Let me preface by saying, I would love to hear counter points and am fully open to the fact that I could be wrong and totally out of touch. I just want to have some dialogue around something that’s been bothering me in the fediverse.

More and more often I keep hearing people refer to “normies”. I think by referring to other people as “normies”, whether you intend to or not, you inadvertently gatekeep and create an exclusive environment rather than an inclusive one in the fediverse.

If I was not that familiar with the fediverse and decided to check it out and the first thing I read was a comment about “normies”, I would quite honestly be very put off. It totally has a negative connotation and doesn’t even encapsulate any one group. I just read a comment about someone grouping a racist uncle and funny friend into the same category of normie because they aren’t up to date on the fediverse or super tech savvy or whatever.

I don’t want to see any Meta bs in the fediverse. I barely want to see half of the stuff from Reddit in the fediverse. I don’t want to see the same echo chamber I do everywhere else.

I do want to see more users and more perspectives and a larger user base though. I want to see kindness and compassion. I want to talk to people about topics they are interested in. I want to have relevant discussions without it dissolving into some commentary on some unrelated hot topic thing.

I think calling people normies creates a more toxic, exclusive place which I personally came here to avoid.

Just my two cents! I know for most people using the term it isn’t meant to be malicious, but I think it comes off that way.

Love to hear all of your thoughts.

98 points
*

Or…

“Normie” shows a hint of self awareness that the people on this platform aren’t representative of the general public. We’re a bunch of tech weirdos.

We’re the “abnormies”.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

I guess that’s something I didn’t consider. I kind of feel like that is still creating an us vs them mentality though…

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

But that’s pretty much what a group of people is? The people who are inside the group and those that are outside. What is the problem with this?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I mean not get too far down that rabbit hole, but I would argue that we are all human beings first and we all belong to many different groups, not just one.

And I think you’re missing my point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The problem is that generalization exists.

Every person that ever met or talked to a person that is part of the non-“normie” group does not want to associate with other people that might be in the same group. I’ve experienced it myself often enough even though I don’t consider myself far gone like the people that talk to every “normie” in a condescending way, but they don’t know it.

I genuinely try to hide the fact that I have fun tinkering with my PC or programming because of that. Because I do not want people that are not tech affinitive to think ‘I’m probably just a stuck-up asshole’.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This is absolutely not how you approaching communities. They literally said it creates an Us vs them mentality and you claim that as a positive? Groups are not about us vs them. At all. Nor is it how you build communities. That’s how you create echo chambers and cliques and lead to your own downfall as a community.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

The problem isn’t that that exists, it’s when people decide that not being in the group is bad, and not just a casual state of being.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You missed to very key letters here. Here’s the original statement with the two key letters highlighted:

[…]creating an us →vs← them mentality though…

Nobody that I’ve seen here has said that there is no “in” or “out” vis a vis the group. The objection is over those two key letters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Pretending there isn’t any condescension toward the “normies” when using the term is blatantly exhibiting the exact behavior the OP referenced. It’s not how inclusivity works in a community at all. It alienates anyone that isn’t already a part of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Why? Because I don’t expect a person who’s not entrenched in a specific hobby to understand the ins-and-outs of that hobby?

It’s not condescension. It’s setting reasonable expectations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

No of course it’s reasonable that they wouldn’t understand the ins and outs. The op and commenter you’re replying to are talking about the connotation of the word, not the fact that a hobbyist understands their hobby.

Take the term Trekkie for example – people who are into star trek can become Trekkies which symbolizes that they’ve joined a community. That term can be used to mean that two people both belong to a community (i.e., “we’re Trekkies”) or it can be used to refer negatively to people in that community by those who aren’t in it (i.e., “Trekkies smell bad”).

There are (at least) two things happening here that people are picking up on. One is that context matters, and the way that the term normie is often used is not a positive one. I’ve personally never seen anyone refer to themself proudly as a normie, have you? And the other is that we’re referring to normies, a group we ostensibly don’t belong to, as a homogeneous blob which is obviously not accurate.

I doubt anyone’s feelings are especially hurt if they’re called a normie, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a dismissive and usually negatively valenced term used to refer to a massive and diverse group of people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

There’s a hint of elitism to it though, at least as it’s commonly used.

I saw a comment the other day that referred to Instagram users as “people you wouldn’t want to associate yourself with”. I don’t know who these people think normal people are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I think it is more self-deprecation than elitism as (in my image) normies tend to have more friends and healier relationship and hobbies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I always hated the stereotype that Reddit was full of nothing but loser virgins trapped in their mom’s basement who had no friends and no chance of a fulfilling life.

I mean, sure there are a lot of people there (and here) that probably fit most, if not all of that stereotype, but the constant need to point out what losers we all are is problematic in so many ways. Namely that some of us do actually have friends, hobbies, and lives, but still can relate to the overall vibe of being a bit of a weirdo or a loner or whatever, but also it has a tendency to create this barrel of crabs type mental barrier where it just feels like the constant reminders of “if this is all I am, this is all I will ever be” keeps presenting itself. It’s tiring and is the reason why I always kept all the self-insulting subs like me_irl on my block list.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They probably don’t want to associate with “normal” people because they revel in their “weird” status.

Which, honestly, is kind of understandable and relatable. People are often mocked and reviled for sticking out, for being different. It makes a sad sort of sense that they’d lash out at those that represent that “normalness” that they’re told they’ll never achieve.

I certainly don’t think it’s healthy in the long term, but I can at least fathom the logic that got them there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Tbh, it mostly sounds condescending. Like “they are the normals, as opposed to us, we are the ones that see further than them” a lot of times.

Though I did have seen things that are clearly self-aware, mostly the “NORMIES OUT REEEE”-stuff. But there is definitely both.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

This is my thought. The OP leads me to believe that being “normal” is considered bad

permalink
report
parent
reply

Many of us are also not nuerotypical. Another word for typical is normal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Many is not all. And by creating an us vs them mentality where I’m “us” for the most part, but not for the whole part, there’s situations where the need to choose is being presented. It’s gatekeeping for the sake of gatekeeping, and really isn’t part of a healthy community of people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

My perception inn the early days of reddit was that the majority of users were also tech weirdos. So there’s that…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I am a Fallout Ghoul

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

A slur always tells you more about the person who uses it than about the person they’re referring to.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

How about “I hate Terfs”? What does that make me?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

TERF isn’t a slur, it’s an accurate descriptor.

Terfs are trans exclusionary. Terfs are on the borders of feminist thought, making them radical (and not in the cool way).

They only want it to be a slur so they aren’t accurately described as what they are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Actually I think it is quite a stretch to call them feminists in any way. 99% of the time they ally with the far right and many of their leaders advocate against things like contraception and healthcare for women

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah but “Radical”… TERFS ain’t radical, nor bodacious nor totally tubular dude!

Accept everyone, that’s the TMNT way!

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

It makes you an awesome ally. 👍

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

There’s a specific group of people who readily use the word “TERF”, and you’re clearly identifying yourself as in that group. However, I’ve seen folks use the word “TERF” to refer even to people who aren’t Fs at all, and certainly not RFs. JK Rowling may identify as a feminist, but she’s not a “radical” anything. So yeah, I think using “TERF” does more clearly identify the position of the speaker than the person so described.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

if terf isn’t a slur, Normie isn’t either. people seem to get irrationally upset about the word normal. normal is a well defined word, the same way cis is but it seems one group is fine with one whilst the other isn’t.

instead of focusing on labels and how much they upset you (I don’t mean who I am replying to), focus on understanding and respecting people’s differences, regardless of terminology.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It really does say a lot when the dreaded other that they want to avoid is someone who is normal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

To be completely blunt about it, if someone uses “normie” seriously, I expect they also think they’re oppressed by age-of-consent laws and possibly also laws against rape. At the very least, they don’t own a TV because there aren’t enough lolis on basic cable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Sucks that we have to deal with those types but I wouldn’t go so far lump them all like that. I feel like some of it might involve neurodivergent people who just don’t feel like they get the best of treatment out there. But just this elitism driven by terminally-online brain rot can get bad enough by itself, it’s not a good mindset.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ain’t that the truth.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

I have seen the word normie used in almost exclusively sarcastic or tongue in cheek contexts.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

The internet has a way of taking things that are used sarcastically and removing every bit of irony. The Flat Earth Society, PCMR, and The Donald subreddit all started out as making fun of the people that are now 100% unironically part of very thriving (and toxic to differing levels) communities.

I think that will almost certainly happen to the word normie, if it hasn’t already.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’ve only really seen it in two contexts. Mainly “don’t scare the normies”, which was largely the advice given to my larp communities to not freak out people in real life with their hobby stuff, and probably also applies to subcultures like furries and such. And secondarily as self-deprecating. I’m a Facebook meme group “Normie Has-Beens” tied to the page “Stale Memes for Normie Has-Beens”, and it’s certainly not people who consider themselves normal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It feels a bit like the contemporary counterpoint of 1337, and more or less equally silly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This post and many of the comments should make it abundantly clear folks have an entirely different experience with the word. I’m not sure what you’re trying to add to the conversation other than to try and claim everyone else doesn’t have valid concerns.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

OP asked for my thoughts, I gave my thoughts. I’m sorry you think my experience invalidates yours.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Thoughts can still be provided in a useful fashion without trying to invalidate everyone else’s opinion.

Edit: I didn’t say your experience invalidated anything. Your choice of words did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I have definitely seen it used outside of that. Again, I think the effects are largely unintentional but from an outsider looking in could be very off putting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

nah, you’re right

the term always gives me images of channer culture; like it reminds me when the internet as a whole thought that 4chan and its ilk were cool and elite for being shitty for “lulz”

it needs to be retired

permalink
report
reply
7 points

That’s where it came from. Back in the day when everyone on 4chan was some type of “fag”:

-Newfag - new users
-Oldfag - old users
-Normalfag - normally-adjusted human being not on teh interwebz, later became shortened to “normie”

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Doesn’t “normie” come from /b/? I don’t think I saw it used anywhere else until shitposting subs like /r/dankmemes started calling who don’t use memes correctly normies

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Uh … I was in circles that used words like “norms” and “normals” and, yes, “normies” before the Internet was a “thing”. SF fandom of the '70s was easily as nerdy and toxic as are any of today’s Internet circle jerks.

Sorry, Kiddies1, but very little of what you do is new. Sometimes the techniques are new (because technology happened) but humans have been human for, well, as long as humans have existed.


1 If you’re finding this word offensive, you might want to take a long, hard look at how you use words like the one that triggered this thread before the inevitable downvoting.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I heard usage of “Normie” way back on usenet long before 4chan even existed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yeah agreed. It was kinda funny 10 years ago, but I thought we would’ve grown past it by now. Feels like needless gatekeeping

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Right that’s the vibe I get too!

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Like everything else context matters

permalink
report
reply

Fediverse

!fediverse@lemmy.world

Create post

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it’s related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

  • Posts must be on topic.
  • Be respectful of others.
  • Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
  • Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

Community stats

  • 5.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.7K

    Posts

  • 58K

    Comments