why is gatekeeping considered bad?

submitted by babystud from self.LGBDropTheT

For the life of me I cannot understand why gatekeeping has been labeled as bad. Gatekeeping would have stopped this whole alphabet soup mess from starting in the first place. how u gonna hate from outside of the club if u have to lie your way in? If you cannot get past the gate, 9/10 times it’s because you don’t meet the requirements to be in the group. Its okay to not be included in everything.

all 19 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]FrostyNugsI'm allergic to nuts 37 insightful - 10 fun37 insightful - 9 fun38 insightful - 10 fun -  (2 children)

Because the younger generation is full of brats who think they're entitled to be part of any group if they want to be, regardless of if they fit the criteria. Anything else is like, suuuuper mean, guys :(

[–]reluctant_commenter 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Hey, some of us are trying. :) I'm hopeful we can turn the tide! Frankly, there's a lot of propaganda being fed to us, and whenever I've talked to people directly about it, they're often surprised at the facts and statistics (e.g. LGB being forced to transition by homophobic parents), because that information is so suppressed. Esp in universities.

[–]FrostyNugsI'm allergic to nuts 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm college age too, it's why I get to see this bullshit from other young people every day. You're right that they've been fed propaganda from a young age, so I guess they aren't to blame entirely when it was our parents generation that created said propaganda. But holy shit, it's so insufferable to listen to them talk.

[–]Gearbeta 28 insightful - 1 fun28 insightful - 0 fun29 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gatekeeping is bad if done excessively, like if someone says "hey cool, you're a fan of seahawks, I am too!" And you respond with "oh yeah? Well you're not a real fan until you can tell me who the quarterback was in 1976 and how many interceptions he threw!" That's bad gatekeeping, cause knowing such info has nothing to do with being a fan of the Seahawks. it's related sure, but all he really has to do is like the team and root for them. People have confused that form of gatekeeping with having standards and boundaries. It's only bad gatekeeping when you're trying to kick out people who fit the description based on arbitrary nonsense. Sort of like... TRAs trying to say that TERFs aren't real lesbians. So lol they DO gatekeep in a way.

[–]CaptainMooseEx-Bathhouse Employee 25 insightful - 2 fun25 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Gatekeeping is "bad" in the same way boundaries are seen as "bad"- they force people to think critically about their behaviour and it's effect on others. No one likes having to self-reflect, especially if the only conclusion they can draw is that they may be the bad guy.

And I disagree with FrostyNugs; I've seen plenty of people in the older generation throw a hissy fit when you set up boundaries.

[–]Willpoll 21 insightful - 4 fun21 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

It's not lol. If you look at the people who discourage gatekeeping, it's usually the same people with the toxic behavior that would have them gatekept

[–]ThiccDropkickGay 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

For some reason being excluded from anything is considered this terrible thing. If people aren't allowed into a group they'll twist it into a sob story about how inclusivity is important and how they're entitled to it etc. So we have sexes and sexual orientations being turned into 'identities' that anyone can claim without meeting any of the requirements.

[–]diapason 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I kind of wonder, with my generation at least, if it has to do with policies schools had about inclusion and all that. I remember in elementary school there were school policies that you couldn't "exclude" anyone (which were really unevenly enforced but that's a whole nother thing). It was meant to prevent kids from getting deliberately left out and bullied, but it morphed into you couldn't ever just have a friend group in peace, and it pissed a lot of kids off cause we knew how ridiculous it was even at the time lol. Wouldn't surprise me at all if other elementary schools had similar policies, and if it made some people grow up and still think being excluded from a group they don't really belong with is the worst thing that could ever happen to them, cause we all know they treat being part of the alphabet soup as some exclusive club that only the evil cishets should be barred from 🙄

[–]ThiccDropkickGay 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think I might've dodged the bullet with my school. They were beginning to get like that in the younger grades when I was graduating

[–]julesburm1891 20 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It’s not. It’s people whining that others have boundaries.

[–]KingDickThe2nd 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There has always been a reluctance to gatekeep, this is why NAMBLA was able to infiltrate many US gay rights organisations in the 70s, which caused the global organisations they belonged to (like ILGA) to be banned from lobbying at the UN (something that was only overturned 9 years ago). This obviously caused considerable long-term damage to LGB people because some idiot couldn't say No.

But it turns out NAMBLA had a problem with gatekeeping itself, as it started off as campaigning to change the US age of consent laws to match that of central Europe (13/14) at the time and legalise same-sex hebephilia, but morphed into calling for society to accept sex between an adult man and a 4 year old boy. This (sort of) explains how they managed to infiltrate organisations, yet have completely detestable beliefs.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

NAMBLA is such a disgusting organisation, and I have nothing but contempt for anybody who defends them or tolerates their existence. They are proof that oftentimes gatekeeping is good, and absolutely necessary.

[–]Eurowoman24 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

this is what we get after decades of participation trophies and everyone needs to be included everywhere, all of that PC woke groundwork has led to entitled children.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gatekeeping can be good or bad. It depends on the circumstances. Telling a man that he’s not really gay because he’s masculine is an example of bad gatekeeping. Because gay men can be masculine and half of them are. Telling a man that he’s not really gay because he’s exclusively attracted to women and identifies as a woman is an example of good gatekeeping. Because a man can never be a woman, and being gay means being exclusively attracted to members of the same sex. You have to approach these things logically and pragmatically. And so what if that means being exclusionary? Humans naturally form into groups. Not everyone can be in a group. As a man who is 100% Irish, I can never be a Finn, a Spaniard, a Belgian Fleming, an Armenian or a Greek, no matter how badly I want to be those things. Even if I moved to Spain, learned to become fluent in Spanish, married a Spanish man and renounced my Irish citizenship to become a Spanish citizen, I will never be a Spaniard. I will always be Irish. Not that I’m complaining, because I’m proud to be Irish, and I wouldn’t change it for the world. But I cannot be something that I’m not.

[–]JulienMayfair 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

First, gatekeeping goes on around us all the time. It's basic for social order. For example, if I've made an appointment at the doctor's office and I'm there waiting to be seen, someone else can't come in and demand to be seen instead of me (assuming no major emergency). In that situation, the front office is the gatekeeper for the doctor.

And a certain kind of gatekeeping only allows qualified and board-certified doctors to practice.

However, the LGB fought against the sort of gatekeeping that, say, kept people out of their partners' hospital rooms because they were not considered "family."

It's all very context dependent.

[–]reluctant_commenter 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know your question is kind of rhetorical, but to give a serious answer--

Joke "gatekeeping" subs are funny because they show examples of people drawing ridiculous and arbitrary boundary lines around a topic, boundary lines that don't reflect reality and/or can't be redefined by any one individual. However, as others have pointed out, boundaries are important in and of themselves.

We use vocabulary to communicate meaning. Sometimes-- particularly common with ideologies-- people will try to subsume or coopt certain words in order to smother communication about certain facts. Then, when this act is challenge, they cry "gatekeeping" and argue that their boundary line is correct. In the long run, however, objective reality will win out; erasing the vocabulary used to discuss a phenomenon will not erase the phenomenon itself. (Thinking otherwise, kinda reminds me of the concept of "object permanence"-- "If we don't talk about it, then it won't exist!")

[–]BiHorror 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

it's not usually. It saves fucking communities that for sure. I think it only becomes "bad" is when it becomes overbearing if that makes sense. Not in a way that's trying to keep those who are ill intended away, but just being pretty asshole-y towards everyone.

[–]8bitgay 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gatekeeping is only considered bad in some situations. When it comes to racial issues for example the "woke" people are fine with gatekeeping. They understand easily the issue with saying "all lives matter", or the issue with a white girl going to a discussion about racism and trying to draw all attention to her and her personal problems.

But try to apply the same reasoning with sexuality, and suddenly you're gatekeeping sexuality.

That said that are many instances when gatekeeping is bad too, like others have mentioned here.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Like, gatekeeping as a concept? Or only in this case?

Gatekeeping broadly is hated because it's done by individuals who have impossibly high standards that far exceed reality, like a jerk saying someone can't be a starwars fan if they can't identify the exact comics in Legends that Luke used a red bladed shoto lightsaber.

In our specific case, I don't think it would be the internet common version of "gatekeeping" because it would have been legitimate and done by more than loose individuals and with reasonable standards that make sense