It isn't the "not owning" a tv that's hipster.
It's the _humblebragging_ about not watching TV. (Also known as "virtue signaling": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling)
It's the _humblebragging_ about not watching TV. (Also known as "virtue signaling": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling)
While going around accusing people who advertise a lack of Televesion ownership as virtue signalling I think you're missing other reasons they might be doing it, for example:
- Openly seeking some validation from their peers about their lifestyle change
- Find people who feel similar about owning a Television and share ideas.
- Yeah, some people might brag, so what?
Why be so quick to judge?
I agree that people should discuss it as long as it's genuine conversation. The negatives of tv have been discussed for a long time. Neil Postman's 1985 "Amusing Ourselfs to Death" talks about unplugging from tv. The 1953 Ray Bradbury book "Fahrenheit 451" has been often analyzed for its themes of censorship and burning books but the author has stated the larger theme was television and its effect on dumbing down society. Yes, it's healthy to have an ongoing dialogue about this subject.
>People should be able to do so without fear of being ridiculed and accused of "Virtue Signalling.
The "Virtual Signaling" is a good label because it helps separate the meaningful from the superficial. Many people who don't watch tv (or have other strong beliefs such as "not eating meat", etc) lack self-awareness as to how it's perceived by others when it comes to advertising their positions. They think it enhances their appeal when in fact, the opposite happens: the people roll their eyes at the smugness. If "virtue signaling" as a meme helps people become more self-aware, that's a good thing.
>Openly seeking some validation
This is reasonable and possible, but in my observations, I've never seen it.
>Why be so quick to judge?
I'm not judging. I was clarifying to the poster (odiroot) that it's not about the "owning" -- it's the "signaling".
I know, you're probably jumping at the edge of your seat wanting to protest that there is nothing unethical about watching TV. But those who don't own a TV often have ethical reasons, such as not wanting to be entrenched in consumerism promoting advertisements and product placement, or not wanting to have their political views overly influenced by sensationalist mainstream-ism.
I have no idea how you extracted that from my comment.
>I know, you're probably jumping at the edge of your seat wanting to protest that there is nothing unethical about watching TV.
I don't own or watch any tv so you're preaching to the choir. My point is that I understand exactly _why_ The Onion wrote the sarcastic article and _why_ they're called "hipsters". Many people who "don't watch tv" are ignorant of how their pronouncements are perceived.
And instead of asking why or what/if they miss something and having an interesting conversation you get annoyed?
Have I understood you correctly?