Even as empathy becomes an increasingly rare trait, we should be able to feel for those who are nothing like us

by CLAIRE MARSHALL WATKINS

Opinion Editor

Too often while scrolling through social media, I see posts from people arguing that others should agree with their belief or opinion by attaching an element of attempted universality to the topic. Countless times online, I have observed users who support reproductive rights rhetorically asking, “What if it was your daughter?” or some variation of that question to men who regard themselves as pro-life. They hope to incentivize these men to question their beliefs and agree with pro-choice values. While this argument poses a valid question, it upholds the idea that for one to empathize with a concept or person, one must relate to it.

Most people have likely seen or heard some version of the same question. There are a plethora of videos, comments and real-life instances of people using that point to support their belief.

“With sexual assault, a lot of people are like, ‘Oh, if that was my girlfriend, if that was my daughter, if that was someone I’m closely related with.’ Sometimes people use that to preface the rest of their statement and I think you don’t necessarily need to do that to convey empathy. It shouldn’t happen to anyone at all. It’s a little hard because I feel like when people say that they don’t realize it sounds non-inclusive,” said Garret Hennessey, a senior English major.

He continued, “They don’t necessarily understand that them saying it basically sounds a little [in]genuine as if it would only affect them. Maybe they do feel empathy for any survivors of sexual assault, but because they preface it with, ‘Oh, if it was my girlfriend,’ it sounds [in]genuine.”

What bothers me most about the sort of “what if it was your girlfriend” argument is the fact that sometimes, that is the one point that appeals to some men.

Some people with anti-choice values use confirmation bias or overlook facts that do not support their belief, and argue that pregnant people should carry out pregnancies regardless of circumstance. Charlie Kirk, a right-wing public figure who has gone viral multiple times for sharing his views online and around college campuses with a microphone, holds this belief.

“I just think it’s important that if we’re not willing to fight for those in the womb that we can’t see, that we can’t observe, then we’re just hypocrites,” said Kirk in one video in which he speaks to a student about abortion rights. “We’re just like, what good are we talking about human rights issues?”

The video, posted to YouTube, goes on for nine minutes and is flagged with an informational message containing a link to a page on the Centers for Disease Control website with facts and information about induced abortions. 

Abortion Surveillance in the United States conducted by the CDC records that in 2021, 625,978 abortions were reported in their survey. While the lowest percentage of these abortions were performed on minors under the age of 15, the number of abortions performed on people ages 15-24 increased from the previous year. The CDC also reports that at least one in four girls experience child sexual abuse.

Does Kirk believe children and victims of sexual assault should bear children? Does he know these facts and just not care? 

Sometimes speaking to people with differing views can feel like speaking to a brick wall if they are unwilling to listen, and unfortunately, sometimes the only way to get reciprocity is to use a personal appeal.

“I definitely do think that argument has worked before. I know I’ve been in a situation where I’ve witnessed it working, where someone has brought up a personal example or a hypothetical personal example, and it has appealed to someone else’s empathy,” said Ally Hamilton, a junior English major.

“I take issue with it because I like to think that in a perfect world, everybody would just kind of treat each other well just to treat each other well. Obviously, I know that’s not realistic,” she said.

I agree with Hamilton. While a personal appeal as an argument is certainly effective in many cases, it shows that some people fail to empathize with people outside of their lives. It implies that facts or inherent moral standing is not enough to persuade or dissuade some people regarding an opinion or value.

It shouldn’t matter the disadvantage or oppression a person or group of people face, any individual with morals ought to empathize with those facing oppression. We should hold our values for what they are, not for the sake of the people in our lives for whom those values might benefit.