The ‘Asshole’ Fallacy

This word tends to get overused…and it downplays the toxicity that can arise from identity politics

One of the most overused words in the English language has become the word “asshole.” Generally, it’s wielded as an insult to describe someone who engages in selfish, thoughtless, rude, malicious actions. When taken by itself, this purpose is fine.

Unfortunately, over time, the term “asshole” has become a cheap excuse to dismiss the bad behavior of people who happen to belong to various marginalized groups. This is a subtle, backhanded way to propagate the myth that minorities can never be guilty of “-isms” related to their minority status.

So, in lay terms…

BIPOC people are never racist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

Women are never sexist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

LGBT+ people are never orientationist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

Older people are never ageist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

Poor people are never classist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

Members of the disability community are never ableist. They’re just sometimes “assholes.”

Lather, rinse, repeat.

May I ask — with a bit of humor, but mostly in all seriousness: what ASSHOLE came up with this rule?

Writing for The Philosophers’ Magazine, Aaron James defines “asshole” as a way of expressing disapproval. Or, to quote an illustrative example he provides:

…the asshole is the guy who systemically allows himself special advantages in cooperative life out of an entrenched sense of entitlement that immuni[z]es him against the complaints of other people.

Yet, he points out how some people can acknowledge that someone is an asshole without necessarily objecting to their moral personality; it may be a pragmatic statement, lacking scorn or animus.

Obviously, James refers to the “asshole” designation in a rather androcentric manner. Most people would agree that women and nonbinary people can be assholes, too.

The problem, according to James, arises when we sterilize “asshole” as an “objective expressive” rather than as a term suggesting vices or pejoratives. I’m in agreement with him on this…but let’s take a closer look at some of the root psychology that can describe its usage.

During the early-aughts, I struggled (as an undergraduate) to fit in amongst my college fraternity. A lot of our alumni were cliquey GenXers who embraced the type of apathetic “tech bro” demeanor that you’d expect from younger-to-middle-aged dudes in Silicon Valley. They viewed me (and guys younger than me), as a “Xennial,” with the same ageist contempt we’ve seen from Boomers who take a “Get off my lawn!” attitude toward young people in general.

One of them, a home sommelier named Ben, identified as a Libertarian and was particularly argumentative. Our alumni and active undergrads often discussed politics and social issues on one section of our chapter messageboard. Along with joining in the dismissive tone of other guys from his generational cohort, Ben would often minimalize strong points made by people when he’d utter the common cliché of:

“Opinions are like assholes — everyone has one, and most of them smell bad.”

Um, no, Ben…not all opinions are created equal. Some people are speaking from an informed perspective, where they combine their life experiences with the compassion they have for others.

A true asshole is someone who centers themselves (and their worldview) in a majority of conversations without taking into account factors outside of their own thought-bubble.

We must consider how personal experiences may segue into greater societal trends. What are the flawed assumptions people make about strangers in daily life? How does that arrogance stir up anger toward dynamics that are systemic, cultural, and/or social?

In a GQ interview, Clay Skipper talks with Geoff Nunberg, who wrote the book Ascent of the A-Word. Nunberg examines how the term “asshole” often implies an intimate relationship between the accused and the accuser. He calls this dynamic “enormously destructive of the fabric of public life” because it gives people free license to act like juvenile delinquents.

I agree with Nunberg in one respect: yes, when we behave like assholes to other people, it becomes especially hurtful and infuriating if the behavior is coming from someone to whom we feel emotionally close — or from someone who is close to us in physical proximity. As an example, Nunberg suggests that we’d be more likely to refer to our noisy neighbor as an “asshole” rather than using that same term to describe a ruthless dictator such as Saddam Hussein.

But, in another respect, I slightly disagree with part of Nunberg’s premise. In my view, impersonal contempt from strangers or acquaintances is too readily written off as “Oh, they’re just being an asshole.”

We’re not holding members of the general population, as a whole, accountable for behaviors that are far more serious than the trite excuse-making where we’d shrug how somebody is “merely an asshole.”

Public figures and members of identity-based groups can end up as the beneficiaries of this special treatment.

One of my least favorite TV characters in recent times has been Jazz Forster (played by Chloe Bailey) on the Freeform dramedy Grownish. As the resident “sassy diva” of her college peer group, Jazz is portrayed as a hyperwoke caricature — the personality type who society uses in order to generalize and tarnish the image of Zoomers. Since Jazz is a young woman who is also Black, many leftist observers would give her a free pass for her vitriol.

But the other main characters of color on Grownish — Zoey, Aaron, Vivek, Ana, Luka, and even Jazz’s own identical twin sister, Sky — are all written with multifaceted passion. They generally discuss their attitudes and perspectives with respect and willingness to explore discussions from different angles.

By contrast, not only is Jazz racist toward White people and sexist toward men (and yes, women of color can be guilty of both!), she’s just an all-around shitty “friend.”

She’s materialistic, heteronormative, judgmental, sadistic, and ladles out backhanded compliments. She rarely exhibits genuine sympathy for anyone outside of her own identity. She takes her friendships for granted…I don’t even understand why Zoey’s friend group tolerates her. If someone like Jazz was constantly hanging out around me, I might be inclined to transfer colleges!

Calling Jazz a mere “asshole” doesn’t do her cruelty justice. And, while you might argue how she’s a fictional character, you can bet that Jazz is an archetype reflective of actual people in the real world. Let’s look at some more of them…

Openly-gay advice columnist Dan Savage is often praised for his biting “humor.” Critics kiss up to him because he was the powerhouse behind the short-lived ABC sitcom The Real O’Neals — which was indeed groundbreaking in that it starred the first openly-gay teenaged character in an American sitcom. Savage is also lauded for founding the “It Gets Better” campaign.

I have major problems with “It Gets Better,” as it treats the oppression faced by Queer youth glibly in that it ignores our obstacles related to socioeconomics, neurobiology, and regional isolation. Furthermore, in his Savage Love column, he constantly dismisses and condescends his readers. Savage tends to dispense his advice along a framework of neofeminist, neoliberal, politically-correct reductionism.

As a gay man, I’m ashamed that Savage gets to be out there representing “my people.” The harmful narrative he’s creating extends far beyond someone just being “an asshole.”

Then we have Michael Eric Dyson, the Vanderbilt sociologist who is often held up as an avatar of black excellence as he regularly makes the rounds on the talk show circuit. For certain, Dyson is extremely intelligent when it comes to sharing multicultural history, researching data, and identifying systemic problems that need to be rectified. I definitely wouldn’t categorize him as “dumb.” I don’t question his sincerity in wanting to achieve systemic progress for Black people.

I do, on the other hand, call out Dyson for being a glorified performance artist. He has no appetite for well-reasoned or civil conversation. The personal insults he lobs at debate rivals have all the finesse of a carnival barker. It’s very likely that he knows exactly what he is doing, and — similarly to Robin DiAngelo — is consciously cashing in on his grifter shtick. If America has any hope of making real progress on race relations, it won’t be on this bozo’s watch.

It would be very easy to minimalize Dyson as simply “an asshole” — if he wasn’t normalizing anti-White racism and sectarian privilege. But he is and does.

And, of course, who could forget The View’s very own ray of sunshine, comedienne Joy Behar? Now, I do find Behar quite funny when she’s opining on human behavior — and human vices, including her own — in an egalitarian way. In all the years I’ve watched The View, she has elicited some major belly-laughs from me on many occasions.

On the other hand, Behar harms the national discourse by flouting her misandry toward men (and boys), her ageism toward younger generations, and her own internalized racism. She is the human embodiment of “celebrity privilege” — insisting that “her people” (comedians) be given a blanket free pass solely on their status as entertainers per se.

Behar could be called “an asshole” if she was just lamely trying to couch ALL of this commentary in silly humor. But the fact that she takes her own worldview so seriously is what’s so dangerous — especially when it encourages and incites modeling behavior from viewers at home.

In 2013, photographer Marc Beaulac created a Reddit forum entitled “Am I the Asshole?” As characterized by journalist Tove K. Danovich, this platform allows users to turn to each other for accountability. With more than 2 million subscribers, someone posts their account of an interpersonal conflict in which they were a participant. Other members chime in to opine whether they believe the person who’d posted about the situation was right or wrong.

According to Danovich, AITA’s moderators try to promote civility and respect. Their goal is to provide an outlet where folks process advice and channel it to change their daily interactions for the better. Yet, like with most messageboards, members can get censored or banned for violating forum rules. Their individual motivations create this climate: some people frequent AITA because they want to help others, whereas some of them wish to be voyeurs or express moral superiority. Some are insightful, but others are vengeful.

We shouldn’t turn to platforms such as AITA in the hopes of diagnosing social ills. It’s very easy for onlookers to chalk up someone’s actions to being indicative of “an asshole” — while simultaneously excusing their racism, sexism, ableism, classism, orientationism, beautyism, or ageism.

Please refer to my piece entitled “The ‘Hurt Feelings’ Fallacy” to receive a primer on how we can all avoid leveraging a person’s identity against them. Scapegoating, gaslighting, and victim-blaming never lead to anyplace good.