DOUBLE STANDARDS: WHY YOU MAY BE WRONG IN YOUR JUDGEMENT by Mubassirah Bint Solih

We all seem to enjoy passing judgment on the conducts of other people, accusing them of either being fake or living with double standards. Oxford dictionary defines “double standard” as a rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups. Wikipedia defines it as the application of different sets of principles for situations that are, in principle, the same, and is often used to describe an advantage that is given to one party over another.

Applying different principles to similar-looking situations may or may not indicate a double standard. In order to distinguish between the application of a double-standard and the valid application of different standards towards circumstances that only appear to be the same, several factors must be examined. One is the sameness of those circumstances, philosophy or belief system. If correctly identified, a double standard is viewed negatively as it usually indicates the presence of hypocritical, biased and/or unfair attitudes leading to unjust behaviours (Wikipedia).

Principally, it is practically explained to be a situation where a person shows two different conflicting sides of himself (of speech, opinions, deeds, convictions, etc) to the public on the very same matter; judging something as legal when it involves a certain set of people and judging it as illegal when it involves another set of people. It may be simply termed as “hypocrisy” since it also involves being two-faced. You would normally expect that a person who preaches contentment and sincerity would never involve in shady money-making activities (such as yahoo and the likes of it), but, it will be a great rude shock to find out that these people who come out in the public and make us want to adopt the most decent and moral lifestyles end up being revealed to us (eventually) as people who live the most hideous of lives. 

While it may be true that it is quite easy to identify someone with double-standards and reproach them for such maladaptive behaviours, it is relatively difficult to be assured in our identification and judgment of them, due to a number of factors, of which change and personal weaknesses top the list.

CHANGE is said to be the only phenomenon in the world of man that is consistent, and as such, no living being is immune to it. In essence, as time advances and people get exposed to more experiences and facilities, they tend to alter their moral values and judgment to align with their current situation and circumstance. Thus, it cannot be easily assessed what convictions and values a person currently hold before indulging in activities we “have always known” contradict their personal standards and defy their life philosophies and principles. Your views and perceptions of something or someone may change; the more you increase in knowledge of a particular phenomenon or situation, the more your previous assertions seem to be wrong, and thus, you start to deflect: that cannot be said to be double standard of course. However, your intentional refusal to come out to proclaim the event of such change and/or denying its occurrence makes you portray yourself to the public as still firmly upon your previous assertions. In this case, you intentionally lead them to believe (and maybe even act upon) information you have realized is inaccurate, probably just to save your own face. The fact that your extrinsic behaviours do not match your intrinsic perceptions makes you guilty of double standard!

For instance, a person who used to lead a promiscuous life advocating for sexual purity and emotional commitment and fidelity in relationships would not be said to be having double-standards (as most people would love to immediately adjudge): the fact that a person “used to” do something does not take away their right to speak against such a thing when they have finally realized the evils there are in such endeavors. In fact, a person who has been through the dregs of a menace is in the most efficient position to talk against it, given the belief that “experience is the best teacher”. It is rather sad that people would rather gossip and say things such as: who is talking about sexual purity? That one? Ah, if you know how shameless she used to… I know her, she is just trying to conform to the societal norms and make people believe she has some elements of good too, she is the last person who is supposed to be opening her mouth to talk about sexual purity or any such! Such double-standards! (Once a thief always a thief, yeah?)

There are also cases of people who used to hold an opinion as correct but later deflected, then, we see them acting upon these newly adopted ideologies and assume they are being “untrue” to their beliefs and convictions, whereas, we are only ignorant of changes that have likely occurred to make them change their positions. As mentioned earlier though, if it involves a situation where the individual “should have” made proclamations of such changes in their positions and convictions but they intentionally did not, then, the conclusion we will draw is the opposite.

The second important factor I mentioned is PERSONAL WEAKNESS: nobody is perfect, we are all humans and it is only in our nature that we have flaws and shortcomings. We all (relatively) know what is acceptable and what is not, in our communal and individual lives, but, for some reasons, we all find ourselves indulging in some activities contrary to the “ideal” which we personally endorse too. Usually, we know that lying is bad and a sin in our religion (plus socially unacceptable), but, we have grown to internalize it as the world has continued to make it appear like something that is permissible, and hence, we have grown so used to it that we cannot imagine going a whole day without telling a lie; however little. There will always come a time when you realize that honesty is a virtue that should not be compromised for any reason, and so, you make a decision to always speak the truth, no matter how appealing and easy lying seems. Hence, you start to advice your friend and others against lying and vulgar speeches too. Definitely, change has happened and they have to look at you and ask if it’s really you saying that to them. Then, it happens that a particular event occurred where you “felt” compelled to “lie your way out”. Now, what comes of that? Of course, they will have to wonder “why lying is allowed for you but not them”, yeah, and that’s double-standards! What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, isn’t it? So, what makes it different in your instance?

We all battle some levels and forms of personal weaknesses, but, that shouldn’t stop us from preaching that which is ideal, should it? The fact that I’m still unable to arrive at that level of honesty that is ideal should discourage me from encouraging another to strive for it? Allah says in the Qur’an that the one who calls people to goodness without doing the same will be from among the people of hell: but, you will agree that there is a difference between someone who is merely rendering lip service and advocating all-round goodness that we need for a wonderful society just for the fame and so people wouldn’t pay much attention to the evils he perpetrates behind closed doors himself, and, that person who invites to good in hopes that it would further assist him in adopting the ideal lifestyle too, helping him to overcome the weaknesses of the flesh and live the admirable life he advocates too.

On a more subtle ground, I personally have this bad habit of using my right pinky finger to “settle” the itching in my nose or the accumulation of dust (and other external bodies) in there, which I definitely learnt in primary school is not socially acceptable (since we’re expected to get rid of filth of all kinds using our left hands), but till this moment, I still feel like my left hand just can’t “clean” it and cause me relief “enough”, so I still use that same finger my primary 6 class teacher rebuked me before the whole class for back then. Yeah, I know, that’s not such a nice thing to say about self, and it’s not like I’m actually proud of it of course, it’s just, you know, one of those things (as we say). And really, you wouldn’t tell me to not advise someone (anyone at all) against using the right hand to remove any form of “dirt” since that’s the social norm and dictate which I personally agree with, would you? So yeah, when you “unfortunately” catch me dipping my right finger in a nostril, would you say I’m being fake and living with a double-standard? 

Exactly! That is why we need to understand the importance of a person’s mindset and how well those “hidden” beliefs and convictions align with their outward behaviours and speeches, so that we know when some things are just habits born of compulsion which are difficult to change and avoid placing unfair judgments on their persons.

How Would we Know When Someone is Actually Living with Double-Standards?

It is true that we can only deal with that which is apparent as we cannot know what is hidden within every person’s heart, and as such, we can only make our value judgment based on what we see of a person’s speech and actions. However, it remains imperative upon us all to be very cautious in labeling people or thinking/speaking ill of them, as we would want people to accord us when we happen to be at the receiving end too: what goes around definitely comes around.

A teacher who would teach you in class and give you a note on the evils of examination malpractices but comes around to give you “chips” when you are writing your final exams lives with double-standards: it is wrong in theory but right in practice?

An organization which states in its constitution that all citizens are equal and everyone will be attended to on a basis of “first come first serve”, but would allow a rich man to jump a very long queue to get attended to “on arrival” does just that. Yes, that is exempting certain categories of people from an otherwise “general” rule: applying a rule unfairly to different groups of people and giving one group of people an undue advantage over the other.

A rule of queue proceeding in a hospital that allows a patient rushed in for emergency to immediately get attended to by the doctor cannot be said to be a manifestation of double-standards, on account of the patient’s severity of condition: this is a typical realization of the explanation provided above that “Applying different principles to similar-looking situations may or may not indicate a double standard.”

A married man who establishes strict laws guiding the conducts of his daughters to prevent them from leading wayward lives but goes about having illicit romantic and sexual relationships with young girls on sly: that’s double-standards! Aren’t those girls also some other persons’ daughters too?

Telling people it’s wrong to steal while you let me watch you sneak up on other’s properties without any bit of shame or remorseful conscience: that’s double-standards! What makes stealing different in practice and theory?

Confusing me as regards which to pick of your speech or deeds without making clarification as to what necessitates the deviations of your deeds from your speeches: that’s double-standards!

Making it a sin for a poor to legally win while you take pride in helping a rich steal his way to the trophy: that’s double-standards!

Jumping to conclusion when it comes to some certain people you “just don’t like” and lobbying for intangible excuses to exonerate some certain people you “prefer” is yet another manifestation of your double-standards! And yes, that is why you may be wrong in judging others as having double-standards: your very own shamefully shameless double-standards!

You hold people as guilty and convict them without fair hearing (or guiltless and acquainted for others) on certain ground rules, but, those rules no longer hold when it comes to you, your family, your friends, your bosses, your acquaintances, and other influential or significant others, and you display this distinction with no iota of restriction or shame. Such baseless discrimination and undue instability in your body of guiding principles is the real double-standards!