“What about …”
Never has such an innocuous phrase been the subject of such criticism and even outrage. Of course, as you might suspect, it isn’t the phrase itself that has drawn criticism, but how it is deployed in conversation. Taken at face value, “what about” is simply a preface to expressing some kind of concern or another. So, what’s all the fuss?
As far as I can tell, the phrase is used in at least five distinct ways.
‘What about’ Introducing an Aggregate Evaluation
“Charlie Kirk said and did these things, so he was a good person.”
“But what about these other things he said and did?”
When “what about” is used in this way, it serves to contribute information relevant to making an overall, bottom-line assessment. Thus, it introduces a pro or a con, generally to bring balance to a value claim. When making blanket evaluations that involve competing interests and a mix of good and bad, asking “but what about so-and-so” is not only unproblematic—it is inevitable. It merely serves as shorthand for:
“We must take this evidence into account as well in making such an overall value judgment,”
—which no one wants to say or type.
‘What about’ Pointing Out Contrary Evidence or Inconsistency
“Charlie Kirk wasn’t a racist.”
“But what about these comments he made about Ketanji Brown Jackson?”
When “what about” is used this way, it simply prefaces what purports to be incompatible with what someone has just said. Once again, such use is innocuous—and indeed, it is critical—for it amounts to little more than shorthand for:
“What you are saying cannot be correct because of X.”
The entire edifice of argument, therefore, depends on using “what about” in this way.
‘What about’ Asking a Legitimate Question
Despite pretending the form of an interrogative, “what about” is generally not used in polemical contexts to ask questions. However, sometimes it is:
“Charlie Kirk has been assassinated; we should pray for Erika.”
“Well, what about his kids and his parents?”
“The board of Turning Point USA is determined to continue course.”
“But what about their employees?”
Obviously, asking questions is not wrong. Moving on.
‘What about’ as a Diversion
“Charlie Kirk criticized the Civil Rights Act, which is widely regarded as an incredible achievement for civil rights.”
“Well, what about Derrick Bell (the father of critical race theory), who criticized Brown v. Board because he thought it served white interests?”
In this case, “what about” changes the subject and generally does so in some way that is considered to be counterevidence. As such, it often serves to direct focus away from the “man behind the curtain” (we just watched The Wizard of Oz) and simply ignores the import of what someone has said. Such use is obviously problematic. It is particularly problematic when people are trying to present thoughtful arguments and discuss difficult things. People using “what about” in this way simply want to rehearse their talking points and aren’t so much listening as they are waiting to talk. Don’t waste your time with them, and don’t be one of them.
Having said that, we should always remember: context is king. If two people were debating whether only white people would ever dare criticize ostensibly huge advances for the Black community, the “what about” above would then fall into the “contrary evidence or inconsistency” usage.
‘What about’ as a Downplay
“Slavery in the antebellum South was an utter abomination.”
“But what about masters who taught their slaves how to read and shared the Gospel with them?”
Those tempted to use “what about” in this way would do well to remember Proverbs 27:14:
“Whoever blesses his neighbor with a loud voice, rising early in the morning, will be counted as cursing.”
True things—even good things—spoken at the wrong time amount to foolish action. In this case, someone is drawing attention to something good in a way that downplays the seriousness of something bad. This remains the case even if they are ignorant of the effect of their speech—someone screaming blessings in the morning with the best of intentions is still doing something that counts as cursing.
Let’s be honest: some people use “what about” in this way simply because they are conversationally awkward and don’t know how to read a room. That awkwardness is exacerbated in the crucible of charged discussion. But many others use it for reasons similar to the diversion usage above: they have their talking points and are simply waiting to deliver. They have no real interest in good-faith discussion and would prefer to joust than reason together.
What’s the takeaway?
The takeaway is that instead of having apoplectic, knee-jerk reactions to a two-word phrase, people—and Christians in particular—should instead listen carefully to how the phrase is being used, rather than assuming the role of vocabulary police.
Those who have been discipled by a mindless culture to shout “Foul!” every time they hear a phrase are actually contributing to the breakdown of communication, not fostering healthy dialogue.
This frustration notwithstanding, we should likely aim a bit higher than introducing our responses with “what about”—not only to avoid premature, dismissal and misunderstanding, but also because the vibe it brings is closer to what one would expect of an opaque, middle school essay than a mature conversation. We need less of the former, and more of the latter.