued that their intent was genuine and their hearts were clear of inherent prejudice. But just because you don’t deliberately think of ways to continue marginalizing a group, that doesn’t mean the impact of the legislation won’t contribute to further marginalization. To search your heart, and for it to be known, sometimes requires you to address impurity within through exploring hidden prejudices and biases that unknowingly consume you.
On a national level, there was a recent occurrence in a legislative setting where a person of color was tone policed after being criticized for what she was wearing. In what was meant to be a hearing pertaining to the U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s refusal to turn over audio recordings between President Biden and special counsel Robert Hur, U.S. Representative Jasmine Crockett from Texas asked Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia, “Do you know what we are here for?” To which Rep. Greene responded, “I don’t think you know what you are here for… I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you’re reading.” That was followed by a few more exchanges, including a shot Rep. Crockett took at Rep. Greene said, “I’m just curious, if someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody’s bleach-blonde bad-built butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct?”
Rep. Crockett was then treated as if she had done too much or had taken it too far with her remarks, despite the lack of reprimand for Rep. Greene, who also declined to apologize for the comment about Rep. Crockett’s eyelashes. This was a clear example of tone policing, and the footage of the exchange that surfaced in the media created some interesting dialogue about how people of color are treated in predominantly white spaces.
The interaction between Representative Crockett and Representative Greene exemplifies how tone policing is used to undermine the credibility and authority of Black women, especially in politics. Representative Greene attempted to sideline Representative Crockett’s voice and distract from substantive issues at hand by attacking her appearance, instead of engaging with her arguments. The behavior Representative Greene displayed is somewhat common in legislative settings, and it reinforces the barriers that Black politicians face. Politicians of minority status are required to navigate not only the political challenges of their roles but also the racial biases that seek to diminish their presence and impact. That dispute, and the way it was handled, highlight the necessity for a political environment where all voices are respected and heard on the merit of their contributions, rather than being dismissed based on superficial judgements.
Exchanges like the one between Rep. Crockett and Rep. Greene depict the reality for people of color in politics. Black kids are raised to understand we have to be twice as good and we have to be overqualified because our first strike is the color of our skin. We’re told we’ll be discredited and deterred. And, at some point in most Black people's lives, they are challenged by the perception others have of them. Racism is still prevalent, and to act as if it does not exist, and to grow outraged when it is pointed out, is a despicable display of privilege. Tone policing is divisive and tends to leave problems unresolved, in the case that tone is disrespectful or belittling there’s nothing wrong with pointing it out, but to silence one simply because you don’t agree is diminishing to the democratic process.
