The Exploitation of Token Pundits
Posted by Lial on 2024-December-29 00:05:25, Sunday|
In all social groups, there are those who are willing to participate in activities which are counter to the interests of their community. The type of individuals who, were they to have been born in the '70s, would have claimed that their fellow homosexuals could lead perfectly heterosexual lives in spite of the good work of the gay liberationists of the era. These people vary in their publicity and the extent of their assimilationism. What these tokens do not vary in is the fundamental core of their ideologies as well as their use. At their core, there is an essential buy-in to the predominant, conservative frameworks which the majority of their community objects to. This buy-in may be earnest, or it may be cynical (in the case of those who may realize they can profit off a conservative audience.) It makes little difference. This means parroting the points of conservative figureheads who are not of the targeted social group, simply filtered through the token's lens. The formulation differs, but the conclusion reaches the same point (i.e., the restriction or persecution of the group.) I do not need to name many specific figures for you to know who falls into this category. One example is the British trans woman Debbie Hayton, whom was recently utilized in an article by Tom O'Carroll to argue points remiscent of the UK's Daily Mail. The question is not their existence, however. In any group, conservative or even far-right members are bound to occur by simple odds. The question is their presence in these spaces. How is it that a small portion of a minority group, whose will is contrary to most others, comes to be placed above their own community? In spite of the rise of conservatism in countries like the USA, there is still a use to be found by tokenizing conservative minority members. They become essential to the battering ram of pundits. By their presence, it becomes all the easier to dismiss the opposition and obfuscate the group dynamics of the political landscape by pointing to the relatively small selection of conservative tokens. In truth, their presence is a mirage. When someone is put up on a platform, it does not change reality. If they were not in tandem with their community prior, this will not change. However, it does affect perception. By placing those who capitulate to the predominant ideological framework into a closer proximity to respectability, giving them a bigger voice (even if it is a mere echo of their majoritarian counterparts), one artificially skews the perception of their community. The pundit-token in turn comes to represent a larger portion of their community than they comprise, and the rest of the group is seen as increasingly fringe in spite of their demands being more representative of the community's will. In this way, tokens are exploited in the most literal way. They may or may not experience cushier lives for their tokenization. I do not care to question their psychological state. They are, however, used for an end that is not unto themselves. Their use in the broader paradigm represents a manipulation by their majority counterparts - e.g., trans tokens utilized by cisgender conservatives - to further their own points. Whether or not their points give these tokens proper respect or will lead to their full liberty is not really in earnest discussion here. For this reason, I have rarely found any interest in actually presenting a counterargument when someone utilizes such a pundit-token. They have faltered on the first step of understanding the dynamics at play. Their use of these figures is, in essence, a rhetorical ploy - to be disregarded as skewing the reality of the group which they are attempting to portray. All points which can be made with token-pundits, can be made more earnestly without their use. In earnest, to dismiss the exploitation of token is to refuse obfuscation of the subject matter. I would suggest one consider this before utilizing them next time, if so they do. This writing has largely been inspired by Tom O'Carroll's piece from around a month back, as I had recently been reminded of it again. This may add due context to those who have read the piece, although this post stands alone well enough. |
Follow ups: