A Critical Analysis of the “Language Contamination Series” by Courage is a Habit - Part 3

This essay analyzes the problematic messaging in a Courage is a Habit resource on countering radical indoctrination in K-2 schools.  It reveals that most claims are oversimplified or unsubstantiated.  The author encourages the reader to question the credibility of those who distribute claims that are similarly unfounded.  It makes a convincing call for a shift away from divisive rhetoric and towards respectful and constructive dialogue, a shift that is exceedingly important in today’s internet age.  Read parts 1 and  2.

A Critical Analysis of the “Language Contamination Series” by Courage is a Habit

Part 3 - Conclusion

Their Call to Action

We have seen how the first part of the pamphlet attempted to define “language contamination”, where words used by “critical race theorists” and transgender advocates “don’t mean what you think they mean.” We also saw examples of phrases and what they actually mean according to Courage is a Habit’s perspective. 

The document then encourages parents to ask the following when hearing about virtues at in their Call to Action: “Through WHOSE lens is that trait being taught?”

Here is the text of the last page of the document, their “Call to Action”:

CALL TO ACTION

NEW QUESTION PARENTS SHOULD ASK

Every time a school personnel tells you, "We're just teaching about <insert virtue>," your immediate feeling should not be, "Oh good, we teach that at home too." We want you to train yourself to ask, "Through WHOSE lens is that trait being taught?"

Traits are not good or bad; it depends on the purpose for which they are being taught. Today in K-12, traits are often taught through the lens of a Critical Race Theorist pushing for anti-American values or a Transgender Activist seeking to separate children from their parents.

"THROUGH WHOSE LENS IS THAT TRAIT BEING TAUGHT?"

Analysis & reflection

In my opinion, this does not effectively conclude the claims put forth by Courage is a Habit, because it does not address or clarify any of the previous statements. Instead, it introduces a new and only tangentially related question about questioning the lens through which concepts are being taught at school. While this may be a valid concern, it does not clearly connect to the rest of the content of the pamphlet. Furthermore, the statement seems to be hypocritical since it urges parents to be skeptical of the perspective from which traits are being taught, yet the organization itself seems to be promoting a specific ideological viewpoint.

In this analysis, I have suggested that the language used by Courage is a Habit is often inflammatory and can lead to harmful stereotypes and polarization. Therefore, I suggest that it’s important to approach this statement with critical thinking and consider the broader context of the information that they are producing. While questioning the lens through which virtues are being taught can be a useful exercise, it is essential to do so in a way that promotes productive dialogue and doesn’t perpetuate harmful stereotypes or incite unnecessary fear or outrage.

Conclusion

Review of my analysis

In part 2 of this essay, I have shown how some of the claims that Courage is a Habit in this pamphlet are unsubstantiated. Specifically, I have shown how the claims about what people mean when they say “comprehensive sex ed” and “keep secrets from parents” are not substantiated. Furthermore, the claim related to what people mean when they say “teachers know best” is not necessarily substantiated. In this case there wasn’t enough evidence to say whether the claim was substantiated or not based on the comments provided to illustrate it.

My analysis did not include a commentary about whether the first point (“parents are the abusers”) was substantiated but rather focused on the problematic nature of the claim.

I determined that one claim was indeed substantiated by the comments used to illustrate it (“children can make medical decisions”) but that the claim was a problematic one.

Ultimately, I have shown that the majority of the claims did not show enough reasonable evidence to be substantiated, and the ones that did, were problematic, either from overly simplifying a nuanced debate, or from containing harmful and divisive rhetoric.

Concerns about the “parental rights” platform

Courage is a Habit starts its own analysis of the Twitter comments pointing out how parents are being called abusers, and it ends with the same claim. In this way, the pamphlet is calling out what it sees as anti-parent behavior. The statements also suggest a lack of trust in some parents' ability to care for and make decisions for their own children, and overall suggest a negative view of parents, or of the role of parents, in certain situations. However, the claims of parents being accused of being abusive are not substantiated by the comments themselves, and I have shown throughout this essay how the way these claims were approached was not helpful.

The idea of anti-parent sentiment should be carefully examined, and claims made by politicians and other public figures should be scrutinized for accuracy and evidence-based support. These claims may be based on misinterpretations or exaggerations of opposing viewpoints, exacerbating polarization and conflict and contributing to further misunderstandings of the educational system.

A hopeful invitation

Ultimately, as a society, we need to find ways to engage in respectful and constructive dialogue about parenting and education, while also recognizing the importance of protecting the safety and well-being of children.

Fear may be a habit, but so is anger. Each time you want to act impulsively and lash out, it becomes a little easier to lose control.

Courage may be a habit, and so is restraint. When we take time to reflect and cool down before responding, it becomes a little easier next time to avoid escalating conflicts and find more constructive solutions.

In my opinion, the language used in this pamphlet exemplifies the very thing it urges people to be wary of: contaminated language, or language that seems to say one thing, but carries a different meaning. In this case, when considering the disruptions that have been happening at school board meetings across the nation, I worry that the banner of "courage" has been used to justify bullying directed towards adults. Perhaps it is part of a cycle of escalated outrage; and it is one that we need to break out of.

I worry that the banner of "courage" has been used to justify bullying directed towards adults. Perhaps it is part of a cycle of escalated outrage; and it is one that we need to break out of.

My hope moving forward is that as a culture, we can engage in more careful, controlled reasoning. That we can recognize inflammatory and polarizing rhetoric when we see it for what it is, without getting sucked into the vortex of fear and anger. That we will hold each other accountable on social media for respectful and productive discourse. I also hope that we will seek to be reflective of our own beliefs and biases, and compassionate to understand the perspective of other sides, even of those sides that we don’t agree with. And may we be brave, both in our speaking and in our restraint; in our compassion and in our peacemaking.

I hope and I pray that this essay will be an impactful contribution to our community. I am confident that we are capable of inspiring positive change in one another and encourage each other towards more thoughtful and respectful dialogue.

Thanks for reading!

Blog post by Molly Sturm