Why is a deleted Facebook post even making headlines?
The University of Guelph’s Central Student Association (CSA) posted an apology on Facebook for playing Lou Reed’s “Walk on the Wild Side” during bus pass distribution.
The CSA apologized because they thought Reed’s song was “hurtful to our friends in the trans community,” according to a Facebook post, which has since been removed.
Since the post, several media outlets such as the Independent have criticized the CSA for misunderstanding the song’s lyrics, for not knowing Reed’s history with the LGBTQ+ community, and for trying to censor art.
On reason
While some of the arguments against the CSA may be reasonable, the amount of attention the post has received is unreasonable.It’s unreasonable because it’s obvious that the underlying purpose of the Facebook apology was a well-intentioned attempt at inclusion, it was neither a criticism of Reed nor a secret agenda to censor art, and because the post was deleted.
On political correctness
The unreasonable response indicates that the annoyance at the CSA is due to our society’s growing frustration with the culture of political correctness—a culture that many perceive as being upheld by “young, liberal students,” as described by the Independent.
People dislike political correctness because it forces us to learn new ways of communicating; being uncertain about whether or not your vocabulary is acceptable is uncomfortable.
But doesn’t the underlying purpose of political correctness make our collective discomfort worthwhile?Isn’t the point of political correctness to refrain from using language that marginalizes and dehumanizes people?
On interpretation
The CSA may have found the lyrics to “Walk on the Wild Side” problematic because it was unclear to them if Reed was portraying trans people as wild and, therefore, uncivilized and less than human—a major aspect of racial prejudice that is often taught to university students.
Of course, if you listen to the lyrics closely, familiarize yourself with Reed’s history, and know that he was friends with some of the people he’s singing about then people would be better able to interpret that the trans community is being celebrated in this song.
Either way, as others have said, art is open to interpretation, but that also means it’s open to misinterpretation.On censorship
Some may disagree with the CSA censoring their playlists in the future; those people have the right to disagree. However, people also have the right to censor themselves, which is what the CSA stated they would do in the future when unsure if something would be hurtful to their community.
There are worse things than a bunch of university students apologizing to each other on Facebook because they don’t know if something they did hurt someone belonging to a marginalized group.Perhaps the proper solution in such cases is to educate the students because, despite their involvement in student politics, they are still university students.
Assuming that the CSA set out to insult the legacy of a famous musician due to some “young, liberal” agenda that seeks to destroy free speech and expression through art as we know it is just as mistaken as the CSA’s interpretation of Reed’s music.
Photo courtesy of Lou Reed.