How To Spot — and Root Out — Biased Language
When I first saw the Tweet, I cringed. Then, I took to my keyboard. Here's how we can work on identifying biased language — and why it's critical to remove it from our communication.
Someone I follow online just posted a Tweet that stopped me cold:
After reading this Tweet, the first thing I did was cringe.
On the surface, the Tweet may *appear to* compliment the Mormon community and its approach to raising children. And, really, what’s wrong with that?
A closer look, though, and you’ll see that the Tweet not only stereotypes and oozes judgment but also encourages groupthink and a default mentality.
To be sure, while the Tweet may have been borne from good intention and with no desire to cause harm, it’s actually filled with biased language — something that I believe destroys societies faster than anything else.
Here, you’ll find that I’ve deconstructed the Tweet, then drafted a suggested version that better communicates (what I hope was) the sender’s original intent.
Deconstructing The Original Tweet
Here’s the original Tweet:
“I’m not Mormon. But they raise incredible kids, and I’ve tried to learn from Mormon friends how they do it. You’re going to have people you disagree with. But whenever a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s almost always some good stuff there. Default to looking for that.”
Offense #1: “They”
The Tweet reads: “…they raise incredible kids…” and “…I’ve tried to learn from Mormon friends how they do it…”
I’ll tread delicately yet deliberately as I say that, when I hear someone make a blanket statement about a cultural and/or religious group while using the word “they”, my bullshit meter shoots through the roof. I can’t help but think of phrases like, “They all look alike…” or “They tend to get arrested more often than other groups…” or “They don’t understand what we’re trying to accomplish…” or “They were a much more approachable group than I expected…”
Humans are individual and dynamic and varied. It’s lazy to lump us all into groups and make generalizations. Trust me — as a memoir coach, I’m working with more than one Mormon client, and I’ve learned firsthand that some Mormon families raise their children in ways that are not only deeply troubling but also hardly admirable. The point being: life is not lived in black or white, and no one group has the *corner* on anything — good OR bad.
For just a moment, consider switching a few simple words and phrases in that original Tweet, swapping out “Mormons” and “raising incredible kids” and using some other words and phrases. In doing so, the judgment structure becomes even more evident:
I’m not a Black person. But they have incredible hairstyles. I’ve tried to learn from Black friends how they do it…
I’m not an Asian person. But their kids are always the smartest ones in the class and get into incredible colleges. I’ve tried to learn from Asian friends how they do it…
I’m not a person with a disability. But they have incredible patience in navigating an able-bodied world. I’ve tried to learn from my friends with disabilities how they do it…
Can you better see the judgment? The air of superiority? What the Tweeter suggests is:
I’m not like [X kind of person], but [I like what they do and I want to know how I can achieve what they have].
A better approach: Find common ground, and be specific about the behaviors or outcomes you admire (or struggle with), rather than labeling an entire group as acting a certain way.
Offense #2: “But”
The Tweet reads: “I’m not Mormon. But they raise incredible kids.” It also says: “You’re going to have people you disagree with. But whenever a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s almost always some good there.”
There’s dismissiveness and arrogance in this biased language. Why not just come out and say what you’re really implying — that, despite disagreeing with some of the ways Mormons live, you believe their child-rearing skills are impressive.
A better approach: Be clear about your own biases and motivations, and keep your opinions focused on behavior and outcomes, rather than on any one group of individuals.
Offense #3: Advocating Groupthink & Defaults
The Tweet reads: “…whenever a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s almost always some good there. Default to looking for that.”
So what I’m hearing is that, if a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s not only power and truth in that, but also a suggestion to *go with the group*.
No.
Just NO.
Think about it.
Is life so busy and overwhelming that we need to switch our beliefs to auto-pilot and defaults? Is it too hard to look at a situation and assess its various dynamics? Is it too much to explore why people do the things they do, and to find common ground even when we don’t share the same views?
Or, are we saying that…
…if a bunch of people believe the Second Amendment guarantees their right to own guns, there’s always some good there, so let’s go with that.
…if a bunch of people believe abortion should be banned, there’s always some good there, so let’s go with that.
…if a bunch of people believe the LGBTQIA2S+ community makes them uncomfortable or goes against the bible or doesn’t deserve the same rights as heterosexuals, there’s always some good there, so let’s go with that.
…if a bunch of people believe an election was stolen and choose to rebuke the declared winner, there’s always some good there, so let’s go with that.
…if a bunch of people believe someone on Twitter is a judgmental, arrogant buffoon, there’s always some good there, so let’s go with that.
A better approach: Remind yourself that the more we respect each other as distinct human beings (rather than compliant groups), the better we’ll function as a society. Remind yourself that one size does not fit all. Remind yourself that it’s definitely okay to differ in opinion from *the group* (whatever a *group* is). Remind yourself that it’s critical to remove defaults and exercise an open mind.
Biased Language
Here are some examples of biased language that I, unfortunately, heard while growing up:
Car culture and the stereotype of “all Asian people are bad drivers”
Intelligence and the stereotype that “all Polish people are stupid” or “all blondes are dumb"
Addiction and the stereotype that “all Irish people [or homeless people] are heavy drinkers [or addicts]”
Finances and the stereotype that “all Jewish people are cheap”
Politics and the stereotypes that “all Republicans love Trump” or “all Democrats are bleeding heart liberals” or “all Christians are conservatives” or “all liberals are pro-life”.
And, based on the Tweet in question, perhaps we should add:
Parenting and the stereotype that “all Mormons raise incredible kids”.
Needless to say, biased language doesn’t always convey a “negative” message. Biased language, at its insidious root, serves to perpetuate a “we vs. them” mentality, reinforce biases, and fortify inequalities. Biased language often includes assumptions about others and presents them as facts (“I’m not Mormon. But they raise incredible kids…”).
Owning Our Biases and Opening Our Minds to Other Opinions
As I suggested earlier, not all biased language is obvious or easy to spot (which is what makes it so perilous).
Here’s the original Tweet, as well as my suggested revision.
Original Tweet:
“I’m not Mormon. But they raise incredible kids, and I’ve tried to learn from Mormon friends how they do it. You’re going to have people you disagree with. But whenever a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s almost always some good stuff there. Default to looking for that.” (49 words)
What’s not working with that Tweet?
Judgment
“I’m not Mormon. But they…”
Failure to name or own one’s biases
“You’re going to have people you disagree with.”
Advocating groupthink & defaults
“But whenever a bunch of people believe a thing, there’s almost always some good stuff there. Default to looking for that.”
Suggested Revision:
“I’m interested to learn more about how to raise strong, happy, confident, independent children. Though my cultural and religious views differ from those of, say, the Mormon Church, I admire what I’ve heard about its focus on family. I’m eager to hear others’ views on positive child-rearing practices. Thanks!” (49 words)
What’s different in the revised Tweet?
Clarity of purpose, need, or desire.
“I’m interested to learn more about how to raise strong, happy, confident, independent children.”
Own your own biases and make them known.
“…my cultural and religious views differ from those of, say, the Mormon Church…”
“I admire what I’ve heard about [the Mormon Church’s] focus on family.”Actively engage with others.
“I’m eager to hear others’ views on positive child-rearing practices. Thanks!”
I haven’t yet reached out to the Tweet’s author. I’m still processing what was written and what I might want to say. And, I’d really appreciate hearing from you on this subject.
What examples of language bias did you grow up with? What examples of language bias have you run across recently? What are your thoughts on the original Tweet? How does the suggested revision sit with you?
Excellent analysis and great rewrite!