Please note a CW for racism, antisemitism, and antisemetic images in the post below.
Recently on Twitter, I've noticed a lot of discourse surrounding the use of memes with antisemitic origins. Most notorious are the Tradwife and the Nordic Man or "Yes Chad" (in the incel community, "Chad" is a pejorative for attractive men who are successful with women). These characters are pictured below:
 |
| A recent viral meme format on Twiter and other social media platforms, where the iced coffee was interchangeable with any small, Millennial comfort (a Frank Ocean album, crab rangoon, the movie Mamma Mia!, etc.) |
However, the problem lies in the original contexts of the characters. Both originate from alt-right circles on the website 4chan: a notorious host for extremist rhetoric. The characters are meant to represent white-supremacist ideas about ideal Aryan men and women. For example, the "tradwife" (shorthand for "traditional wife") describes modern women who take "traditional submissive roles in marriage". The tradwife movement--which is popular in pockets of TikTok and Instagram as a sort of "aesthetic"--frames womens' roles as homemakers and stay-at-home-mothers as virtuous and ideal. As exemplified in the meme below, part of this virtue involves womens' role in the continuation of "pure" white bloodlines. (This incredible Jewish Currents article describes one person's anecdotal experience with "Mommy Bloggers" with traditional values and their connection to alt-right conspiracy theories.)
 |
| An alt-right meme comparing a happy, healthy "tradwife" with "a liberated feminist", who is supposedly unhappy and ugly. Note that the figure on the left is frowned upon for "race-mixing", while the woman on the right is celebrated for her "European roots" and white children, loving "her family, race, and country in that order" |
Similarly, though the Nordic Man is often used in funny, innocent contexts, he still represents ideals of whiteness and masculinity. Compare this benign "Yes Chad" meme with the outwardly antisemetic one below:
 |
| Two memes in the "Yes Chad" format. The second features the Nordic Man wearing a SS officer's hat: a symbol of the Nazi party. |
Depending on the communities we participate in online, we may never have seen these memes used in their original, white-nationalist context--we may know them only as cute iced coffee and gaming jokes. This is where the Twitter discourse comes in. Many people argue that sharing these memes--no matter the context they're used in--is harmful and popularlizes or normalizes alt-right rhetoric. Here is one Twitter thread of many that discourages posting and sharing these memes. The author of the thread argues that sharing the memes in non-antisemetic contexts makes it "harder for Jewish people to detect when they're being used with harmful intent and effectively inflate[s] the sense of community for Nazis by spreading their imagery".
Many others respond that if the memes are not being used in a racist context, then they are not harmful. Some even advocate for "reclaiming" these memes from the alt-right; by putting these historically hateful characters in pro-BIPOC, pro-LGBTQ, and other progressive contexts, we are combatting white nationalism. Is this true? In this context, what does "reclaiming" mean, and who is doing it?
I admittedly have an issue with the second argument due to how memes function as alt-right dogwhistles: "coded or suggestive language in political messaging to garner support from a particular group without provoking opposition". Without delving too deeply into digital alt-right rhetoric, dog whistles in meme format are a deliberate alt-right strategy to recruit people--particularly young, white men in "nerdy" online spaces such as gaming communities--into the movement. Essentially, memes represent racist, white nationalist ideas under the guise of humor, which makes them easy to dismiss as "just a joke" if the recipient is resistant. White nationalists gradually introduce more and more extreme ideas via memes until their subject is fully recruited into the movement. This process is called "redpilling", and this article describes white nationalist recruitment and how redpilling occurs in more detail.
What do we think about this? Is it harmful to spread memes depicting characters originating from alt-right spaces, even if their new contexts do not reference the movement in any way? If so, is it possible to "reclaim" them? Should these memes be considered free speech?
Brynn,
ReplyDeleteThis really opened my eyes! I've seen those memes around the Twitter-sphere and I honestly had no idea behind their true nature. I think this greatly ties into our discussion on post-truth and how harmful it can be. This just emphasizes how even if we are aware of it or not, the spread of political ideals, rhetoric, or criticism is under our noses pretty much 24/7. We really have to be able to decipher these things and not fall into a trap of misinformation.
What a great topic to discuss in the class! Is our speech really 'free' if it is attached to problematic ideology? This reminds me of the Mocking Spongebob meme; although members of the disabled community have spoken out against "tYpInG lIkE tHiS" because it it mocks vocal stimming. The disabled community was deeply hurt that hurtful rhetoric was normalized, especially in a popular meme with an even more popular cartoon character. Is there a way to appropriately reclaim a meme that is deeply offensive to a community? Personally, I think we should turn to the community that would be hurt by the perpetuation of the content. The disabled community was very clear that they did not want the spongebob meme/that textual format utilized; so that closes that argument. If the Jewish community wanted to reclaim the Chad meme and turn it around as anti-Nazi propaganda, by all means - but as a goy person, I don't feel like I can be the one to make that call.
ReplyDeleteI think you make an excellent point that we should consider the context or background of self-expression before utilizing it! Free speech doesn't mean free from connotation.
I appreciate you writing about this--the discourse around this specific meme is something that's been on my online radar for awhile as well. When I first started seeing people talk about how it has a background in white supremacy, I admit I rolled my eyes (probably because the people I saw talking about it were hostile and claimed we need to cancel anyone using it, which is rhetoric I've become less inclined to take seriously). I had somewhat the same view as the defense you mention in your post; I felt that it was such an innocent meme that was used with purely humorous intentions that people were making a fuss out of nothing. But, to write memes off as something that isn't "serious" and thus shouldn't be analyzed seriously would be a dangerous mistake, as memes are staple items of our culture now. They're also difficult to regulate, as there are so many pockets on the internet that are exposed to different trends and often never hear about what trends are problematic. Looking at Gayle's example of the Spongebob meme, I've never heard of the disabled community commenting about it even though it's been around for awhile. Although I would say these are protected under Free Speech (especially since hate speech is still protected), but this does say a lot about what voices are heard and deemed as important in internet discourse.
ReplyDeleteThis blog post was very interesting to me. I think what stood out most was that photo you added of the two women standing side by side. For some reason it made me think how woman almost do not have full rights to self expression without being completely and utterly judged based on their appearance and how they carry themselves. I have been getting into memes recently, and to me this meme (although somewhat hilarious) should be looked at with concerning eyes. Considering context as you mentioned is definitely a crucial thing to do and I could not agree with you more on that. Nicely done Brynn!
ReplyDelete