All Words Matter: The
Manipulation behind “All Lives
Matter”
KELLY CORYELL
***
K ELLY C ORYELL wrote this essay in her first-year writing
course at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, CA. An
English major, Coryell works as a tutor in the college’s
learning center and serves as a supplemental instruction
leader for multilingual students. She plans to become an
English professor. This essay, which is documented in
MLA Style, was nominated for the Norton Writer’s Prize.
________
I ’VE NEVER UNDERSTOOD THE POPULAR SAYING “Sticks and
stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt
me.” I grew up as a tomboy; I’ve had more than my fair
share of scrapes, bruises, and stitches. But I’ve found
that words inflict the most painful injuries. On sleepless
nights when I toss and turn, I’m not replaying the time I
broke my foot over and over in my head—I’m thinking
about some embarrassing thing I said that still makes
me physically cringe or a time someone said something
hurtful to me. Broken bones heal—words stay with us.
This is because words have power. A skilled
wordsmith can influence us by using evocative words
that elicit an emotional response. The meanings of
these “loaded” words aren’t located in a dictionary.
There is a context surrounding them that implies a
meaning beyond the basic information they convey.
Loaded words and phrases appeal to our emotions, not
our logic—they enter our hearts, not our minds. They
can manipulate, so sometimes people use loaded
language to distract us from a flawed argument.
Such is the case when people use the phrase “all
lives matter” to oppose the phrase “Black lives matter.”
In 2012, neighborhood watch coordinator George
Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin, an unarmed
African American teenager returning home from a latenight snack run. In 2013, Zimmerman was acquitted of
all charges. This sparked the birth of the Black Lives
Matter (BLM) movement, when activists Alicia Garza,
Opal Tometi, and Patrisse Cullors, frustrated with the
systemic inequality and oppression exemplified by
Zimmerman’s trial, started using the hashtag
#BlackLivesMatter on Twitter . As more and more Black
people died during police confrontations or in police
custody—Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice,
Walter Scott, Freddie Gray—the movement, chanting
the phrase “Black lives matter,” gained momentum and
media coverage, eventually becoming a major talking
point in the 2016 presidential election. And in the spring
of 2020, the deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor,
George Floyd, Rayshard Brooks, Dominique “Rem’mie”
Fells, and Riah Milton reignited the BLM movement,
leading to an overdue reckoning with racism in this
country.
Summarizes effectively ( Chapter 2 ).
As a direct response, Americans who either
disagreed with the BLM movement as a whole or who
supported the movement but were uncomfortable with
its slogan, began to chant their own phrase: “all lives
matter.” It should be acknowledged that some of those
who have used the phrase “all lives matter” did so
naïvely aiming to unify people in a time of division,
thinking of the words as a positive affirmation to which
no one could object. However, saying “all lives matter”
as a response to “Black lives matter” is, in reality,
sending a dangerous message: it steals attention from
the systematic oppression of Black Americans and
actively distorts the message behind the BLM
movement, manipulating the American people into
maintaining the oppressive status quo.
Entertains counterargument (Chapter 6).
5
The phrase “all lives matter” belies the current racial
inequality in America by implying that all lives are at
equal risk. The racism and prejudice endured by African
Americans didn’t end when slavery was abolished in
1865, it didn’t end when Congress passed the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, and it didn’t end when a Black man
was elected president of the United States in 2008.
Racial inequality in America persists to this day,
ingrained and interwoven so deeply in American society
that our prison systems and manufacturing industries
depend on it. It’s so expertly hidden under layers of
celebrity gossip in our media and blatant and bold lies
from our politicians, and so “normalized” in our culture,
that the privileged may not even be aware of the plight
of Black Americans.
But the statistics speak for themselves. According to
the NAACP, African Americans are incarcerated at six
times the rate of white Americans for drug crimes
(“Criminal Justice”). The Center for American Progress
reported that in 2016, the median wealth of Black
families was only 10 percent of the median wealth of
white families (Hanks, Solomon, and Weller). Police
shoot and kill Black Americans at two and a half times
the rate of white Americans, according to a 2016 report
by The Washington Post (Lowery). All these statistics
point to the fact that Black lives are valued less than
white lives in America. The BLM movement aims to
change this depressing reality by insisting that “Black
lives matter.”
Uses data ( Chapter 18 ) and explains why we should
care ( Chapter 8 ).
Responding to “Black lives matter” with “all lives
matter” ignores the unique prejudices and discrimination
Black people experience in America. Chimamanda
Ngozi Adichie makes a parallel argument in her essay “I
Decided to Call Myself a Happy Feminist.” Adichie
explains why she calls herself a feminist instead of a
human-rights activist. She writes:
Feminism is, of course, part of human rights in
general—but to choose to use the vague expression
human rights is to deny the specific and particular
problem of gender. . . . For centuries, the world
divided human beings into two groups and then
proceeded to exclude and oppress one group. It is
only fair that the solution to the problem should
acknowledge that.
Introduces quotation ( Chapter 3 ).
Adichie’s point is that not every human being suffers the
oppression that women suffer. Therefore, campaigning
for all humans, while noble, is irrelevant. It would ignore
the specific plights of women, as well as the historical
fact that those behind the oppression of women were
other human beings—men. In the same way,
emphasizing all lives takes much-needed focus away
from the oppression specifically felt only by Black
Americans—which is a direct result of the centuries of
oppression at the hands of white Americans.
Explains quotation ( Chapter 3 ).
Later in her essay, Adichie recalls a conversation
she once had about gender: “A man said to me, ‘Why
does it have to be you as a woman? Why not you as a
human being?’ This type of question is a way of
silencing a person’s specific experiences. Of course I
am a human being, but there are particular things that
happen to me in the world because I am a woman.”
Shifting attention away from the female gender to the
entirety of humankind silences the hardships women
face simply because they are women . Talking over
them by questioning their commitment to the whole, and
not allowing them to share their experiences, smothers
their voices. The same is true when shifting focus from
“Black lives” to “all lives.” Saying “all lives matter”
ignores the unique discrimination only Black Americans
face, simply because they are Black . Dismissing the
importance and relevance of their struggles because
everyone has struggles misses the point entirely.
“All lives matter” implies that all lives endure an
equal amount of hardship; therefore, the struggles of
Black Americans deserve no more attention than the
struggles of white Americans—which is demonstrably
false statistically. Daniel Victor illustrates the harmful
way the phrase “all lives matter” removes focus from the
hardships of Black Americans in his article “Why ‘All
Lives Matter’ Is Such a Perilous Phrase” for The New
York Times . He writes:
Those in the Black Lives Matter movement say black
people are in immediate danger and need immediate
attention. . . .
Saying “All Lives Matter” in response would
suggest to them that all people are in equal danger,
invalidating the specific concerns of black people.
“You’re watering the house that’s not burning, but
you’re choosing to leave the house that’s burning
unattended,” said Allen Kwabena Frimpong, an
organizer for the New York chapter of Black Lives
Matter. “It’s irresponsible.”
To put it simply, focusing too much on the whole can
divert much needed attention from crises affecting a
specific group.
10
As one Twitter user notes, “#AllLivesMatter is like I
go to the Dr for a broken arm and he says ‘All Bones
Matter’ ok but right now let’s take care of this broken
one” (@djsoap92). In this analogy, only one bone needs
immediate attention—ignoring it because all bones are
important to a person’s health isn’t an appropriate
response to the situation. Nor would be putting the
injured person in a full-body cast—though that would be
treating every bone equally. “All lives matter” doesn’t
acknowledge that the lives of Black Americans are in
greater danger due to the hundreds of years of
systematic racism designed to devalue them. The point
of saying “Black lives matter” is to bring attention to the
fact that Black lives do not matter in our society. The
BLM movement is not simply saying “Black people are
shot and killed by the police,” it’s saying “Black people
are shot and killed by the police at two and a half times
the rate of white people .” Replying with “all races are
shot and killed by the police” can be an acceptable
response to the first statement, but not the second . Yet
that is exactly what saying “all lives matter” does—it
ignores the second statement, ignores the voices of
BLM activists.
Uses metacommentary to differentiate views ( Chapter
11 ).
Using “all lives matter” as a response to “Black lives
matter” perpetuates the misconception that BLM
activists do not believe both sentiments. The core of the
BLM movement is the belief that all lives matter—
including Black lives, which are treated differently than
white lives, not just by law enforcement but America as
a whole. As J. Clara Chan explains in her article, “What
Is ‘All Lives Matter’? A Short Explainer,” for The Wrap ,
BLM supporters stress that the movement isn’t about
believing no other races matter. Instead, the
movement seeks to highlight and change how racism
disproportionately affects the black community, in
terms of police brutality, job security, socioeconomic
status, educational opportunities, and more.
The BLM movement’s focus on particular inequities
doesn’t mean other races don’t matter, but the phrase
“all lives matter” is loaded language that implies they
don’t. Dave Bry explains this manipulation in his article
titled “‘All Lives Matter’ Is and Always Was Racist—and
This Weekend’s Trump Rally Proved It” for the UK paper
The Guardian . He writes:
Often people who say “all lives matter” say it
pointedly, correctively under the veneer of the idea
that “all men are created equal.” It is meant to refute
the idea that “only” black lives matter.
But understanding “black lives matter” to mean
“only” black lives matter has been a misinterpretation
from the beginning, one made in ignorance of the
intent of the statement and the statistical facts that led
to it.
That is to say, “all lives matter” misinterprets the point
the BLM movement is making—that all lives do matter;
therefore, Black lives need to matter as much as white
lives in American society. It isn’t “ only Black lives
matter”; it’s “Black lives matter, too .”
Connects the parts ( Chapter 9 ).
“All lives matter” manipulates people into believing
those who say “Black lives matter” are against other
lives. Jason Stanley explains the many ways language
can be used as a tool for suppression in his New York
Times opinion piece, “The Ways of Silencing.” Stanley
writes, “Words are misappropriated and meanings
twisted. I believe that these tactics are not really about
making substantive claims, but rather play the role of
silencing. They are, if you will, linguistic strategies for
stealing the voices of others.” In other words, a group
can be silenced if the language vital to their ability to
express themselves and their beliefs is co-opted by
another group. Supporters of “all lives matter” co-opted
the language of the BLM movement, forcing a
separation between the two phrases. As a result, BLM
activists cannot say “all lives matter” without sounding
like they oppose the views of the BLM movement, since
“all lives matter” is no longer just a phrase but a rebuttal
—a counterargument.
Saying “all lives matter” is premature, since it
presupposes that equality has already been achieved. If
Black lives really did matter as much as white lives in
American society, then saying so would be as
uncontroversial as stating any other fact. In fact,
America is not a postracial society: poverty, education,
health, incarceration rates—all are unequal between
different races in America. We must acknowledge this
ugly truth if we are ever going to change it. “All lives
matter” invokes a naïve reality in which all races are
holding hands in a great big circle, singing “This Land Is
Your Land” as the sun smiles down on the world. “All
lives matter,” like the statement “I don’t see race, I just
see people,” may, at first, seem like a beautiful
sentiment. Those who say such things may truly do so
with the intent of creating a world where everyone is
treated equally—regardless of race, gender, creed,
orientation, and so on.
Represents objections fairly (Chapter 6).
But upon close examination, these phrases—
however well- meaning—are harmful because, aside
from robbing people of their racial identities, they ignore
race-based discrimination. How can one notice racism
when one does not “see race”? How can one point out
discrimination against African Americans if the only
response one gets is “everyone matters”? If one insists
that a goal has already been met when it hasn’t, why
would anyone put in more effort toward reaching that
goal? This is why “all lives matter” is so manipulative
and damaging. It’s an attempt to convince us we don’t
have to keep reaching for equality and justice, even
though every fact around us tells us this is far from the
case. Only by consciously acknowledging racial
inequality will we ever be able to put an end to it.
15
The root of “all lives matter” boils down to one thing:
privilege, and the reluctance to give it up in the name of
equality. As Chris Boeskool put it in a Huffington Post
opinion piece: “Equality can feel like oppression. But it’s
not. What you’re feeling is just the discomfort of losing a
little bit of your privilege.” Evening the playing field can
feel like a bad thing to the person benefiting from the
imbalance. In the 1960s, a white bus rider may have felt
oppressed when she started having to compete with
Black bus riders for the front seat—she lost the privilege
of getting a guaranteed front seat because of her race.
In the 1970s, a man might have complained that he
could no longer “compliment” his female coworkers
without them accusing him of sexual harassment—he
lost the privilege of being able to say offensive things
because of his gender. If American society starts to
accept that Black lives matter as much as white lives,
white Americans will lose some of the privileges
afforded to them as a result of the oppression of Black
Americans. Therefore, people who either do not realize
they have this privilege, or people who simply don’t want
to give it up, chant “all lives matter” in an effort to hold
on to that privilege. If the BLM movement is silenced,
the status quo of racial inequality will be maintained.
The privileged must resist this unethical temptation and
not mistake oppression as equality.