I think you raise some really interesting issues in this post, particularly how much scholars are responsible for managing (to the extent they can) how their work is used. It’s a tough one. My sense is that we simply have to accept that people are going to misunderstand and misuse our work, especially when the issues are hot. I think there are a few things we can do in our writing to ameliorate this: (a) Write clearly and concisely. (b) Make our arguments, while clear and easy to understand, complex and nuanced so that they are difficult to “oversimplify” without obviously mangling what was said. (c) Avoid fanning the flames of controversy by participating in it, but instead write to make people think.

While I think we can do some things to influence the tenor of the discussion by how we write and present arguments, beyond that we just have to accept that we will sometimes be misunderstood by people whose preconceptions are a thick filter for anything they read or hear. And sometimes deliberately misrepresented by those who find our views offensive. (Maximalist/minimalist controversy, anyone?) On a certain level that’s life. I feel that, if one has done one’s best to put out a good, clear, nuanced argument and this still happens, well, you still go to bed knowing you did the right thing.