I generally agree with this, and have two additional thoughts:
1) The one which jumped out to me was...did like a whole generation of writers watch older comedians do the 'women act like this, men act like this'/'white people act like this, black people act like this,' model and not get that the joke was supposed to be on...everyone? And that it was a joke.
2) Also, to be fair, there is a stronger version of this argument which I don't think I've seen generally made on twitter (though I simply observe a few folks who don't reliably annoy me on twitter). That is, there is an interesting question on why republican voters skew white and male (happy to provide citations if needed). But that argument needs to deal with the fact that a majority of democratic voters are also...white. A smaller majority, but still a majority (as you'd expect given the voting population).
On a totally random aside, I do wonder given current census results and what really looks like a shift in folks from identifying as white how long term data analysis on this is going to play out and if we're going to end up with a democratic party that is majority 'minority' without actually changing its makeup in any way...
As dedicated intellectual materialists, I am sure David Roberts and other good white men are equally dedicated to the proposition that the ideas and opinions of all Black people are also just a confluence of historic power differentials and impersonal cultural forces that act through them and give, at best, only the mirage of personal agency. This would be a totally fine and unobjectionable thing to say to racial minorities whenever they express their ideas, right?
I found this piece unusually snarky, shallow and unthoughtful. Are there common problems with White men? Yes. Am I a White man? Yes. Are you going to make nasty comments about my appearance next?
First mention on that Will Stancil tweet: "Just a minor correction, this was written by a white woman." Of course white women belong to their own special totalizing category.
I have a hypothesis on this for some contexts. In the corporate world, identity is the one way to legitimately express grievance. I certainly couldn't go on LinkedIn and offer a Marxist critique of work. But I can express issues with inclusivity, whiteness, patriarchy, etc. People diagnose themselves with mental disorders for the same reason. Critiques are only respected by the upper middle class if they filter through an identity lens.
This might come down to the simple fact that companies can get sued over identity stuff, and not just generally being bad.
Once again, if I refer to a general social phenomenon, people say "you've provided no examples." If I provide examples, people say "this is too personal." You have to decide which is more important to you: specificity and citation, or a fetish for false civility.
"And so in lieu of justice, we’ve arrived at this place where it’s just… a little embarrassing to be a white man? Sort of? In certain very narrow social contexts?" Such as sitcoms, where it's now de rigueur to swipe at the white maleness of the white male cast members. Observed most recently in the otherwise charming Only Murders in the Building, which show's creators (including Steve Martin!) are obliged to apologize for having cast older white men in two of the show's three lead positions.
With one exception: I don't think the quote you've used by Will Wilkinson implicates all white men.
It seems pretty clear to me that he's saying that hostile emailers are usually white men, which says nothing about the white men who aren't hostile emailers. Presumably Will thinks he fits in that category.
Great essay. I now generally read these guys as: desperate midwits in a dying industry debasing themselves for engagement.
The ‘ooh I’m edgy for social justice’ identitarianism did in fact generate some heat 5 years ago when it went against progressive norms that had been pushed since the ‘60s. But now it’s a mature, saturated industry that has been subsumed by everything from the security state, to Disney, to Lockheed Martin, to American Express.
It is a little sad. And unfun. Which is how I feel about Park Slope too. I get that the neighborhood is affluent and the brownstones are nice. But it’s sanctimonious, people dress poorly, a lot of the men have gynecomastia, it’s more parochial than cosmopolitan, and in general filled with the type of upper middle class Leftist wine moms who a generation ago would have been moderate Republicans in Fairfield County.
Great piece, white dude! Messy human peculiarity is a swell phrase
“Be kind. Be honest. Be gentle. Protect those weaker than you. Tell the truth. And don’t spend a day of your life apologizing for who you are.“.
If only some of us could direct that inward. But yes.
In Conair-- Swamp Thing (M.C. Gainey), probably not reflective but useful.
Typo in the link under untoward ways. It has a period in front of it, so it doesn't actually link to: https://twitter.com/freeblckthought/status/1382461124168151045
Great piece. What's with the misspelling of Noah's name? Is that to thwart attempted name-searching?
BTW, I assume you know, but his Twitter is private due to being outed for paedophilia apologia.
Completely irrevelant to the substance of your post but I, too, will ever get used to the WWF being called the WWE
I generally agree with this, and have two additional thoughts:
1) The one which jumped out to me was...did like a whole generation of writers watch older comedians do the 'women act like this, men act like this'/'white people act like this, black people act like this,' model and not get that the joke was supposed to be on...everyone? And that it was a joke.
2) Also, to be fair, there is a stronger version of this argument which I don't think I've seen generally made on twitter (though I simply observe a few folks who don't reliably annoy me on twitter). That is, there is an interesting question on why republican voters skew white and male (happy to provide citations if needed). But that argument needs to deal with the fact that a majority of democratic voters are also...white. A smaller majority, but still a majority (as you'd expect given the voting population).
On a totally random aside, I do wonder given current census results and what really looks like a shift in folks from identifying as white how long term data analysis on this is going to play out and if we're going to end up with a democratic party that is majority 'minority' without actually changing its makeup in any way...
As dedicated intellectual materialists, I am sure David Roberts and other good white men are equally dedicated to the proposition that the ideas and opinions of all Black people are also just a confluence of historic power differentials and impersonal cultural forces that act through them and give, at best, only the mirage of personal agency. This would be a totally fine and unobjectionable thing to say to racial minorities whenever they express their ideas, right?
I found this piece unusually snarky, shallow and unthoughtful. Are there common problems with White men? Yes. Am I a White man? Yes. Are you going to make nasty comments about my appearance next?
First mention on that Will Stancil tweet: "Just a minor correction, this was written by a white woman." Of course white women belong to their own special totalizing category.
I have a hypothesis on this for some contexts. In the corporate world, identity is the one way to legitimately express grievance. I certainly couldn't go on LinkedIn and offer a Marxist critique of work. But I can express issues with inclusivity, whiteness, patriarchy, etc. People diagnose themselves with mental disorders for the same reason. Critiques are only respected by the upper middle class if they filter through an identity lens.
This might come down to the simple fact that companies can get sued over identity stuff, and not just generally being bad.
Once again, if I refer to a general social phenomenon, people say "you've provided no examples." If I provide examples, people say "this is too personal." You have to decide which is more important to you: specificity and citation, or a fetish for false civility.
"And so in lieu of justice, we’ve arrived at this place where it’s just… a little embarrassing to be a white man? Sort of? In certain very narrow social contexts?" Such as sitcoms, where it's now de rigueur to swipe at the white maleness of the white male cast members. Observed most recently in the otherwise charming Only Murders in the Building, which show's creators (including Steve Martin!) are obliged to apologize for having cast older white men in two of the show's three lead positions.
"...from snide Cato Institute libertarian to weepy woke white man ...." This sums Will's trajectory up so well.
This is spot on.
With one exception: I don't think the quote you've used by Will Wilkinson implicates all white men.
It seems pretty clear to me that he's saying that hostile emailers are usually white men, which says nothing about the white men who aren't hostile emailers. Presumably Will thinks he fits in that category.
Great essay. I now generally read these guys as: desperate midwits in a dying industry debasing themselves for engagement.
The ‘ooh I’m edgy for social justice’ identitarianism did in fact generate some heat 5 years ago when it went against progressive norms that had been pushed since the ‘60s. But now it’s a mature, saturated industry that has been subsumed by everything from the security state, to Disney, to Lockheed Martin, to American Express.
It is a little sad. And unfun. Which is how I feel about Park Slope too. I get that the neighborhood is affluent and the brownstones are nice. But it’s sanctimonious, people dress poorly, a lot of the men have gynecomastia, it’s more parochial than cosmopolitan, and in general filled with the type of upper middle class Leftist wine moms who a generation ago would have been moderate Republicans in Fairfield County.