Term for this? "Your Good Thing isn't Good Enough and therefore is Bad!"
April 30, 2015 12:42 PM   Subscribe

I'm trying to come up with a term that describes a phenomenon where someone's genuinely well-intentioned effort is criticized because it's perceived to be not good enough, or ideologically impure in some critical way. Examples inside...

So, there's a thing that happens sometimes, often in online conversations but not always, where a person, organization, or institution makes a good-faith effort to improve or fix something, or do something nice for someone else. And even if the effort can objectively be said to improve whatever situation it tries to address, or the gesture is truly appreciated by the person to whom it's offered, the person or organization gets piled on by critics who accuse them of not doing enough or not fixing the problem in the right way or implementing a solution that is ideologically problematic in some way.

Some examples:

Friend A: "My sister just had a baby and I taught myself to knit in order to make this baby blanket for my nephew! I’m so proud of myself!"
Friend B: "Did you make that out of ACRYLIC YARN? How could you? Don't you know that acrylic yarn is made out of petroleum products? Are you trying to destroy the earth? You should have used wool from a sheep you know personally."
Friend A: "Uh, but acrylic is machine washable. I thought that was good, for something that's going to be around a baby?"
Friend B: “Also, it's BLUE. What were you thinking? How could you participate in re-inscribing gender binaries? Do you want him to grow up to be a rapist or something? God, I can't even be your friend any more.”

Member of a group: "Hey, I brought some apples for us to have as a snack at our meeting today!"
Other members of the group: "Are they organic? Where did they come from? How many food-miles did they travel? Did you pick them yourself? Who picked them? Were they paid a fair wage and given health insurance and a retirement plan?"

I've encountered this phenomenon mostly in left-leaning communities; I have no idea if it's as common in right-leaning or just generally middle-of-the-road communities, since that's not really where I hang out online or IRL. Is there a term for this communication phenomenon? I feel like it's related to crabs in a bucket but that's not quite it. I'd love to be able to have a way to describe and name it when I see it happening.
posted by spamloaf to Human Relations (37 answers total) 23 users marked this as a favorite
 
Best answer: Making the perfect the enemy of the good

also, "being a dick"
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 12:47 PM on April 30, 2015 [69 favorites]


Perfect is the enemy of good?
posted by EndsOfInvention at 12:48 PM on April 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


Ungrateful Arseholery
posted by JenThePro at 12:49 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


"Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" was my thought on your initial question. But upon reading your examples, they have a "holier than thou" quality to them as well.
posted by soelo at 12:52 PM on April 30, 2015 [5 favorites]


Oh my god I experience this all the time. I call it militant ____, or evangelical _____ where the blank stands for some -ism (vegetarianism, veganism, whatever). Self-righteousness applies too.

omg it makes me so mad, too, ugh
posted by Hermione Granger at 12:54 PM on April 30, 2015 [6 favorites]


It's the No True Scotsman fallacy. If you really cared about the baby, you'd have made the scarf out of purple organic wool. If you really cared about the group's snack, you would have brought apples from your own orchard. Etc.

It's hardly a left-specific thing. Turn on Fox News at any time of day to hear the if you were a real patriot argument.

Definitely the appeal to some supposedly perfect quality of extremism that Hermione mentions above.
posted by phunniemee at 12:59 PM on April 30, 2015 [17 favorites]


In activist circles I know this as the "circular firing squad" issue where you're so busy poking holes in the bona fides of your companions that you lose focus on the original issue/argument. There's also the "Well actually" phenomenon which is related but not the same. I see it so often in the online world (or among people who spend a lot of time online) that I just handwavey call it an "internet people thing" even though it clearly predates that.
posted by jessamyn at 1:02 PM on April 30, 2015 [7 favorites]


nthing "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" as a useful maxim; as to a simple label for the concept, the people who are like this are ideologues for or true believers in their ideology.

I have no idea if it's as common in right-leaning or just generally middle-of-the-road communities

Yes. In any group totally or loosely centered around an ideological issue you'll have people who are the enforcers of or most ardent advocates for doctrinal or ritual purity, the ideologues. So you have your Portlandia friends, I have my crazy Catholic friends, others have their libertarian friends, etc.
posted by resurrexit at 1:03 PM on April 30, 2015 [3 favorites]


Best answer: Call out culture might also apply.
posted by Librarypt at 1:04 PM on April 30, 2015 [4 favorites]


Best answer: I'd say this is related to the issues of intersectionality, what solves one problem doesn't necessarily solve all problems.

If you'd like to watch a pretty funny movie that covers this as a major topic, I'd recommend Together by Lukas Moodysson, about a bunch of folks living in a commune.
posted by JauntyFedora at 1:05 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


"The nirvana fallacy is a name given to the informal fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem. A closely related concept is the perfect solution fallacy."
posted by clavicle at 1:12 PM on April 30, 2015 [12 favorites]


As a very left-leaning person, these people sound insufferable and not like the liberals I know. What comes to mind is: "Never good enough." Also maybe being a snob or being militant.
posted by AppleTurnover at 1:19 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


Best answer: Based on the title of your question, I came to say "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" which is one I whip out any time someone is earnestly trying to do a good thing and actually doing all kinds of harm. But based on your longer description, I agree with "the perfect is the enemy of the good" as well as Ungrateful Arseholery and "holier than thou."

I would add that it is very often about one-upmanship/social pecking order more than anything else. In other words, even if you showed up with organic local apples picked by folks who were paid a living wage and retirement benefits, someone would criticize it in order to try to bring you down a notch. Actually, if you really showed up with "perfect" apples, especially then would they criticize because you are making everyone else look bad and it is easier to try to bring you down a peg or three than to try to meet the standard you are setting.

No True Scotsman is similar but is typically about moving goal posts in an argument.
posted by Michele in California at 1:22 PM on April 30, 2015 [4 favorites]


This can also be a form of "Concern Trolling" - when someone who is actually against the cause tries to hurt it by feigning "concern" that those trying to help are actually hurting the cause or "doing it wrong" in some way.
posted by drjimmy11 at 1:24 PM on April 30, 2015 [6 favorites]


It's hardly a left-specific thing. Turn on Fox News at any time of day to hear the if you were a real patriot argument.

I'm not sure that's the same thing. I can easily imagne a Fox News commentator questioning the patriotism of a Democrat reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at a Fourth of July picnic: "Well, I don't know how patriotic you can really be when you spend the rest of the year apologizing for America and emboldening our enemies abroad..."

But the same (imaginary) Fox News commentator seems as likely to give a Republican the benefit of the doubt: "It's not fair to paint Paul Ryan as un-Christian just because he's read Ayn Rand. There are things she wrote that he agrees with, and things he doesn't."

I think there may be a real Right vs. Left distinction on this.

Liberals are more likely to see each situation as a complex thing with many parts and variables, and to feel that criticizing the bad is as important (if not more so) than highlighting the good.

Conservatives are more likely to stick together and present a unified facade, and to avoid criticizing their own members' inconsistencies.
posted by General Tonic at 1:26 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's annoying. I dunno if there's a one-word term for it. "Ideologically and morally more pure than thou, look how much I fucking care and you fall short!" sort of sums it up. It feels like fundamentalism.
posted by Klaxon Aoooogah at 1:34 PM on April 30, 2015


Response by poster: Thanks, all of you -- this has been super-helpful to me in picking apart the different threads of what's going on here. To respond to a few of the concepts that have been suggested already:

"Perfect as the enemy of the good" is really close, but there's a piece missing (which, admittedly, my examples probably didn't illustrate) in that often the implicit or explicit message of the criticism is that not only is the effort not good enough, it actually is worse, or makes the situation worse, than it was before. General Tonic identifies this in "criticizing the bad is as important (if not more so) than highlighting the good."

There is definitely a "holier than thou" and/or social pecking order aspect to what's going on, as Michele in California rightly identifies.

Librarypt's link to call-out culture is very apt -- that's not all of what's going on here, but it's very much a part of it. And likewise JauntyFedora's invocation of intersectionality (which I admit I understand imperfectly at best), with the concept that what solves one problem might not solve all problems (and might, in fact, create more problems -- which is also a piece of this).

What's here already has helped enormously; thank you. If you have further thoughts I'm all ears.
posted by spamloaf at 1:38 PM on April 30, 2015 [3 favorites]


No good deed goes unpunished.
posted by whuppy at 1:41 PM on April 30, 2015 [9 favorites]


"Knock down a peg"
posted by cmcmcm at 1:45 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


Puritanism
posted by Flitcraft at 1:46 PM on April 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


I would also describe this as a toxic social environment. I mean unless the apples are poisonous or someone in the group has a deadly apple allergy, this much focus on being negative and giving zero credit to people and zero respect: That's just toxic.

They may well have good points, but those points can be made without tearing people apart and being insulting and doing what amounts to a public lynching or pile on.

That brings to mind another thing I read somewhere: Those people who value brutal honesty value brutality more than honesty. In other words, it is possible to be honest and value the truth and also value treating other human beings with respect. Humiliating people and attacking them in such an ugly, public way is rarely really about The Truth or whatever their big bugaboo supposedly is.
posted by Michele in California at 1:47 PM on April 30, 2015 [23 favorites]


In political/social-justice discussions, I've heard this called "critique drift."
posted by Bardolph at 2:16 PM on April 30, 2015 [7 favorites]


Something similar I hear in the corporate world is "not invented here."
posted by littlewater at 2:32 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm noticing something similar lately that I'm calling "Criticism for the sake of criticism" - the tendency to shoot off a bunch of shitty comments about something because you think you're supposed to, whether or not it makes any sense.
posted by bleep at 2:47 PM on April 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


It reminds me of this CollegeHumor video about social judgement and the overwhelming consequences of living in the information age.
posted by Enki at 2:59 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


Oh well you know, just to dissent a little, I was quite hurt when I bought my friend a delicious pudding and she told me in detail why she wasn't going to eat it. Several years on I'm more informed about her principles and understand she really does emotionally suffer on behalf of other creatures and her life is absolutely led avoiding as much harm as she can...

so to answer your question, super-sensitive, principled and conscientious?

/only half kidding.
posted by glasseyes at 3:05 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


Pharisaism.

"You charge the people with impossible burdens, though you would not touch them with one finger"

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees!
posted by tel3path at 4:25 PM on April 30, 2015 [5 favorites]


If you're just focusing on the response given, it's a form of proslepsis.

It's a the extreme version of paralipsis, which is when stating and drawing attention to something in the very act of pretending to pass it over is taken to its extreme. The speaker provides full details.

But I may be reading too broad of a definition of "to pass it over"; I also think it could mean "to diminish" or "to deprecate."
posted by singmespanishtechno at 4:27 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


I don't think any of these quite capture what you're after (these are all political jargon), but...

"analysis paralysis"
"one-upsmanship"
"proleier than thou"
"posturing"
"lifestyle liberalism"

But yeah, hanging around people like this is *exhausting.* I don't know exactly what this behavior is called, but I know what the right response is:

"There is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism!"
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 4:29 PM on April 30, 2015 [1 favorite]


"Throwing the baby out with the bathwater."
posted by delight at 4:53 PM on April 30, 2015 [3 favorites]


Priggish
posted by greta simone at 5:30 PM on April 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


These psychology ideas might be related: fundamental attribution error and actor-observer bias. This just seems like simple neuroticism on their part.
posted by wilywabbit at 5:42 PM on April 30, 2015


Shaming
Shame campaign
Snark
Social justice over-warrioring
Philanthropy policing
Nitpicking
Crusading
Finger wagging
Over-raising awareness
Maintaining impossible standards
posted by quincunx at 8:44 PM on April 30, 2015 [2 favorites]


Resurrexit and Michele have it. Ir's a combo of contamination anxiety and general hatefulness. The same puritanical urge to cleanse yourself and your community from "sin" in right-leaning religious communities will manifest as the kind of fucked up obsession with chemical and ideological purity you talked about (callout culture) in secular or antireligious leftist communities and as mommy-blogging war behavior in centrist consumerist ones.
posted by moonlight on vermont at 8:53 PM on April 30, 2015 [5 favorites]


I call it "nitpicking assholery."

The other week my mom was at my house vomiting at around 3 or 4 a.m. and she asked me to pour her some soda (closest I had to ginger ale), and when I brought her the glass, she complained about how the glass was too big and couldn't I get a smaller one. WTF? She apologized later after I called her out on it and she wasn't vomiting any more, but still I was all, "THAT was your priority?!"

Among hippie types I think of this sort of thing as "more hippie than thou."
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:52 PM on April 30, 2015


Seeing others in the worst possible light.
posted by Homer42 at 8:02 AM on May 1, 2015


Response by poster: Thanks again, everyone -- I think many of you have hit on different aspects of the phenomenon, and I've marked several "best answers" that I found particularly useful in giving me frames and concepts with which to view it.
posted by spamloaf at 10:17 AM on May 1, 2015 [2 favorites]


« Older Furniture delivery problems   |   Attachment Parenting = Securely Attached Child? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.