This article will explain why statistical trends do not equal prejudice. It's quite dense, so let's get on with it! So I'm doing a few performances of a spoken word show, which I've given a deliberately controversial eye-catching title referencing Ricky Gervais. It's a trick to get people into the show; I actually talk very little about Gervais. I just use my experiences working on "Life's Too Short" as a jumping off point to talk about heightism in modern society.
One point I make is how hypocritical some comedy can be; for instance The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (not very topical, but a reference most people know) highlights a lot of good points about how black people can face discrimination, especially in affluent areas. However, at the same time in most episodes Will Smith relentlessly mocks his cousin Carlton for being so short. There is an irony in trying to defend one minority, while attacking another for an easy source of humour.
Another point I make is that the biggest reason I (or any other short heterosexual man) really cares about being short is that women prefer taller men. Short men are left on the bottom of the dating pile, and the secret to happiness is a loving relationship, right? So it's not surprising that short men are more depressed and tend to have a higher chance of committing suicide.
Now we get to the crux of why I'm writing this... after one performance an audience member took offence. Her accusation was that I was suffering from the very thing I was criticising; while trying to tackle heightism, I myself was being sexist. Quite hypocritical of me eh? Well it depends on your definition of sexism.
She took issue with my use of generalisations; I repeatedly say 'women prefer taller men'. "That's a generalisation, you're being sexist", she cries. It may be a generalisation, but it's not sexist; I can cite many studies that came to this conclusion (another article full of references, plus here's something that is just fantastic). "But statistics can be manipulated" her friend cries in protest. Yes of course a few devious sorts manipulate statistics, but does this mean we should disregard all scientific evidence? At this point I've hit a brick wall; it is impossible to win an argument with someone who fundamentally misunderstands statistical trends.
It's not prejudiced to quote a recognised trend about woman. It would definitely be prejudiced for me to go up to any one woman and declare "you are a woman and therefore you MUST prefer taller men" based on no information other than the fact she's female. Similarly it's not racist to say, "in the UK on average black people commit more drug related crimes"; that's just a statistical fact. It would be racist to accuse every black person of being a criminal, or to assert that this trend was due to the colour of their skin (it is down to underlying social issues rather than anything to do with genetics).
Unfortunately I don't have time in the show to meticulously read out every study I reference; my assumption is that the audience understands I am an intelligent trust worthy person. I'm not going to mislead them when I'm performing a serious heart felt monologue (punctuated by the odd laugh to keep them awake).
Similarly when I read Ben Goldacre or listen to Robin Ince I don't read up on everything they reference to check they're not lying; I trust them. Admittedly I'm not widely known like those two, so the audience member in question is within her rights to be suspicious. However anyone can just look these things up themselves, it's really not hard to find evidence online to support everything I say (not to mention soft evidence like the widely used phrase "Tall, dark and handsome" which has permeated society's mindset).
Luckily the vast majority of the audience trusts that when I make a claim, it is based on a valid piece of evidence. But this one audience member still leaves me with an uneasy feeling... how many other people have seen me make these claims and, with a basic misunderstanding of the difference between trends and bigotry, have gone away thinking I'm a sexist prick? The amount of statistics taught in schools definitely needs to increase if we want to help society head in the right direction.
Anyway in case you were wondering the controversial title worked a treat! I've done no promotion of the show, other than spending £95 to list it in the Fringe brochure. Yet the room was packed out last week, plus The Scotsman featured it as their pick of the day (they've never mentioned my conservatively titled stand-up shows)!
Gareth Morinan: Truth Doodler @ 13.30 Underbelly