WaPo coverage of a Qanon in recovery
Nov. 11th, 2020 08:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
walkitouthttps://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/11/masks-qanon-target-melissa-rein-lively/
PR person (contractor? Freelancer? How is this not some shade of “influencer”?) apparently had a dissociative episode at a Target and wrecked a display of masks. But it wasn’t _that_ dissociative, because she took video and posted it on Instagram Live. *shrug* Anyway. Bad times followed, and she is now doing the apology tour. I have a couple issues with this article.
First — and this is probably the most and possibly the only important objection — “This story has been updated to include information about Lively’s racist language that came to The Post’s attention after publication.” This is not some nice person who got sucked into Qanon (if such a thing even ever happens — I am still unsure); this is someone posting n-word and anti-burqa stuff. _And then this was concealed in the apology tour._ Apology tours are fine, but just like BK, you are supposed to bring _all_ your bad in at once. If you do not bring in all the bad, and we find more later, we are going to wonder what else you’ve tried to bury.
Second — and indirectly related to the first — is her attack on cancel culture.
If you have _any_ understanding of cancel culture _at all_, you understand that what is being canceled is reprehensible behavior by people who do it so consistently and egregiously that the person has become a problem because it is clear that that behavior is part of their identity. Thus, the canceled ism includes canceling that person’s access to our collective attention. People who relentlessly abuse those without power need to have their power taken away from them. That is canceling.
Instead, this woman focuses on all the death threats and threats against her puppers and whatever. Which is def not fun stuff! But tons of people have to slog through that shit all the time, canceled or not canceled, it is part of being at the center of cultural conflict. She seems to think that _having brought that down on her own damn head_, she deserves some sympathy there, and wants to center herself as a hero for having the “courage” to fight back against that.
Reprehensible behavior needs to be pushed back on; people who persistently engage in it need to be pushed back on. Anyone wandering around, having behaved reprehensibly, saying, oh, gosh, I needed some therapy, I’m a nice person, I helped people, etc., has _missed the point_.
The apology tour should be OMG I am so sorry I did that and I am in therapy and I am getting better and I am taking steps not to wind up in that bad place again etc. And if she wants to go around and center Qanon as a problem, I am interested in hearing more about her experience and even her ideas about how to help wind down that hot spot of crazy. But attacking cancel culture is not the right approach here.
PR person (contractor? Freelancer? How is this not some shade of “influencer”?) apparently had a dissociative episode at a Target and wrecked a display of masks. But it wasn’t _that_ dissociative, because she took video and posted it on Instagram Live. *shrug* Anyway. Bad times followed, and she is now doing the apology tour. I have a couple issues with this article.
First — and this is probably the most and possibly the only important objection — “This story has been updated to include information about Lively’s racist language that came to The Post’s attention after publication.” This is not some nice person who got sucked into Qanon (if such a thing even ever happens — I am still unsure); this is someone posting n-word and anti-burqa stuff. _And then this was concealed in the apology tour._ Apology tours are fine, but just like BK, you are supposed to bring _all_ your bad in at once. If you do not bring in all the bad, and we find more later, we are going to wonder what else you’ve tried to bury.
Second — and indirectly related to the first — is her attack on cancel culture.
If you have _any_ understanding of cancel culture _at all_, you understand that what is being canceled is reprehensible behavior by people who do it so consistently and egregiously that the person has become a problem because it is clear that that behavior is part of their identity. Thus, the canceled ism includes canceling that person’s access to our collective attention. People who relentlessly abuse those without power need to have their power taken away from them. That is canceling.
Instead, this woman focuses on all the death threats and threats against her puppers and whatever. Which is def not fun stuff! But tons of people have to slog through that shit all the time, canceled or not canceled, it is part of being at the center of cultural conflict. She seems to think that _having brought that down on her own damn head_, she deserves some sympathy there, and wants to center herself as a hero for having the “courage” to fight back against that.
Reprehensible behavior needs to be pushed back on; people who persistently engage in it need to be pushed back on. Anyone wandering around, having behaved reprehensibly, saying, oh, gosh, I needed some therapy, I’m a nice person, I helped people, etc., has _missed the point_.
The apology tour should be OMG I am so sorry I did that and I am in therapy and I am getting better and I am taking steps not to wind up in that bad place again etc. And if she wants to go around and center Qanon as a problem, I am interested in hearing more about her experience and even her ideas about how to help wind down that hot spot of crazy. But attacking cancel culture is not the right approach here.
no subject
Date: 2020-11-13 10:23 pm (UTC)