Several times recently, I have written that being offended is often the price you pay for learning. If you can go through four years of college without ever having your ideas challenged, then you are not really getting an education. What I did not say is that students should not go out of their way to seek offense. Yet that is exactly what some students do. Unfortunately, it is hard to blame them when they are simply following the example set by many of our elected leaders.
Allow me to give an example from my own classroom.
At the end of a semester, I received a comment on a course evaluation stating that the student was “completely offended” by something I said to another student. The evaluator explained that a student from Africa with a thick accent made a comment in class. Because I could not understand him, I asked him to repeat himself. When he did, I jokingly said that I could understand him better if he would “just learn proper English.”
On the surface, I can understand how that comment might sound bad. But context matters.
I did make the comment, and the student does have a thick accent. However, I know the student well, and this is a running joke between us. The student in question is Black, but he was born and raised in England. In other words, he is a native English speaker with a strong British accent. When I told him to “learn proper English,” I was speaking to someone who speaks the purer form of English; we Americans are the ones who changed it. He understood the joke and laughed, as did his friends. I have said the same thing to white British students without raising an alarm. Another student, however, assumed, based solely on skin color, that he was African and took offense on his behalf, assuming I was being racist.
This is where intent becomes important. The student to whom I was speaking knew there was no malice. The majority of the class knew there was no malice. He eventually asked his question, and we moved on. That brings me to what I really want to discuss.
On Dec. 16, Los Angeles Rams wide receiver Puka Nacua, one of the best players in the NFL, appeared on a livestream with two popular internet personalities, Adin Ross and N3on (Mikyle Rafiq). I hope I’m getting that right; I am far too Gen X to fully understand this world. During the stream, the hosts asked Nacua if he would perform a touchdown celebration they created. After a couple of failed dance attempts, Nacua admitted he was not coordinated enough. Instead, they asked him to rub his hands together while looking into the camera. He agreed.
Nacua had no idea that rubbing one’s hands together is considered by some to be antisemitic. My first reaction was simple: How is that antisemitic? If he had done so while calling Jews greedy, then yes, that would be offensive and deserving of punishment. But that is not what happened.
Like Nacua, I had never heard of that gesture being associated with antisemitism. I grew up in the Washington, D.C., area. My high school included students of every race, religion, and background imaginable, including a sizable Jewish population. I have heard every slur one can think of, and never once have I heard that rubbing one’s hands together is associated with Jews. My secondary field for my Ph.D. is the modern Middle East, including Israel, and again, I have never encountered that gesture alone used as a derogatory symbol toward Jewish people.
I question if not for the hosts referring to it as a “Jewish dance,” earlier in the show, if anyone would have even associated them together. It looked far more like the “money” gesture popularized by athletes than anything else. If my background and education do not associate that gesture with antisemitism, why would Puka Nacua? Intent matters. There was nothing malicious in what he did.
If anyone deserves criticism, it is the hosts of the show. Earlier in the stream, when Nacua was not present, they referenced what they called an “iconic Jewish dance.” In that case, there was intent. Yet because Adin Ross is Jewish, it is unlikely any real accountability will follow. The greatest mistake Nacua made was associating with juvenile adults behaving foolishly in pursuit of followers.
Much like my classroom example, the person who seemed most offended was U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell of California. After referring to Nacua as an “a—hole,” Swalwell called for him to apologize or be removed from the league. While I agree there is no place for hate speech, I see no evidence that Nacua engaged in any. If the congressman is genuinely concerned about antisemitism, perhaps he should turn his attention to college campuses across his own state, where students openly call for the elimination of the Jewish people in Israel when they chant “From the river to the sea.”
Again, intent matters. What those students are doing is intentional. Rubbing one’s hands together without any knowledge of a supposed meaning, and with no desire to offend, is not. Punishing Nacua for something that may or may not be true without malice does nothing to combat real hatred and should not happen.
James Finck is a professor of American history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He can be reached at james.finck@swoknews.com.
