I'VE fallen in to a podcast rabbit hole.
It leaves me feeling a little lonesome if I don't have Ira Glass's rasping tones comforting my ears. His series, This American Life, has been running since the mid-90s so there's a job of work to be done in catching up, but this week I was listening to an episode called Tell Me I'm Fat.
In it, the American writer Lindy West details a ferocious spat she had with her colleague Dan Savage. It was a back and forth about Savage's writing on the obesity epidemic, which contained some pretty brutal lines about fat people - so, by extension, about West.
What struck me about this incident, though, was a line in which the host says, "Dan and she went out once for beer and soft pretzels and talked it out a little to make sure they were still friends. Of course, they still didn't agree."
READ MORE: Sorry was the hardest word for Boris Johnson and the Tories
Of course. They still didn't agree – but they were still friends. This podcast was recorded in 2016, a mere six years ago. Yet the thought of two people having an intense ideological split over a topic, a dispute during which there is no common ground and no willingness to relent a little, and being friends at the end seems like the halcyon surrounds of a bygone time.
West writes about being fat and accepting herself as such. Being fat is an integral part of her identity. Savage is stridently anti-fatness. Of course, they're still friends.
If you spend any amount of time online at all it's impossible to avoid becoming witness to raging identity war clashes.
Despite these being intellectual disputes you can feel people's physiological response, the way the fight or flight reaction is kicking in when they start bickering over something that truly matters to them, whether it's Scottish independence or feminism or bike lanes.
It seems impossible to say: you know, I acknowledge all the pros and cons of a situation but, on balance, this is what I think. You have to be right and the other person has to be dead to you.
Nicola Sturgeon, at an Edinburgh Festival appearance, raised eyebrows when she said she feels British as well as Scottish.
This should be nothing more than a mildly interesting line. Of course, it's not, it's headline grabbing because it's assumed that de facto leader of the Scottish independence campaign must flatly reject all things British.
Identity is "complex", Sturgeon said. It is, no doubt. People talk about feeling Scottish and feeling British. It is, it's said, about respecting and believing in a set of values that represent the feeling of Britishness or Scottishness. I'm not really sure what it means to feel either of those things, national identity is not really anything I've ever particularly chimed with, but I respect that other people do.
Respecting the validity of feelings over the stone ground of fact is another stumbling block to healthy dispute. I feel, therefore I am, is the modern take.
Feelings take precedence. Identity is a feeling. And when something as important as your very core self is under attack, people lash out.
READ MORE: Batgirl was vanquished by Glasgow - and here's why
At the same time as Lindy West was taking soft pretzels with her enemy, the UK had moved from hot disputes about Scottish independence to a hot mess of arguing over Brexit.
Divisions, and more divisions. In the flow chart of identity, underneath the main splits of yes and no or leave and remain, come the sub-identities.
You can be pro-migration or racist; woke or gammon; striver or shirker. Many of these are all lazy, shallow labels created by years of unchallenged narratives spun by sections of the political class and media.
The long spoon that stirs this fetid pot is made of manufactured outrage. You don't need binoculars to scan our surroundings and find the latest confected dismay. This week's most obvious, albeit cross-border, pearl clutcher is the ongoing saga of Sanna Marin.
The Finnish prime minister, renowned for her diligence and sense, was caught dancing. Not just dancing but dancing "flirtatiously" and sitting on the laps of male friends. Ye gads, and she a mother. The woman is 36 years old and previously criticised as a bit stiff and lacking spontaneity.
Let her have fun on a night out without a pathetic additional dose of slut shaming. Marin was compelled to take a drugs test following the incident, the thinking being that her dancing was so flamboyant she must have been on something. She was high on nothing but life and good luck to her.
There's no scandal here, beyond what might be settled during a dance off with Michael Gove.
Meanwhile, in the past six years, real scandals have emerged, both here and overseas, the likes of which would have seemed like overblown fantasy if any pundit had tried to predict them. An attempt to prorogue parliament for six weeks; partying in a pandemic; the ministerial code violated.
READ MORE: Scotland's period dignity officer should budge over
But if we are diverted by fake scandals and diverting our energy towards arguing ourselves exhausted over them, we're distracted from the big picture. From the dismantling of the rights that protect the identities we hold so dear.
From the protection of systems that support us - the benefits system has been openly dismantled as we fight over who deserves to be supported and who does not. From our place in the world as we argue over who is taking back control and who is giving away sovereignty.
Wild excuses are made instead of tackling issues head on: look at Truss suggesting Britain would escape recession if only we all worked harder. Strivers and shirkers, once again.
Adherence without exception is no way to live and move forward in the world, acceptance of contradiction is. We seem to have forgotten that we contain multitudes and instead have become small, accepting only single identities at any one time.
Refusal to engage with those with disagree with - never mind finding a way to respect or partially agree with those we disagree with - is the root cause of so much of the political mess we find ourselves in.
Instead, we should find a way take soft pretzels with our enemies. Of course.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel