Emily S. Whitten: Geeklitism, Part II
A couple of weeks ago, I talked about geeklitism in fandom, with geeklitism being defined as “claiming you’re a ‘real geek’ and other people aren’t; claiming you’re the superior geek.” I gave a few illustrations of common types of geeklitists I have come across (and find generally obnoxious). I was, yes, a little sarcastic about the way they behave, because I think it’s both ridiculous and harmful. But even though I don’t agree with their attitude, I still understand that they are, as we say, “One of us! One of ussss!” – in the sense that if we weren’t all fans of geeky things, we wouldn’t even be talking about this. We are, by dint of being interested in genre fandoms, all part of the same group; even if geeklitists would argue that point.
I also believe that people with these attitudes, no matter how they might alienate people or make others feel bad by what they say, aren’t purposely trying to be mean or hurtful. They don’t realize what their words say about them, or how they’re perceived by those they try to negate. Why not? Well, let’s go back to the four types of geeklitists I identified last week, with those Geek Badges they wave so proud and high; and see if we can look beyond the attitude to understand what they’re really saying; something they may not have tried to do themselves. Let’s also look at why these attitudes are unhelpful or hurtful to others.
Type 1: The Bullied Geek Badge of Experience
The attitude:
“As a child (and possibly into adulthood), I was bullied, belittled, or ostracized by others in my peer group because of my genre interests. If you didn’t have my exact experiences, you can’t understand or be part of my group.”
What they are really saying:
“I went through these negative experiences and survived. These experiences made me a stronger person and helped me build my identity, and if you haven’t experienced that, you can’t understand what I went through or what my interests mean to me. I perceive that I suffered unfairly because of the things I loved, but I didn’t give up on them. Claiming your place in this fandom falsely indicates to me and others in this group that you are also someone with that level of commitment, when you were not. This takes away the sense of identity I retain from my experiences, and the value of my integrity or bravery in sticking up for what I loved in the face of adversity. Also, because I feel that my treatment was unfair, I may not trust you, as someone who didn’t share my experiences, to be someone who won’t persecute me in the future. I am afraid to let you in to the group in case you are like the people who were mean to me in the past.”
Why this attitude is not helpful/is hurtful:
For one, it assumes things about the other people that the geeklitist couldn’t possibly know. It assumes they didn’t have similar experiences, or other experiences that were just as important and valuable to their identities. It negates those experiences by assuming their nonexistence, and/or makes people have to defend themselves by opening up and sharing possibly painful parts of their own history that they wouldn’t feel comfortable sharing if their identities had not been challenged. For another, even if other people didn’t have the experiences of the geeklitist, it assumes they are not intelligent or emotionally advanced enough to empathize anyway, and also that their lack of that experience makes them people of lesser quality. It also may assume they are untrustworthy or bullies when they are not. It invalidates their importance as whole people in their own right by claiming the past experience of the geeklitist to be a necessary part of true character development.
Type 2: The Encyclopedia Geek Badge of Intelligence
The attitude:
“I know more about this geek topic and fandom than you do. If you don’t know the things I know, you can’t be part of my group.”
What they are really saying:
“I have invested a lot of time in absorbing and learning about my genre loves and fandoms and feel that I now know a lot about it, which proves that I am a true fan. If you know less than I do and claim to be in the same group, that means that you are saying you can achieve the same thing I did with less knowledge and time spent on this passion/hobby/lifestyle. You are also saying that anybody can be a part of a group that I worked hard to belong in. This threatens or negates my achievements, knowledge, or devotion.”
Why this attitude is not helpful/is hurtful:
For one, the geeklitist is calling other people less knowledgeable, which is always insulting and frequently inaccurate. The geeklitist is challenging the achievements and determination or devotion of other people, while also indicating that their interests and achievements (whatever they may be) are less objectively important than those of the geeklitist. The geeklitist is belittling others’ dedication, intelligence, and sense of self based on the tastes and choices that the geeklitist values, rather than the idea that other interests can be just as valuable to others, and just as objectively important.
Type 3: The Discovery Geek Badge of Priority
The attitude: I have known about this fandom since the day it came to be. You just got here. You didn’t recognize the value of this when it first appeared, and haven’t put in the time and effort I have to appreciate or preserve it. You aren’t a true fan like me.
What they are really saying:
“I feel a deep kinship to this fandom because I’ve been in it since day one, which gives me a sense of belonging and being special. (And possibly: I am so special here that sometimes even other fans recognize how important I am to this fandom.) I appreciated it when others didn’t, which means I have a finer ability to recognize quality than the masses. I put effort into helping to keep this going, and (possibly) sometimes even the famous people involved have expressed their thanks at my actions. This makes me feel like a contributor and person of value. If you come to my group and overshadow my sense of value, all of the positive personal qualities I associate with my involvement in this fandom are threatened. You are threatening my identity.”
Why this attitude is not helpful/is hurtful:
The geeklitist is using a false assumption that the amount of time or energy spent focused on something is equal to the devotion someone might feel to it, and that the priority of those who “came first” somehow increases the value of their contributions. By doing so, he or she is negating the value of others’ experiences, actions, and feelings in something that they may care just as much about. The geeklitist is attacking others’ identities by defending his or her own.
Type 4: The Misogyny Geek Badge of Exclusion
The attitude:
“Girls/Women can’t be geeks like boys/men are. They do not truly understand the value or lore of these fandoms/this lifestyle. They can’t be a part of it. It’s our territory.”
What they are really saying: “I built my masculine identity in part (or whole) on geekdom; possibly to the exclusion of more typical “masculine” pursuits that I didn’t have interest in or wasn’t good at. Since I broke out of the stereotypical male mold to do this, I have to feel that I am still part of a masculine group to retain that masculine identity. If females try to enter this group, my masculinity is threatened.”
What they also may be saying in some cases, when this is combined with Type 1:
“Some females gave me a hard time about my interests at some point in time, because they didn’t fit with what was expected of males. I resent this, because it hurt my sense of my own masculinity.(Or) females have it easier than I do. If they want to be geeks (read genre books, engage in less physical forms of activity, etc.) no one cares, because the expectations put on females are not the same as those put on males. I resent this. Because females couldn’t possibly have had the experience I did, they will never understand what it is to be a geek. When they claim they do, it threatens my masculinity.”
Why this attitude is not helpful/is hurtful:
This attitude devalues an entire half (or more than half) of humanity by indicating that due to different assumed experiences and pressures, no matter what qualities or experiences females may have or have had, they will never “measure up” to what males experienced or can understand. It is, essentially, saying that females are lesser people – in intelligence, knowledge, empathy, identity, and much more. It also assumes that the pressures or stereotypes put on females were not just as difficult to deal with as those put on males. It is again based on false assumptions, and challenges and negates a lifetime of experiences and a person’s identity. It also puts females on the defensive in fandom, and perpetuates an exclusionary dynamic by making them constantly feel unwelcome and challenged in their own areas of interest. This can result in less future effort by females to be accepted as part of the group – which doesn’t benefit anyone in the end.
When examining geeklitism in light of the deconstruction above, maybe it’s easier to see why these attitudes are so toxic to our beloved fandoms, and identify ways to weed them out of our own behavior (because let’s be honest, we’ve probably all been guilty of at least a shade of geeklitism at some point, even if it was fleeting). Maybe we can recognize that we all got picked on at some point for our interests; and that everyone has their own special areas of knowledge that they are proud of; and that everyone was part of the “discovery” group for at least one fandom or interest (or if they weren’t, it doesn’t make them less devoted to it); and that women are equals and people too (this one should not be hard to do, but shockingly, it still is for a surprising number of men).
And most of all, maybe we can all try to consciously remember that someone else being good at something, or a fan of something, or part of something, does not have to threaten our own sense of identity and belonging; and that by including rather than excluding others with shared interests, we can actually continue to build and grow the identities we are so protective of into something to really be proud of: the identities of people who know the value of sharing what they love, who can continue to learn and become more well-rounded people, and who can rejoice in the uniqueness of others as much as we do in our own.
So instead of giving in to the impulse to be elitist jerks when our geek identities are threatened, let’s try instead to, in the words of the great Bill S. Preston, Esq., “Be excellent to each other.”
And until next time, Servo Lectio!
TUESDAY AFTERNOON: Michael Davis
WEDNESDAY MORNING: Mike Gold
