We’re living in an age where anytime a person sees someone else doing something they don’t like, that person is at risk of being shamed across social media. The alleged offender’s actual motives never matter, all that matters is that the person who shamed them felt offended.
But assigning motive to someone without knowing their true motive is wrong. Not everything is racism or sexism, and people need to be more cautious before sending online outrage mobs against potentially innocent people.
Case in point: A woman in Melbourne, Australia was riding a bus when she noticed a young man walking up to other women and sticking his hand in their faces. This woman said the man sat near her and stared at him. She claimed the women he tried to interact with were visibly fearful. She wrote an expletive-laden Facebook post about the incident, calling the man a “low life,” “creep,” “loser” and “festering turd of a human being.”
She did not know this man, but immediately jumped to conclusions about his motives. She even took a photo of the man (without his consent) and plastered it on Facebook, where her post received more than 80,000 likes and nearly 10,000 shares.
The man she shamed is reportedly autistic, and likes giving people high fives.
Multiple local sources told the Daily Mail Australia that the man is a regular on the train, and that he leaves people alone if they ask.
“He exclaims and utter noises very suddenly at times and he does hover over people but he never touches anyone without asking,” one source said.
Others took to social media after seeing the woman’s post to defend the man.
“This man was trying to get a woman to give him a high five and I know this man he has a disability,” one woman wrote online. “This man is disabled… A simple reminder of personal space and friends vs strangers and he understands.”
Yet this man was being called a predator and receiving death threats.
The woman has since taken down her Facebook post, as an online mob has turned on her for attacking a disabled man (others claim his disability doesn’t excuse his behavior).
This isn’t the first time something like this has happened in Australia. Last year a man took a selfie in front of a Star Wars display at a Target as a joke for his kids. A mother didn’t realize he was taking a selfie and assumed he was taking pictures of her kids. So she took his photo, posted it online and rallied an online outrage mob and reported him to police. The man turned himself into police, who looked at his phone and didn’t charge him.
This man and his children ended up being affected by this woman’s rush to judgment. Police said the woman was apologetic.
These kinds of things will continue to happen so long as people assume that everyone else’s actions are sinister. Maybe instead of assuming the worst about people, we could all stop and think about the possibility of an innocent explanation.
I’ve written before about motives being wrongly assigned to people. I’ve given the example of holding my purse close whenever anyone walks by, but that risks a black or Latino person thinking I’m doing it because of their skin color. I do this on the metro with my phone as well, whenever the doors open.
When I first moved to D.C., I saw a man try to steal someone’s phone — the doors were about to close and he reached in and grabbed a man’s phone who was standing too close to the door. Fortunately, the doors weren’t actually closing, so the victim was able to jump out of the train and chase the thief. But you can believe I’ve held my phone tight ever since.
But if someone saw me clutching my phone, they could assign motive to me, because they don’t know what I witnessed five years ago. It’s why you can’t always assume someone’s motives are rooted in racism or sexism or something else sinister.
Ashe Schow is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
