That's a really good point about the term 'alt-right,' Christian, I used it because it's how Evie is often described (including on Wikipedia!) but it is perhaps a bit strong given that they don't publish openly misogynistic or racist content. Then again, there is a lot of antifeminism, and in amongst the fluff they have promoted misinformation and conspiracy theories found on the alt-right. I really wanted to distinguish them from normal Christians, even 'Christian conservatives,' since I think they often go far further (like the Labubu article!) but they are deliberately vague about their precise political leanings so it's hard to know what term to use. They're trying to present themselves as unbiased!
Words are so important though and you've made me reconsider. Since I'm not sure what works best, I'm taking the coward's way out and removing any adjectives. There is now a link from 'Evie Magazine' to the Wikipedia page. Readers can decide for themselves!
Please don't use my critique as a reason to edit your piece. Though I disagree with the particular use of the term for this article, my disagreement was based on the reading of fewer than 15 articles on the site and so I cannot say there is no alt-right content on the site. Additionally, it might alter the voice of the piece to remove adjectives like that from the text. I was merely engaging in dialogue with a piece I enjoyed and I'm always looking for points of discourse that make my interactions with the things I share more than "read this because reasons."
The reason I highlight stuff is two fold. First to share stuff I think is great and second to build community and friendship in a medium that makes that challenging (online). Your article was entertaining, the bit on advising they change the demon to Lamashtu made me laugh out loud, and thought provoking. Let's not let a bit of pedantry regarding American culture wars and political definitions lead you to edit anything.
There is a long history in American politics for this kind of criticism of occult and occult adjacent pop culture that is less mainstream today that it was in the past. That is to say that the Evie article represents and older form of American Evangelical Christianity and is more traditionally conservative in that sense than the Evangelical minister I shared in the music section who discussed Ozzy Osbourne.
I would argue that more than being alt-right, their article is in line with the kind of thing that used to be mainstream in US conversations. Take this 60 Minutes segment on D&D as an example.
All of which is to say that I value you voice and would argue against you making edits, though I praise you for your "Readers can decide for themselves!" stance which displays a true Professorial mentality.
I can only imagine what your commentary would be if I was to write about British politics in a post, given that the majority of my knowledge of Parliament and the Bureaucracy comes from "Yes, Minister," "Yes, Prime Minister," and "Twenty Twelve." I know that you would be kind and I hope you feel the same well intentioned sentiments from me.
I think you made a good point though, and I'm happy to be corrected!
I almost never edit articles (unless I notice typos) and probably wouldn't have changed this one even after changing my mind EXCEPT that I've been ultra-sensitive about how I describe the author of the original article and I do think it's worth removing an inflammatory term that might describe the magazine but may not describe her. I used the fact that Evie forgot to credit her on Substack as an excuse not to use her name, for example, even though it is easily traceable on the Evie website. I'm not used to being so directly critical of a person's writing and I just didn't want to open her up to bullying -life must be hard enough if you genuinely believe the latest trending dolls are possessed! On balance that tipped my decision in favour of making an edit so please don't worry.
Another thing I didn't add to the article because I rarely speak about my own religious upbringing is that my parents were basically just like her and I'm oddly nostalgic about evangelical panics. I missed the D&D one but was caught up in the anti Harry Potter and Pokémon backlash! My parents' faith was extremely unusual in the UK and hugely influenced by things my mother watched and read from the US so I feel like I have a strange affinity with a particular kind of American religious culture...
I was actually going to ask you about whether you were affected by the campaign against D&D and similar games? I'll watch the clip you linked!
You might guess, based on the fact that I always try to focus my critiques on ideas and not people (say in my Star Wars discussion on your Note), that I am 100% sympathetic to your desire to minimize the potential for online bullying. I admire your concern and sentiment there. As someone who studies political polarization, it's always a joy to see someone who emphasizes the humanity of those with whom they disagree, even strongly so.
I'm definitely going to have to write an article about my personal experience with D&D, Heavy Metal (I like Metal but am in no way a Metalhead), and the American Satanic Panic. My experience has me holding a kind of nostalgia as well, though from a slightly different perspective because my parents were largely agnostic. My circle of friends, though, was filled with a variety of faith communities and there is one story in particular that involves Dungeons & Dragons and a game called Star Frontiers that I find particularly amusing.
Thanks for the mention in your rundown! I appreciate. And great read throughout.
That's a really good point about the term 'alt-right,' Christian, I used it because it's how Evie is often described (including on Wikipedia!) but it is perhaps a bit strong given that they don't publish openly misogynistic or racist content. Then again, there is a lot of antifeminism, and in amongst the fluff they have promoted misinformation and conspiracy theories found on the alt-right. I really wanted to distinguish them from normal Christians, even 'Christian conservatives,' since I think they often go far further (like the Labubu article!) but they are deliberately vague about their precise political leanings so it's hard to know what term to use. They're trying to present themselves as unbiased!
Words are so important though and you've made me reconsider. Since I'm not sure what works best, I'm taking the coward's way out and removing any adjectives. There is now a link from 'Evie Magazine' to the Wikipedia page. Readers can decide for themselves!
Thanks as always for your thoughtful response.
Oh dear,
Please don't use my critique as a reason to edit your piece. Though I disagree with the particular use of the term for this article, my disagreement was based on the reading of fewer than 15 articles on the site and so I cannot say there is no alt-right content on the site. Additionally, it might alter the voice of the piece to remove adjectives like that from the text. I was merely engaging in dialogue with a piece I enjoyed and I'm always looking for points of discourse that make my interactions with the things I share more than "read this because reasons."
The reason I highlight stuff is two fold. First to share stuff I think is great and second to build community and friendship in a medium that makes that challenging (online). Your article was entertaining, the bit on advising they change the demon to Lamashtu made me laugh out loud, and thought provoking. Let's not let a bit of pedantry regarding American culture wars and political definitions lead you to edit anything.
There is a long history in American politics for this kind of criticism of occult and occult adjacent pop culture that is less mainstream today that it was in the past. That is to say that the Evie article represents and older form of American Evangelical Christianity and is more traditionally conservative in that sense than the Evangelical minister I shared in the music section who discussed Ozzy Osbourne.
I would argue that more than being alt-right, their article is in line with the kind of thing that used to be mainstream in US conversations. Take this 60 Minutes segment on D&D as an example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFq5aci6CHA
All of which is to say that I value you voice and would argue against you making edits, though I praise you for your "Readers can decide for themselves!" stance which displays a true Professorial mentality.
I can only imagine what your commentary would be if I was to write about British politics in a post, given that the majority of my knowledge of Parliament and the Bureaucracy comes from "Yes, Minister," "Yes, Prime Minister," and "Twenty Twelve." I know that you would be kind and I hope you feel the same well intentioned sentiments from me.
I think you made a good point though, and I'm happy to be corrected!
I almost never edit articles (unless I notice typos) and probably wouldn't have changed this one even after changing my mind EXCEPT that I've been ultra-sensitive about how I describe the author of the original article and I do think it's worth removing an inflammatory term that might describe the magazine but may not describe her. I used the fact that Evie forgot to credit her on Substack as an excuse not to use her name, for example, even though it is easily traceable on the Evie website. I'm not used to being so directly critical of a person's writing and I just didn't want to open her up to bullying -life must be hard enough if you genuinely believe the latest trending dolls are possessed! On balance that tipped my decision in favour of making an edit so please don't worry.
Another thing I didn't add to the article because I rarely speak about my own religious upbringing is that my parents were basically just like her and I'm oddly nostalgic about evangelical panics. I missed the D&D one but was caught up in the anti Harry Potter and Pokémon backlash! My parents' faith was extremely unusual in the UK and hugely influenced by things my mother watched and read from the US so I feel like I have a strange affinity with a particular kind of American religious culture...
I was actually going to ask you about whether you were affected by the campaign against D&D and similar games? I'll watch the clip you linked!
You might guess, based on the fact that I always try to focus my critiques on ideas and not people (say in my Star Wars discussion on your Note), that I am 100% sympathetic to your desire to minimize the potential for online bullying. I admire your concern and sentiment there. As someone who studies political polarization, it's always a joy to see someone who emphasizes the humanity of those with whom they disagree, even strongly so.
I'm definitely going to have to write an article about my personal experience with D&D, Heavy Metal (I like Metal but am in no way a Metalhead), and the American Satanic Panic. My experience has me holding a kind of nostalgia as well, though from a slightly different perspective because my parents were largely agnostic. My circle of friends, though, was filled with a variety of faith communities and there is one story in particular that involves Dungeons & Dragons and a game called Star Frontiers that I find particularly amusing.
Thanks for the shoutout! Great post