Why all great brands need enemies and gatekeeping
Every strong subculture is fighting against something, whether it’s a person, a system, or a way of thinking. In this clip from You’re Not the Audience, Parliament Creative Director Calvin Ross Carl makes the case that all brands should have enemies, using punk, the mountain bike brand Marzocchi and its disdain for dentists, and Etsy makers rejecting soul-sucking 9-to-5s as examples. He also takes on the natural gatekeeping that comes with subcultures, and the power and pitfalls of the stereotypes and generalizations behind every psychographic persona. It’s from the You’re Not the Audience episode on subcultures, Build a Subculture, Not an Audience.
Watch the full episode
Outline
Summary
Calvin Ross Carl offers a branding hot take: all brands should have enemies and a little bit of rebel in them. Subcultures always have something to fight against, and that opposition makes it easy to define who a brand isn’t for.
He walks through examples. Punk stands up for the working class against mainstream music and the government. Marzocchi, the mountain bike suspension brand Parliament has worked with, stands up for adrenaline junkies and against nerdy tinkerers and dentists, riders’ slang for rich guys with fancy bikes who don’t really ride. Etsy makers stand for creative independence against soul-sucking 9-to-5s.
Calvin then addresses the gatekeeping and generalizations that come with this approach. Stereotypes hold a whisper of truth, which makes them powerful, but extrapolated too far they become hurtful, so brands need to stay mindful.
Highlights
Subcultures always have an enemy, even if it’s just a way of thinking.
Marzocchi defines itself against tinkerers and dentists.
Some gatekeeping happens naturally, and that can be okay.
Psychographic personas rely on generalizations.
Stereotypes pushed too far breed hatred for a brand.
Key insights
An enemy clarifies who you’re for
Naming what a brand stands against is one of the fastest ways to define the people it stands for.
Insider language signals belonging
Terms like dentists and meat hucking show how a subculture’s own slang marks the line between people who get it and people who don’t.
Gatekeeping isn’t always bad
Brands shouldn’t keep people out intentionally, but a deep interest naturally separates those who are into it from those who aren’t.
Know where generalizations break
Every persona extrapolates from data and instinct. The risk comes when that extrapolation reaches a point that is racist, sexist, or otherwise harmful.
Detailed analysis
The clip balances a provocative idea with a practical caution. Calvin’s examples show that enemies can be ideas rather than people: a mindset, a lifestyle, or a kind of customer. Marzocchi’s stance works because it reflects how its hardcore riders already talk about the sport.
His treatment of stereotypes is notably candid. Rather than pretending personas avoid generalization, he acknowledges that strategists make assumptions all the time and argues the real discipline is knowing when an assumption has gone too far.
Conclusion
A brand with an enemy has a clearer identity and a more passionate audience. Calvin’s advice is to embrace that edge while staying mindful of where generalizations turn harmful.
Transcript
This is my favorite thing. I’ve always had this thought. This is probably a branding hot take. I think all brands should have enemies. I think all brands should have a little bit of rebel in them. That’s probably just my own personal preference, but I think subcultures, to some extent, always have enemies. There’s always something you’re fighting against. It might not be a specific person. It might be a specific way of thinking. It might be something like that.
And I think this is when you start getting into some of the challenges of thinking about subcultures, because I think there’s inherent gatekeeping in it, intentionally or not. And I think a lot of that revolves around any hobby, any really deep personal interest: the idea that some people get it and some people don’t. And that’s okay.
For example, when we go to an absolute classic subculture, when you think about punk bands or something, punk stands up for the working class, and mainstream music and the government are its enemies. Very simple. Granted, that is very much a rebel brand. But then you go to Marzocchi, the mountain bike gear brand. They just make shocks for bikes, but they stand up for adrenaline junkies, and they’re against nerdy tinkerers who want to min-max and make the best out of everything. But then here’s another side of it. This is a term that all the mountain bike guys use when we work with them: they’re against dentists. Dentists was slang that they use for rich guys with really fancy bikes who don’t really know how to ride, and they just get in all the hardcore guys’ ways when they’re riding.
So that’s kind of the mean side of it, but it really easily defines who you’re not for. Marzocchi is about bombing big runs, big jumps, not caring, meat hucking. That’s what they also got. It’s like you’re throwing your meat off the mountain. And the people who don’t do that are dentists, because they’re just guys with fancy bikes that they just want to tinker with. They don’t get out and ride much, and they aren’t in it for that carefree adrenaline thrill. So it makes it very easy.
And I would even like to talk about this idea of the subculture of Etsy moms and dads, or crafting folks like that, where it’s the idea of creative independence. They stand up for that, finding creative independence through hobbies, and they’re against soul-sucking 9-to-5s. That’s a way you can appeal to those people, because that’s why they’re doing it. They want to make some extra cash, they have a really deep passion for something, and they’re not getting their fulfillment through whatever their normal 9-to-5 experience is.
And so, since we’re talking about subcultures that might exclude others, intentionally or not, that is both the power and pitfall of the stereotypes and generalizations that start happening here. And I think in the same way that we think of gatekeeping as not always being potentially bad, I think it can be okay. It really helps us define who’s into a hobby and who’s not. We don’t want to keep people out intentionally, but it just happens naturally.
But I think stereotypes and generalizations can be totally okay, because we’re all doing it anyway. When we’re creating personas for people, especially psychographic personas, you are making assumptions about how people behave, about their emotions. You might be extrapolating it from some data, but you might also just be going on instinct, shared world instinct of what we know about the world, what we know about the customer base, what we know about the brand. And we just take that and extrapolate it out to whole subcultures.
And there is always a whisper of truth in a lot of stereotypes. That’s what makes them both really powerful but can also make them very hurtful, because once you extrapolate it, it can go to an nth degree that becomes bad. So that’s a thing you always have to be really, really mindful of when you’re thinking about subculture work like this, or thinking about extrapolating off of some of those generalizations of a group: just know that once you extrapolate it out, it could go to a point where it is potentially problematic.
So, you know, this is classic. This applies to all things. Don’t be racist. Don’t be sexist. Those things get you nowhere. Those only end up breeding hatred for a brand, and for people in general. Don’t be an [bleep]. Big brand statement this time. Hot take. Don’t be an [bleep]. We need to do a deep insight article on the Parliament website about that.