I have a WIP theory about this type of person on social media.
This isn't about validation or inclusion, if it was, it'd have been over years ago. We're deep in malingering territory now.
1. Creating a divisive persona / Integration
Their bio may mention their membership in an off topic, but sensitive, divisive and prickly issue. The goal is to draw attention to the sensitive issue in the next phases.
They join the group, sometimes not even in the actual working parts of it, but after party social/meta scenes.
2. Exposure and Hijacking
They will tend to put themselves into conversation, conferences, etc. in preparation and in compulsion recreate the issue. The goal is to shift people focused diligently to shift their attention to being a caregiver not for their project or teammates, but to them.
3. Special VIP treatment
Then they get a big smirk when people when management get tongue tied trying to navigate it gracefully. We've seen many surprising public concessions to these types, sometimes based off very flimsy reasons. Which tends to really annoy people who just want to work.
Passerbys also unwittingly aid their endeavors, mistakenly believing they're helping someone disenfranchised and in need.
4. Consolidating (destruction)
When they get the thumbs up on being VIP, they can now consolidate their gains and show what the world is like when only their feelings are cared for.
Cancel culture, trying to ruin people's careers, get them banned, getting in fights with their bosses and chain of command etc. This way they can solidify their need for special treatment.
It's a continual loop of positive reinforcement for them. Since people in power and passerby always cave to them, unwittingly creating more division in an already annoyed community.
5. Preservation / Preemption
To draw the sting of critics, they beat them to the punch by calling them entitled and privileged. Further accuse critics can't grasp and judge their unique plight and never can. Demonstrating evidence of hypocrisy simply validates their presupposition they're underdogs being hounded. So they can repeat and get more concessions and attention.
Other facets: My original theory is it was validation based. It maybe play a role, it's a multi-faceted thing, such as feeling ashamed of their activity some how and want to "come out" in public. But if it was just that, wouldn't they get it off their chest and just over it?
This isn't about validation or inclusion, if it was, it'd have been over years ago. We're deep in malingering territory now.
1. Creating a divisive persona / Integration
Their bio may mention their membership in an off topic, but sensitive, divisive and prickly issue. The goal is to draw attention to the sensitive issue in the next phases.
They join the group, sometimes not even in the actual working parts of it, but after party social/meta scenes.
2. Exposure and Hijacking
They will tend to put themselves into conversation, conferences, etc. in preparation and in compulsion recreate the issue. The goal is to shift people focused diligently to shift their attention to being a caregiver not for their project or teammates, but to them.
3. Special VIP treatment
Then they get a big smirk when people when management get tongue tied trying to navigate it gracefully. We've seen many surprising public concessions to these types, sometimes based off very flimsy reasons. Which tends to really annoy people who just want to work.
Passerbys also unwittingly aid their endeavors, mistakenly believing they're helping someone disenfranchised and in need.
4. Consolidating (destruction)
When they get the thumbs up on being VIP, they can now consolidate their gains and show what the world is like when only their feelings are cared for.
Cancel culture, trying to ruin people's careers, get them banned, getting in fights with their bosses and chain of command etc. This way they can solidify their need for special treatment.
It's a continual loop of positive reinforcement for them. Since people in power and passerby always cave to them, unwittingly creating more division in an already annoyed community.
5. Preservation / Preemption
To draw the sting of critics, they beat them to the punch by calling them entitled and privileged. Further accuse critics can't grasp and judge their unique plight and never can. Demonstrating evidence of hypocrisy simply validates their presupposition they're underdogs being hounded. So they can repeat and get more concessions and attention.
Other facets: My original theory is it was validation based. It maybe play a role, it's a multi-faceted thing, such as feeling ashamed of their activity some how and want to "come out" in public. But if it was just that, wouldn't they get it off their chest and just over it?