Gatekeepin' it real: On the natural condition of fandom

[generic]

The question is really whether or not there is a common, agreed-upon usage of the word "gatekeeping". The entire moral argument collapses when there can be agreement on what "gatekeeping" means. And, who is the authority? Is it a dictionary issued by a collegiate committee, or a common-usage encyclopedia?

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

The question is really whether or not there is a common, agreed-upon usage of the word "gatekeeping". The entire moral argument collapses when there can be agreement on what "gatekeeping" means. And, who is the authority? Is it a dictionary issued by a collegiate committee, or a common-usage encyclopedia?

Perhaps an appropriate phrase here is "gatekeeping gatekeeping".

"Who will gatekeep the gatekeepers?"

 

[generic]

Perhaps an appropriate phrase here is "gatekeeping gatekeeping".

No, perhaps the appropriate phrase is "agreeing on what a word means". Does gatekeeping mean discrimination, or, something else?

 

[Fenris-77]

Perhaps an appropriate phrase here is "gatekeeping gatekeeping".

Hmm. Maybe Gatekeeping-keeping? IDK, this all got ineffable pretty quick.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

No, perhaps the appropriate phrase is "agreeing on what a word means". Does gatekeeping mean discrimination, or, something else?

It was a joke.

But yes. Different posters are clearly using different definitions. Looks like there are a couple common definitions for the term "gatekeeping":

• traditionally: "the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something." (courtesy Oxford, via google search)
• more recently: "When someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity." (courtesy UrbanDictionary)

In the traditional sense, there are perfectly reasonable forms of gatekeeping. In the modern/social media sense that is narrowed to something more discriminatory and derogatory.
So which one is the "one true gatekeeping?"
Ask the gatekeepers of gatekeeping, I guess?

 

[Celebrim]

"Who will gatekeep the gatekeepers?"

Oh that question we can already answer. Morris will. Quote:

"While this is far more rife on social media than here, I want to emphasize in advance that gatekeeping (on either side of the debate, though I'd rather there were no sides to it) is not tolerated here on EN World. Whether that's on the basis of editions, live-streaming, age, gender, or anything else, if somebody says they're a D&D fan, then they're a D&D fan; it's not your place to tell them they're having badwrongfun. If we find anybody gatekeeping others in the hobby here, the moderators will be having a word. And, to be clear, this goes both ways -- there are bad actors on both sides of the current topic. " - Morris

Notice that. Morris threatens to literally gatekeep anyone who figuratively gatekeeps. Obviously no one but Morris can actually gatekeep here, because only he has real authority. He's the only one that can decide who is or isn't in the community. But he wants to squelch the figurative gatekeeping.

I didn't participate in that thread because neither of the things that were being banned, while neither of them were actually gatekeeping, seemed to be the sort of things I'd imagine myself saying, so the thread didn't really apply to me. Likewise, I didn't feel a need to point out the irony of the topic, because someone else did, and Morris seemed to respond to that with jocular good humor.

But then this thread opened with a definition of "gatekeeping" that I find insulting and ugly. I don't think it was intended as such, but it's based off some really ugly stereotyping and then ultimately concludes with an argument that is essentially guilt by association (conflating things that are different) - an association that only works because of the slippery nature of the definition once you start using it figuratively for a lot of different things.

Anyway, Morris (among others) has made this really interesting because in the original post he wrote:

"On the one side there are people claiming that livestream viewers "don't play D&D" or "aren't real fans" (an ugly practice known as 'gatekeeping');"

But then in this thread he wrote:

"It, in this context, relates to the (attempted) exclusion of a demographic as part of the group by virtue of its perceived 'expertise' or 'right to belong' - in this specific case, being "you don't belong in this group because you watch D&D and [I assume] don't play it". It's about deciding who has 'earned' the admission criteria."

And not only aren't those two definitions describing the same behavior, neither describes what the dictionary describes as gatekeeping - which is actually what Morris does and threatens to do.

 

[generic]

It was a joke.

But yes. Different posters are clearly using different definitions. Looks like there are a couple common definitions for the term "gatekeeping":

• traditionally: "the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something." (courtesy Oxford, via google search)
• more recently: "When someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity." (courtesy urbandictionary)

In the traditional sense, there are perfectly reasonable forms of gatekeeping. In the modern/social media sense that is narrowed to something more discriminatory and derogatory. So which one is the "one true gatekeeping?"
Ask the gatekeepers of gatekeeping, I guess?

Understood, and, sorry, I thought it may have been a joke, but leaned more into thinking that it wasn't one when I made my post.

Who or what for example, is the true authority on what "gatekeeping" means? It's all rather silly unless we agree on a definition.

I propose the Oxford English dictionary definition. I dunno, it might help to not debate semantics until the end of time.

 

[Celebrim]

Looks like there are a couple common definitions for the term "gatekeeping":

• traditionally: "the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something." (courtesy Oxford, via google search)
• more recently: "When someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity." (courtesy UrbanDictionary)

In the traditional sense, there are perfectly reasonable forms of gatekeeping.

Ok. Let's just go with those two definitions for a bit.

In the modern/social media sense that is narrowed to something more discriminatory and derogatory.

Read the second one again. Where in that does it mention anything about discriminatory and derogatory? See how you've added some additional meaning to even the UrbanDictionary definition? It may well be presumptuous, arrogant, and rude to "to take it upon themselves to decide", and therefore we might want to decry appointing yourself as a gatekeeper, but nothing inherent even in the slang term inherently carries the meaning you've added here when you appended "derogatory" and "discriminatory" to the definition.

Do you see how slippery that is? Essentially what we've constructed is a new way to call people names, and to justify it through the slippery slope that all this behavior is the same as racial or gender based discrimination.

So which one is the "one true gatekeeping?"

Personally, I go for the one that is original, is in the dictionary, can be understood without a long framework discussion, and doesn't carry sneaky and rather ugly connotations.

Ask the gatekeepers of gatekeeping, I guess?

Did the gatekeepers of gatekeeping decide to take that job upon themselves?

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Notice that. Morris threatens to literally gatekeep anyone who figuratively gatekeeps.

I honestly don't see the problem with that. Morrus literally owns the gate, after all.
How he chooses to police it is, in my mind, completely irrelevant to the discussion of "gatekeeping" in nerd culture or the adoption of a particular definition of that word.

 

[Saracenus]

Now I am waiting for the Alan Moore graphic novel Gatemen... "Who Gates the Gatemen..."

This is drifting into the territory of "you are being intolerant of my intolerance" arguments I have seen (and laughed at, a lot).

Morrus owns this site. So, yeah, by definition he gets to set the rules of this place. If anyone feels that it is too great burden to live under those rules... there is a virtual door for anyone to walk out of this place.