- Source: Tone policing
A tone argument (also called tone policing) is a type of ad hominem aimed at the tone of an argument instead of its factual or logical content in order to dismiss a person's argument. Ignoring the truth or falsity of a statement, a tone argument instead focuses on the emotion with which it is expressed. This is a logical fallacy because a person can be angry while still being rational. Nonetheless, a tone argument may be useful when responding to a statement that itself does not have rational content, such as an appeal to emotion.
The notion of tone policing became widespread in U.S. social activist circles by the mid-2010s. It was widely disseminated in a 2015 comic issued by the Everyday Feminism website. Activists have argued that tone policing has been regularly employed by feminist and anti-racism advocates, criticizing the way that their opponents presented their arguments rather than engaging with the arguments themselves.
Proponents of this viewpoint contend that these expectations tend to give preference to a specific mode of communication often associated with traits like masculinity, high levels of education, and a detached, "rational" style of expression. They argue that this emphasis on a particular communication style may inadvertently reinforce existing societal inequalities, including those rooted in colonial history, White-supremacist structures, cis-hetero-patriarchy, and capitalist systems.
Tone policing may marginalize individuals who naturally incorporate diverse linguistic features, including frequent use of filler words such as "like" and "um," and employ vocal variety, including vocal fry and uptalk, in their speech. Notably, in the realm of social justice, scholars and experts often underscore the significance of emotions, such as anger, as they are frequently associated with personal experiences of injustice and can serve as motivators for those engaged in social change efforts.
The proliferation of social media platforms has contributed to the prevalence of tone policing in online discussions, particularly in contexts characterized by brevity and anonymity. In these digital environments, there is an increased focus on tone over substantive arguments.
Psychological research has explored the potential effects of tone policing, suggesting that individuals consistently subjected to such policing can experience frustration, feelings of silencing, and self-doubt. This psychological toll can significantly deter individuals from actively participating in conversations pertaining to social justice matters.
Additionally, it is noteworthy that educational institutions can be spaces where tone policing manifests, particularly when students advocate for change or raise concerns about systemic inequalities. This may influence communication norms within academic settings.
See also
Fallacy
Righteous indignation