The Non-apology Apology

May have posted this before, and if that bothers you, I'm sorry ....

When did that become the appropriate way to take ownership of something you did wrong?

The Karen from New York is just the latest one. Not apologizing for being wrong, but more feeling bad that your feelings got hurt.

Is being wrong once in a while so bad? And when we are, can't we just say, "I'm sorry for MY actions"?

Or is that too much to ask?

 

I'm sorry you feel that way.

 

Its not that hard. Just say "I'm sorry for what I did."

 

Perfect! And stop! No explanations, no qualifiers!

 

"I'm sorry IF anyone was offended." Always loved (hated!) that one.

 

"I'm sorry if anyone was offended" is so bad and so often ridiculed it's hard to believe anyone who bothers to consult anything more evolved than a dog before releasing their apology would use that terminology. It's the "thoughts and prayers" of apologizing.

How about a little introspection. "I didn't think I was racist, but I'm horrified by my actions and need to really evaluate my own biases and how I react to situations."

 

"Mistakes were made."
The Catholic confession is pretty daunting - they've made it easier - but it really does force you to address your faults by verbalizing them. But I agree at some point "apologizing" was viewed by some as "weakness." I've always figured some political careers could have been extended with apologies instead of denials and stonewalling. You apologize quickly and the thing you are apologizing for doesn't even make it to the end of the news cycle today.

 

I don't know if it's a deliberate tactic or a subconscious defense mechanism, but it does seem like there's an effort in these non-pologies to not actually take that much ownership. The language used gives it away.

"I'm sorry if you were offended...."
"I'm sorry you misinterpreted/misconstrued/misunderstood what I said...."
"I'm sorry if what I said offended anyone...."

All centering those hearing the apology and/or taking offense rather than the one making the apology. The onus is on the people making a fuss rather than the perpetrator of the odious act. The thinking behind it seems to be that the apologizer has fulfilled their obligation by apologizing -- genuine contrition or acknowledgment of harm to others be damned. To expect more would evidently be an undue burden and start veering into 'grievance politics'. This is to say nothing of "I'm sorry to those who were ACTUALLY offended....", which is its own kind of awful.

Short of media training on a societal level, it's hard to see a good way to fix this in the short term. Apologizing well -- with genuine remorse and taking concrete steps to make sure it doesn't happen again -- feels like one of those things that is best taught in childhood, before attitudes harden and stakes rise. It doesn't even have to be that complicated. Using clear, unambiguous language, say 1) what you did wrong, 2) why it was wrong, and 3) how your behavior will change going forward (with the assumption of 4) and mean it).

 

Not sure if the non-apology or the "I never apologize" thing is worse.

I know (and am related to) way too many people who fall into the latter category. Having said that, I need to start saying I'm sorry instead of just showing it and hoping people catch on.

tlR Using your words is a good thing.

 

To a point though I agree with him - if the first thing a lot of people know about you is the worst thing you've ever done - despite whatever good you have done in your life or how you normally treat people - it's somewhat unfair. Goodness knows I've said some awful things and done things I shouldn't have, but the people who know me would consider me a decent person.
Now something like Rice did? People would likely say - accurately - that doesn't come out of nowhere.

 

On the other hand, there are people... like myself... who apologize and it doesn't mean much. It's my emotional "get-out-of-jail-free" card.

Really, I hate it about myself. At least the "I regret you're offended..." BS is more revealing.