Tim Wilson
Auckland, February 5, 2021
Photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash
Late last year, fashion designer Trelise Cooper was accused of perpetrating “Colonial Violence in Floral Polyester.”
Cooper had named a tiered dress with a trailing hem: “Trail of Tiers.”
Unfortunately, that sounds a lot like ‘Trail of Tears,’ a series of forced death marches Native American tribes were sent on by the US Government between 1830-1850.
A New Zealand academic, Professor Joanna Kidman, discovered the dress online, and posted “I guess it is cool to be ironic about genocide” on Twitter.
Twitter produced headlines; Trelise Cooper swiftly apologised.
Trelise Cooper apologises
Trelise Cooper did not know about the American Trail of Tears.
“The mistake was made out of ignorance,” she wrote in her apology. Use of “ignorance” suggests she should have known more about U.S. history.
Why? The event occurred in another country. In the US, they are still struggling to teach the topic properly to high school students. We have only just mandated our own curriculum about New Zealand history. Ignorance implies an uncommon lack of awareness.
Not knowing something is quite different.
Had Trelise Cooper released a “Parihaka Party” dress, that would be outrageous.
New Zealanders should reasonably be expected to know our own history, and where racial insensitivity and injustice exists it should be challenged. But everyone cannot be expected to know everything. Once, as a social experiment for television, I spent the day asking random people to name the Leader of the Opposition. Most had no idea.
Intent matters
Also, intent matters. We know this from disciplining our children. If Tommy meant to hit Sally, he goes to time out. If he did not, we would encourage him to be careful and show compassion, but he is not reprimanded the same way.
So what was Trelise Cooper guilty of, actually?
She was “guilty” of using a sound-alike phrase that accurately described her own design. The person who found this and made the connection didn’t contact the fashion label directly; instead posting derisively on social media, directing others to the perceived slight.
This is quite a mild example of a much bigger problem within the social media and news media eco-system. We know that the script all too well: public accusation, amplification, pile-on, apology.
Sadly, Cooper’s apology does not address the fundamental problems with this kind of culture of public shaming. It diverts the online heat and headlines away from the target…but the direct result magnifies the appeal of the technique.
Righteous indignation
Anger comes from a natural moral desire to end injustice—a righteous indignation.
It is right to want to bring an end to wrongs like racial injustice and for people to not want to perpetuate insensitivity. But how righteous is it to incinerate someone publicly when you do not know whether they are erring deliberately?
Embarrassing, shaming, and terrorising un-knowing people into submission may be the road to clickbait, but it is not the road to growth and mutual understanding.
Perhaps Professor Kidman could have contacted Ms Cooper directly before the Twitter maelstrom. They might have had a private conversation. If that approach does not work out, then public pressure could be the next step.
We need more authenticity in our discussions of these issues, not less. And we do not need performances of outrage, or apology. We can do better. Let’s give the real thing a try.
Tim Wilson is Executive Director of Maximum Institute based in Auckland. The above story has been sponsored by
