In this week's Monday Tip-Off, Grumpy Elder Millennial Andrew discusses toxic positivity, recency bias, and a lack of critical thinking.
The post Monday Tip-Off: Grumpy Elder Millennial & The Toxic Positivity appeared first on NLSC.
We’re at midcourt, and the ball is about to go up…it’s Monday Tip-Off! Join me as I begin the week here at the NLSC with my opinions and commentary on basketball gaming topics, as well as tales of the fun I’ve been having on the virtual hardwood. This week, I’m tipping things off with some thoughts on toxic positivity regarding basketball and basketball gaming, from the perspective of a Grumpy Elder Millennial.
I’m turning forty this year, which to be honest, is something that I’m still trying to get my head around. It doesn’t seem ten years ago that turning thirty was the milestone heralding an existential crisis! While I’m being honest though, I’ve been leaning into being a Grumpy Old Man for a few years now. Not that seriously of course, but I’ve become extremely comfortable rolling my eyes and grumbling about kids and their opinions on basketball, modern games and their microtransactions, and the state of online discourse. And let me tell you about these TikTok trends and weird haircuts…
Oops, too grumpy! Let’s dial it back a bit. The point is that I’ve recognised that despite constant misuse of the term “Millennial” to describe younger generations than mine, I’m not part of the youth of today. I’m not too old to play video games in my spare time – I’ll leave that opinion to the Baby Boomers, thank you very much – but I’ve definitely aged out of the key demographic that they’re aimed at. Whereas I once greatly anticipated the new, I’m now more inclined to indulge my nostalgia. At the same time, I’d rather not be so out of touch and close-minded that I stay stuck in the past. However, there’s one thing that I’ll stubbornly push back on: toxic positivity.
Now, I’m not talking about toxic positivity in terms of psychology and emotional management. That is of course a real problem, but it’s beyond the scope of this site and my qualifications! No, what I’m talking about is toxic positivity in fandoms: the knee-jerk backlash to any criticism, shutting down all negative opinions and insisting on positivity. It’s the insistence that any complaints just indicate a difficult to please whiner. It’s the assertion that everything new is better, and that any sentiment to the contrary is simply blinded by nostalgia, essentially countering an appeal to tradition with an appeal to novelty. In short, it says you either like it, or get out of the fandom.
To some extent, this is understandable. Even long before social media in its current form, online discourse often skewed negative. You only need to trawl through the archives of forums and message boards to see that. Critical opinions and predictions of failure have been trendier than praise and optimism. In a way, the toxic positivity we see in fandoms nowadays is a well-intentioned response to very toxic negativity. I’d say it’s an overcorrection, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. Negative, pessimistic thoughts are exhausting to listen to after a while, and it undoubtedly gets tiresome listening to an older generation grumbling about things being better “back in my day”.
This is something that I’ve tried to keep in mind as I age out of being a cool young person into a very uncool middle aged person (that’s a lie; I was never cool!). The phenomenon of grumbling about the youth of today is as old as recorded history, or at least, so a quote often misattributed to Socrates reminds us. It is demonstrably true that “young people today” are a point of contention of older generations throughout time however, and it’d be nice if Millennials like me could buck that trend. It wasn’t all that long ago that we were being blamed for everything, what with our love of avocado toast and personal freedom. We know how it feels to be society’s scapegoat.
As you get older though, you do recognise that some of the follies of youth are as evergreen as the griping of “old heads”. Socrates may not have had anything to say about children loving luxury, but Cambridge student Kenneth John Freeman did accurately summarise the ancient art of dumping on the youth. Likewise, another quote – often misattributed to Mark Twain and quite possibly apocryphal – sums up the youthful tendency to be dismissive of one’s elders: “When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years”.
When we’re young, there’s a tendency to believe that we invented everything, or that our creations are unique rather than being built on the foundations laid down by the previous generations. Just bring up a classic Simpsons clip on YouTube, and you’ll see comments that marvel at how the show “predicted modern humour”. The truth is that a lot of modern humour is simply the latest version – the latest mutation, if you will – of what came before. To that point, classic Simpsons takes plenty of inspiration from what preceded it, which is something you realise when you get older and you’ve consumed more media and pop culture, and begin to recognise all of the references.
Alright, so we acknowledge that there’s nothing new under the sun, and that older people have a point about young people, and the youth of today has a point about so-called old heads. What does this have to do with toxic positivity, and in particular, basketball and basketball gaming? Let’s start with “everything new is better”. Again, it’s often argued that rejecting that premise is to be blinded by nostalgia. While that can be true, that’s not the only perspective that comes with age. When you’ve seen your fair share of flash-in-the-pan trends, technological flops, and bad songs, TV shows, films, and video games, you know that not everything new is a masterpiece.
I don’t maintain that “new isn’t always better” due to a belief that everything back in the 90s was flawless, but rather because of the flawed products and entertainment that I experienced growing up that demonstrated otherwise! In other words, it’s the things that I’m not nostalgic for – but remember all too well – that stand as proof that “new” doesn’t always go along with “improved”. Of course, nostalgia can be myopic, and that’s where this overcorrection of downplaying the old and enforcing toxic positivity comes from. Ironically, it’s not a new idea, but I’ve noticed a rise in toxic positivity as a counter to the long-standing toxic negativity, to the point where criticism is taboo.
So, let’s get to some examples of how attitudes have changed in that regard when it comes to basketball and basketball gaming discourse. Ahead of the 2006-2007 season, the NBA announced a new synthetic basketball; a change that didn’t involve enough input from the players. Some players liked it, but there was widespread backlash from those that hated the feel of the new ball. Then Commissioner David Stern was initially dismissive of their concerns, stating that he didn’t see any issues with it. Keep in mind that he wasn’t a professional basketball player, so it came across as an incredibly tone deaf and uninformed assertion. The league ultimately brought back the leather ball.
Stern also often championed the idea of expanding the NBA into Europe, which was often met with scepticism. Logistically, how would that work as far as travel and scheduling? Also, players already have issues with being drafted by or traded to teams they don’t want to play for within the United States and Canada; they’re not going to be much happier about being traded to the other side of the world! While an ambitious and interesting notion, European expansion was seen as a fanciful and unnecessary move for the NBA. Stern was rightfully criticised for focusing on a big, sweeping change, instead of addressing some more pressing issues that the league was facing.
Memories of the backlash to David Stern’s attempted meddling leave me puzzled at the acceptance and toxic positivity surrounding some of the radical changes in Adam Silver’s NBA. If you object to the changes, you’re an out of touch old head, even if you can point out some blatantly obvious flaws. Where we once criticised Stern for considering sweeping and unnecessary changes, Silver is applauded. Since he took the reins, we have a new basketball, a Play-In Tournament that punishes the seventh and eighth-placed teams while rewarding those in ninth and tenth place, an In-Season Tournament that feels like a participation award, and farcical All-Star Game formats.
Point out the drawbacks of some of these ideas, or express the opinion that maybe this isn’t the best ever era in the NBA with players that are a hundred times better than the “plumbers and dentists” of yesteryear, and you’ll be shouted down. I strongly believe this is why more and more retired players are suddenly changing their tune, spouting narratives that disrespect their own era. If they don’t fall in line, if they don’t engage in all the toxic positivity, they’re branded as stubborn, grumpy, and out of touch, which can ultimately cost them their new media gigs. Questioning the narrative du jour is frowned upon, because it doesn’t promote the contemporary product and trends.
This is where I feel like a particularly Grumpy Elder Millennial when it comes to such toxic positivity. It’s a generational and ideological gap. The 90s were very much about counterculture. That’s not to say there weren’t popular trends – in fact, the mainstream was far less splintered than it is now that we can curate our entertainment – but it was more acceptable to go against the grain. As popular as Michael Jordan was, as much as many of us considered him to be the GOAT, there were counterarguments for other players. Indeed, acknowledging other greats or nominating them as the best player in history was seen as being more informed, and not buying into all of the media hype!
Admittedly, that’s the same elitist and gatekeeping logic behind all anti-mainstream snobbery, but the point is that contrary views were acceptable; as long as you could back them up, of course. Even as Michael Jordan was winning, even as the league was thriving under David Stern, both men were subject to criticism, or at the very least, many fans were vocal in their dislike while still acknowledging their achievements. They at least believed what they said, rather than pushing a narrative or throwing out an inflammatory comment to manufacture performative debate. Toxic positivity and a desire to be on trend encourage groupthink over critical analysis and original thought.
The quippy declaration or retort on social media that pulls from a buffet of thought-terminating clichés is now preferred to the long-form debate of the discussion forum. Acknowledging the reality that quality has peaks and valleys, and that something may be in a downturn, is antithetical to promoting the contemporary. Social media has fostered echo chambers, parasocial relationships, and making your interests a huge part of your identity. More than ever, seeing someone disagree with your view, or dislike something that you like, is treated like a personal attack. The backlash to nostalgia has too many people believing that things always get better over time.
We see the same toxic positivity with basketball gaming. Like real hoops, the ability to be critical and not agree with popular sentiment simply because it’s popular was once seen as a sign of being knowledgeable; an asset. Nowadays, criticism of a new game is too readily written off as “hating”; a view to be shut down. It’s what’s given rise to the argument that “people hate every game when it’s new and then like it later“. This of course assumes that everyone has the same opinions, and that there’s never a reason to change your mind, such as when a game is fixed by patches. Again, I’ve seen too many bad and disappointing games to believe every new release is superior.
Then of course, you’ve got the whole “get good” crowd, where toxic positivity blames the gamer for not enjoying a title. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: if a mechanic isn’t enjoyed by 99% of gamers, and the 1% that’s all about the competitive scene only likes it because they believe it adds a skill gap – even when that “skill” is mastering a flawed mechanic – then it’s a bad idea! That game has failed in its primary objective, which is to entertain the people who played it. It’s funny, because that attitude actually has a lot in common with people who are nostalgic for the difficulty in old games that was actually due to primitive design concepts (or the pursuit of revenue in arcades).
Worst of all by far however is the defense and outright shilling for microtransactions. Look, I get that “back in my day” is usually a signal for young people to start tuning out a boomer take, and fair enough. When it comes to fairness to the consumer and value for money though, if someone points out the greed in modern titles and notes how an older game used to provide the same (or more) content inclusive in a one-time purchase, telling them to go play that game or get with the times isn’t putting an old head in their place; it’s admitting that you’re willing to be taken advantage of by a billion dollar corporation that generates profits by designing games to be less fun!
Of course, to refer back to the eternal cycle of young vs. old, the fact that it bugs me also comes down to the fact that I can recognise myself – my own youthful follies – in some of the arguments that I see. I remember desperately looking for the good in a few rough NBA Live releases, because it was the game I grew up with and I was still flying the flag for it. I remember being staunchly Team Nintendo in the console wars of the 90s, and enjoying childish fan art of Mario roasting Sonic with a flamethrower. I remember feeling smug about luring someone into a gotcha in an online discussion that invoked Godwin’s law, an adage that long predated my first foray into forums.
I guess what I’m saying is that as a Grumpy Elder Millennial staring down the barrel of forty…I’ve been there. I’ve been a part of toxic positivity in fandoms, and I’ve come to see how damaging, how simply annoying it can be. I’ve been the young man who thought I knew it all, that I was part of the generation that would right the wrongs of all the previous hapless generations that got us into this mess. I’ve laughed at outdated trends, fashions and so forth, thereby failing to paying heed to the scene from that old Simpsons episode where Abe talks about no longer being “with it”, and warns “it’ll happen to you“. That wasn’t another “prediction“; it was an evergreen observation!
But hey, as long as I’m yelling at clouds, allow me to say this. I’m not yet so old that I think young people know nothing. By the same token, I’m no longer so young that I believe old people have no wisdom to share. Things weren’t perfect back in the day, but they’re not perfect now, either. Some things are better, some things are worse. Nostalgia has its drawbacks, but so does recency bias and toxic positivity. We could all stand to be far more open-minded, and less defensive and confrontational across generational lines. We should be looking to combine the best of the past and present, avoiding those old pitfalls while likewise allowing today’s issues to become history.
Obviously, if all you’re doing is shouting angrily about the “good old days” and being adverse to any and all changes, your opinions have questionable value. However, if you can form well-reasoned critique that demonstrates how something has taken a step backwards, that shouldn’t be ignored. Again, entertainment, pop culture, and technology have seen peaks and valleys; innovations and missteps alike. Humanity as a whole had the Dark Ages and the Renaissance, though modern re-evaluation of the term “Dark Ages” should give us pause to reflect on how those earlier eras in history weren’t as primitive as we often think. I’d say there’s a parallel to basketball here!
In pushing for toxic positivity, online communities ironically amplify a miserable side of fandom discourse. There’s a lesson in the saga of David Stern and that synthetic basketball. Criticism of the new isn’t just driven by nostalgia, or a refusal to adapt. It also comes from knowledge and experience. Of course, not all positivity is toxic, and negativity isn’t always right. Nostalgia and recency bias are two sides of the same coin, though toxic positivity often favours the latter. Still, neither should get in the way of honest conversations about basketball and video games. Instead, we must value informed opinions and critical thinking over hot takes and performative debate.
The post Monday Tip-Off: Grumpy Elder Millennial & The Toxic Positivity appeared first on NLSC.
