Don't Mistake Emotional Dysregulation for Passionate Advocacy

Or you'll regret it

Liberty Leading the People, Eugène Delacroix (1830)

All too often in activist circles, I see people who seem incapable of controlling their emotions presented as passionate advocates. The thinking goes that the more they feel—or the more they can express they feel—the more they must care about the cause. To be honest, I think this is usually a better indicator of how much they care about themselves.

I’m not saying that the only good activist is a stoic one. We all care deeply about our issues, and we all show it. But where it crosses into the territory of using emotion as manipulation is where I think people need to watch out. It’s a line that I think many advocates for any given issue cross, and I think too many people fall for it.

A good example of this is Jonathan van Ness. Oh, how I loathe to even type that man’s name. I look at him and all I see is an overgrown toddler—a particularly unpleasant one.

Consider his antics last year on Dax Shepard’s podcast when Sherpard said, “Some people are very uncomfortable about teenagers transitioning. They’re challenging that. How do we know that the person’s not gonna change their mind?” He also added “To even question it makes you an enemy. I don’t think that’s the way forward.”

In response to this, Van Ness cried and complained about being exhausted.

This is not how you have a conversation about a difficult issue. You don’t win just because you are the most upset.

(As an aside, Van Ness has been in the news recently for purportedly being toxic to work with on Queer Eye. I am not surprised in the least. He is a classic vulnerable narcissist. These are the types of people you can expect abuse from. And really, the only clue that anyone could have possibly needed was the fact that this man identifies as nonbinary and uses they/he/she pronouns.)

This is also exactly the kind of behavior I witnessed at the “2SLGBTQQIA+ roundtable” that I attended to discuss Daniel Smith’s proposed policies to tackle gender ideology. Several of those who were there to oppose the policies, who have every right to have their voices and opinions heard, decided that they weren’t interested in having a rational discussion. Instead, their strategy seemed to be to cry the most tears and accuse the government of driving children to suicide.

But it’s not only people who advocate for the chemical castration of children who mistake emotional dysregulation for passionate advocacy, unfortunately. It happens far too often in all activist circles, and I don’t think the “gender critical” one is any exception. In fact, there have been many dust-ups lately where I feel that, as a movement, we have allowed the very strong emotions of specific groups of people to dictate the allowable reaction to a certain situation.

I am thinking, for example, of the Genspect blue dress controversy and Stella O'Malley’s comments about lesbian clothing preferences.

It’s perfectly fine to have strong feelings about these kinds of situations. What I don’t like, and what I think is concerning, is when the reaction reaches such a fever pitch that anyone who thinks differently or who maybe simply isn’t condemning the right people hard enough is painted as morally reprehensible.

I also think some people use these situations to showcase their outrage and present it as a proxy for their dedication to advocacy for women and children—when what they are really doing is getting high off righteousness.

I don’t understand what can be gained by raging and crying over these issues on hours-long spaces and live streams—but maybe I am biased because that’s what people did about me because of who my best friend is (perhaps while I wasn’t looking, their attacks directly led to the removal of men from women’s prisons?).

Obviously, this issue isn’t black and white. Many excellent and passionate advocates might have a hard time controlling their emotions sometimes, but that shouldn’t negate the work they do. I’m not immune to getting caught up in drama myself, nor am I a perfect judge of character who can always tell you when someone is in it for themselves or For The Cause. For all of us, it’s likely a mixture of both.

Just stay alert. You may appreciate it when someone expresses extreme and convincing emotions over an issue that you also care about, but that intensity and behavior likely carry over into every area of their life and personality. You may like it when they are emotionally steamrolling over your enemies, but you won’t like it if they direct that same energy at you.