To De Wever, the ban on rainbow T-shirts fits in perfectly with an earlier ban on religious and ideological symbols. But to many people, mostly on the left, this was just another demonstration of the intolerance they attribute to De Wever. The archaic term “obedience” he used – to which gay people “adhere” – reinforced this feeling.

Certain cultural circles feel that the mayor targets them incessantly. They threw a fit when De Wever called a proposal to name the De Coninckplein Herman De Coninckplein, after a popular Antwerp poet, “the most idiotic idea ever”. They hit the roof when De Wever lashed out at contemporary rap music. And they jumped to conclusions when an N-VA counsellor remarked that Antwerp could well do without a city poet. And every single time, social media supported the indignation of the so-called “culturos”, including a premature Facebook page dedicated to “saving the Antwerp city poet”.

De Wever often complains about the strong reactions he incites. He likes to provoke, though, knowing that his sharp wit will win many a debate for him. Also, his voters could not care less about these issues, be it gay exuberance, rap music or poetry. Polemics like these will never harm De Wever directly.

In a way, the culturos and De Wever are each other’s perfect adversaries. Each new provocation is an opportunity for the left to expose the mayor’s narrow-mindedness, a sharp contrast with its own liberal ideas on culture and diversity. To De Wever, they are an opportunity to expose the ivory towers these people live in and to profile himself as a man of reason and of the people. Although both the culturos and De Wever are rather depressed by these discussions, objectively they both profit.

An end to these cultural wars should not be expected soon, though no one will deny they are a waste of energy. On both sides.