Controversy and hatred are not the same thing

The internet is a fantastic hive of information. What was once only the refuge of the young, the adept and the forward thinking has now become accessible to all. It almost goes without saying that this is – of course – a tremendously good thing. Computer clubs have cropped up around the country to allow more and more people (particularly the increasing numbers of senior citizens) to use this fantastic resource.

Unfortunately, issues inevitably arise from having such a large percentage of the population utilising the power of the World Wide Web. The reason for this? Broadly because lots of people aren’t very nice. The constant cover of anonymity or a pseudonym (for sites that laughably claim they won’t allow people not to be open about their identity) lead to the capacity for aggression and, as with anything, self-righteous and indignant overreactions.

It’s simple to dismiss negative comments on social networking or forum sites as attempts at “trolling”, but when you look a little deeper you’ll see that the trolls are sussed out fairly quickly. The real issues are the commenters who genuinely believe what they’re writing.

For instance: a video goes up on YouTube supporting gay rights – be it the right to marry or something as simple as the right not to be denied service at the whim of a petty cashier. The majority of comments are positive and rational, supporting the civil rights movement and often telling personal stories. Inevitably though, there are some that are less progressive.

Attached to these negative comments will be an influx of hate, pity, explanations etc. which many of the negative commenters will engage with. They frequently cite aggression in the face of their opinion that “I don’t believe in homos” (or something equally ridiculous) as affirmation that people who support the idea of equality are all crazy, violent, godless commies.

Very frequently though, will someone – who had previously shown support of the issue raised – reply to a hateful or ignorant comment with “That’s your opinion and you have the right to keep it”.

Hatred is not an opinion and should not be treated as such. However you justify taking the rights away from someone based on attributes beyond their control is not a good enough reason. To say “Gays shouldn’t get married” or “Homosex is sin” doesn’t count as an opinion any more than the idea that people of a certain race are in some way inferior or that the sun revolves around the earth. You forfeit your right to an opinion when you feel the need to voice something like that.

It’s at this point that people will tell me that my opinion is in no way more valid, and I suppose they’re correct – if you are content in ignoring the fact that my opinion doesn’t involve sectioning off and discriminating against people who just want to enter a shop or book a room at a motel. But it’s more than that. If a person says that gay marriage will bring about actual problems they’d better be prepared to back that up pretty heavily, otherwise it doesn’t affect them and they have no right to complain. The burden of proof rests in the hands of the aggressors.

Here, the word ‘controversial’ is batted around as if this is the key to the undoing of any rational argument: “Just because my argument is controversial doesn’t mean it’s wrong” – as if controversy is in any way an excuse of bigotry. Lots of controversial things are terrible, hence the controversy. ‘Controversial’ has now been adopted as a euphemism for “barely constructed and detrimental to society” or, more simply,  “needlessly offensive”. “Controversial humour” doesn’t mean progressive or unusual anymore, now it just means jokes about race, creed, sexuality and gender are now fair game.

The best thing to do with these people is not to appease them by implying their prejudice is acceptable, it’s to simply ignore them and hope they see reason. Eventually (I’m sure) we can drag them kicking and screaming into the late 20th century, and then we can work from there. Still, it worries me that we have reached 2014 – what should be the zenith of global society up to this point – and all I can see is the mountain we have yet to climb.