A gatekeeper is someone who decides who is "in" or "out" in a social situation. Of course, there are very literal gatekeepers like security guards and nightclub bouncers. It can be necessary in a university environment to ensure suitable credentials and academic rigor. A good editor strives to promote good writing and journalism. It is not unreasonable for a group to exclude neo-nazis and other disruptive elements. While such people may make mistakes, there is nothing inherently bad about the concept of gatekeepers
However, there is also the self-appointed gatekeeper who claims arbitrary authority to serve their own ends, and not the interests of the wider community to which they belong. After some discussion with my co-workers the other day, I have a few examples to share.
In the tabletop war game hobby, there are many intertwined aspects which different people enjoy to different degrees. There is the strategy of the game itself, the real history or fictional world in which the game takes place, scenario creation for battles, assembly of models, and painting.
There are a few very vocal gamers who loudly proclaim that someone else's unpainted army is an insult to their own hobby enjoyment. People who use miniatures or even small embellishments created by a third party company instead of the official game publisher are somehow deemed lesser gamers, or even thieves. And if someone creates a silly themed army using LEGO minifigs, My Little Pony characters, Thomas the Tank Engine toys as military battlefield tanks, or anything else along those lines, they melt down in a toddler temper tantrum online.
Friendship is magic? Magic is heresy!
These gatekeepers serve to discourage newcomers, berate those who enjoy different parts of the hobby, and create needless division among game groups. While some tournaments have painting requirements, and the new 9th edition of Warhammer 40,000 includes specific bonus points for a fully-painted army to a minimum standard, it is pure egotism to make such demands of other players in a casual setting.
One of my co-workers is an avid quilter. She has had her work published in various quilting journals and has helped write tutorials and create new patterns for some. She also just enjoys making special quilts for people.
Yesterday, she told me about a quilting group that did not survive for long because there was a gatekeeper.
This woman looked down on people who quilted with mundane fabric not purchased specifically from a quilt shop. She didn't like it when people changed colors from a given pattern, and heaven forbid you seek inspiration from other quilts and create something derived from several sources. That's like stealing! How dare people have priorities other than coming to the meetings? If you do come to the meeting, but don't work on quilting, why are you even here?
This kind of person is a cancer. Maybe a legitimate gatekeeper could have kept out such a self-righteous control freak, but casual get-togethers aren't built around that kind of vetting in the first place. The group eventually dispersed, and people found better ways to engage with other quilters.
Another co-worker has been participating in fitness programs in a local startup gym. This particular establishment does not seem to suffer from the plague of fitness gatekeepers, and many national chain gyms have signs about inclusiveness and "no judgement," but there are gym rat gatekeepers at some establishments, and anyone who has looked for a new gym probably has met a few.
Sometimes it is the other members who scorn those who are overweight. How dare they be attempting the very thing that would address the issue you mock?
Sometimes it is even the trainers who have no patience for people who don't know how to properly use the equipment. How dare they ask the person who knows how?
You don't belong among us! How dare you be imperfect?
Some of you may have noticed that I consider myself an anarchist. However, because I advocate for the legitimacy of Lockean homesteading and voluntary market exchange of goods and services, many other anarchist gatekeepers insist that I am somehow a closet authoritarian. Oddly enough, many of these gatekeepers also advocate a centrally-planned command economy with compulsory education, mandatory universal healthcare, and courts that punish people like me for thoughtcrime.
Somehow, this self-contradiction completely escapes them. It isn't an oppressive government if they're the ones in charge of a territorial monopoly in violence who harm people who disagree with them?
What self-appointed gatekeeper nonsense have you experienced in areas of your life? What standards do you believe should be enforced by legitimate gatekeepers? Chime in below!
