Is the joke really about clowns?
The “creepy clown” phenomena is a major safety concern in the U.S. and Canada. At the University of Guelph, it has also been a lively topic of discussion, given that we’ve had a few of our own clown sightings on campus.
In one case, a “clown” was carrying a series of handwritten signs, some of which appropriated the language and slogans of various social justice movements, including sexual violence education campaigns and the Black Lives Matter movement.
Our community spoke up by engaging directly with the “clown” and on social media. Many felt that the clown should have been charged with inciting hatred; or at least publicly condemned; for ridiculing serious social issues that impact our community, such as rape culture and racial discrimination.
“…ridiculing serious social issues that impact our community, such as rape culture and racial discrimination.”
Others argued that the “clown” simply borrowed the highly recognizable language of popular social justice movements to bring attention to the plight of professional clowns, many of whom have seen their livelihood and personal safety threatened. Seriously, wasn’t it just a joke?
Universities have a unique responsibility to promote the values of free expression and academic freedom; to engage with potentially sensitive and controversial subjects; all the while adhering to and championing the laws that protect and uphold human rights, and in some instances, limit free expression. It’s not just a good idea, it’s the spirit of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. When these values and our laws appear to conflict, they also demand our effort to find balance, common ground, and sometimes, to compromise.
In Canada, hate speech must be deliberate, severe, and directly targeted at an identifiable group. It’s a high bar to reach—and universities deal almost exclusively with conflicts and complaints that will never see the inside of a courtroom.
“In Canada, hate speech must be deliberate, severe, and directly targeted at an identifiable group.”
We know that jokes, slights, and satire—regardless of intent or interpretation—can have a profound and lasting impact, even if it does not meet the legal standard for hate speech or the balance of probabilities required by our human rights tribunals.
On the other hand, if we are quick to condemn and reprimand any form of contentious, controversial, or downright offensive and vapid speech, this could have a chilling effect on the spirit of our laws and effectively contradict our academic mission.
How do we learn from one another if we must also avoid asking questions and risk making mistakes?
“…jokes, slights, and satire—regardless of intent or interpretation—can have a profound and lasting impact…”
So here are a few questions to consider:
You’ve decided to raise awareness about the plight of professional clowns by dressing up and staging a protest. You are looking for a memorable slogan. Something short and snappy. Should you come up with something original? Why not appropriate the name of an internationally known campaign that promotes awareness about the devastating impact of systemic racism and violence against black persons? Or, maybe you might riff on one of those popular hashtags that bring attention to sexual violence and over 90 per cent of women who will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
Question: Do you truly believe that the plight of professional clowns is commensurate with the experiences of black people and women over the last several hundred years?
“Do you truly believe that the plight of professional clowns is commensurate with the experiences of black people and women over the last several hundred years?”
If you do—okay, free expression is part of what our campus and our country are all about.
But, if it’s only “a joke,” I have one more question: sexual assault, racism, violence against women, professional clowns—who is the joke about?
Building an inclusive campus is everyone’s responsibility. Does this mean that we cannot say controversial things, make mistakes, or make jokes at the risk of offending someone? Absolutely not. All we need to do is: consider the impact, then own it.
Photo courtesy of Tatiane-Fontes CC-BY-NC-SA-2.0.