To Be Unpleasant About the Influence of Others
Written by Miranda Vidak
11/14/20223 min read


There’s a phrase I heard two years ago that I can’t seem to shake. Every issue, situation, crisis, or phenomenon I read about seems to be explained by it. It feels like the universal explanation for why so many unpleasant things occur in public discourse:
To be unpleasant about the influence of others.
Read that again.
I’ve read it in a piece by Van Badham for The Guardian, where she took on a thankless job of breaking down the right-wingers’ hysteria about Harry Styles showing up on the cover of Vogue in a dress. “Bring back manly men!” - roared Candace Owens, distraught with the sight of a beautiful straight man in a dress.
In a world riddled with pandemics, wars, human rights violations, and unpunished assaults, a man in a dress is seen by some as the final drop that makes the glass overflow—just too much!
In her article, Van Badham explains it:
“Their adherents chimed in at full social media volume, echoing claims that a gorgeous young man playing designer dress-ups was an obvious Marxist plot to destroy norms and shred tradition. “It is an outright attack,” claimed the book-promoter (Candace Owens), who really should be shown some photographs of the Soviet march on Berlin. When Marxists attack, they tend to use tanks and plant flags on the Reichstag, not muck around with Vogue photoshoots.”
And she continues:
“The culture wars that so many of them fought for a Thousand-Year Trump have certainly polarized discussions of gender, race and sexuality around the west, but they haven’t brought them victory. The Trump project they championed now lies in smoky ruins, overrun by an extraordinary democratic coalition of liberals, leftists and also those conservatives who’d just plum had enough of this gestural nonsense. In this context, the strange outcry against Styles reads like a band of ousted imperialists spray-painting “Democracy sux!” on a smashed wall.”
Gestural nonsense. Phony outrage.
A lot of the right-wing theatricals are simply a phony outrage.
Many people I’ve met who were drawn to Donald Trump's theatrics and supported him wholeheartedly—or even just toyed with the idea of him—made me realize that their admiration isn’t necessarily rooted in his politics; it’s in how he makes his supporters feel.
Influence—they crave it, having never truly possessed it. Surveys reveal that influence ranks higher on people’s wish lists than beauty, youth, or even wealth.
The worst thing you can be in the 21st Century is a person without influence.
When Harry Styles jokingly posted his Vogue edit on Instagram and wrote - “Bring Back Manly Men”, Candace Owens, the woman who wrote it, tweeted:
"When people try to tell me I don’t have influence, and then @Harry_Styles dedicates an entire post to my tweet. I inspire global conversation.”
Influence.
It’s all about the influence.
Again, Van Badham responds to this brilliantly:
“Attack on Harry Styles is no tactical strike. The actor/singer/model/dreamboat has been photographed in all manner of tutus, kilts, heels, and fancy manicures before this. He’s hardly likely to renounce his famous passion for a costume because of some Trumpist mean tweets. If there’s a “POINT” to the outrage, it’s not really to exert influence in debates about performing social gender. It’s just to be publicly unpleasant about the influence of others, like Styles, and to affirm some tribal costume markers to keep grinding their grift among those who remain uninfluential and aggrieved.”
It's to be publicly unpleasant about the influence of others.
The early days of the Trump Project fiasco were rooted in sowing doubt about others’ influence—starting with Obama’s birth certificate. I’d need far more space than this to list all the other examples from his short but unforgettable term.
People hating on Harry and Meghan? Her brother writing to Buckingham Palace, pleading with Harry not to marry her? Her sister behind over 20 hate accounts on Twitter, spreading vicious lies? Their mixed-race half-sister, whom they dismissed as less worthy her entire life, now suddenly possessing immense global influence? Being unpleasant about the influence of others.
The Royal Family feeling salty about Harry and Meghan overshadowing them on their very first royal engagement in Australia? Being unpleasant about the influence of others.
It’s one thing to encounter something in public discourse you don’t agree with, acknowledge your disagreement, and move on with your life. But to spread hate? That’s being actively unpleasant about the influence of others. You took deliberate action, choosing to publicly express negativity toward their impact.
It applies to everything.
Hate comments on your social media posts.
Gossiping about people.
Spreading lies about people.
All is just being unpleasant about the influence of others.