Here you will find the stockpile of the social media associated with the Creature's Cookbook experiment. You can scroll through it, or simply use the search feature to find posts by keyword.
For reference, I’ve recently learned that “sea lioning” is a description for a person arguing in such a way as to try and make the recipient irrationally angry (even if justifiable anger) so that they can then point to the irrationality as if it disqualifies the argument.
For example, a racist making facetious and intentionally demeaning remarks so that they can trigger the hearer to punch them in the face, so that they can claim moral superiority and hide behind the protections of free speech.
The next time someone does this to you, even a family member, say the following:
“You must be terribly used to arguing with stupid people.”
And then drop the conversation and walk away.
Works every time.
Why? Because it is not a direct assault. They can’t say “im not stupid!” Because you’re not calling them anything. You’re implying that their company is kept by idiots, which is an indirect sort of insult. It’s also one they’d readily accept, since this behavior is commonly enacted by blatant narcissists. Of course they’re surrounded by fools when so intelligent! But you’re also implying that their techniques for making a case are absolutely ridiculous and without merit, and because you walk away, you force introspectiom. This is, as I’ve said, the only way to stop bullying.
So I recommend you try this strategy. And then cease all conversation with them. Period.
Spelling errors amended, if you’d like to reblog the corrected version instead.
That is not what I have been given to understand from reading about it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
literally more than half of my response was a link to an article explaining that sealioning is persistent bad-faith requests for clarification that has already been provided, so i desperately hope you’re joking because if not then you’re providing a perfect example of what sealioning is
Hahaha irony. No, in point of fact, when I read your reply it did not show the link. I see it now of course, but did not before.
I have looked at other materials on the subject, and all of them have differing definitions.
In any case, the technique still works.
Also, this allows me to put forward that it is unnecessary to be defensive with me. I ask questions with true purpose and do not engage in hostility. I also am not ashamed to say when I am wrong. The purpose of discourse is to learn. You cannot learn without first being wrong. I tell you this as an introduction, as I completely understand why you might have been defensive. It is simply unnecessary with me.
Thank you for the link. It adds somewhat to the comprehension.
@ my followers: ive never had a problem with yall going after someone over a miscommunication before, but let’s keep that streak going, hey?
Was that intended to be antagonistic? I haven’t antagonized you. I have simply said my question was honest and I did not see the link. I am used to people being defensive toward me (if you read my blog description you will see why) and I was simply saying it wasn’t necessary as I was legitimately confused and curious. I am afraid that condition has only worsened at this point. I’m more confused than ever.
nah. it had looked before like you were being an asshole, but you clarified that you weren’t, so i wanted to make sure my followers didn’t give you shit over a miscommunication. that’s all
Oh. Very good. I don’t think I’m an asshole. I do try not to be. Of course if the condition were easily recognized by the carrier it would, one hopes, be rectified in the name of sociability. Alas.
This does bring up the notion of the hierarchy of assholes. There does appear to be one, from those who are self-aware to those who aren’t. Not sure how the classification process should be accomplished. Sounds like a debate that needs to happen.
For reference, I’ve recently learned that “sea lioning” is a description for a person arguing in such a way as to try and make the recipient irrationally angry (even if justifiable anger) so that they can then point to the irrationality as if it disqualifies the argument.
For example, a racist making facetious and intentionally demeaning remarks so that they can trigger the hearer to punch them in the face, so that they can claim moral superiority and hide behind the protections of free speech.
The next time someone does this to you, even a family member, say the following:
“You must be terribly used to arguing with stupid people.”
And then drop the conversation and walk away.
Works every time.
Why? Because it is not a direct assault. They can’t say “im not stupid!” Because you’re not calling them anything. You’re implying that their company is kept by idiots, which is an indirect sort of insult. It’s also one they’d readily accept, since this behavior is commonly enacted by blatant narcissists. Of course they’re surrounded by fools when so intelligent! But you’re also implying that their techniques for making a case are absolutely ridiculous and without merit, and because you walk away, you force introspectiom. This is, as I’ve said, the only way to stop bullying.
So I recommend you try this strategy. And then cease all conversation with them. Period.
Spelling errors amended, if you’d like to reblog the corrected version instead.
That is not what I have been given to understand from reading about it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
literally more than half of my response was a link to an article explaining that sealioning is persistent bad-faith requests for clarification that has already been provided, so i desperately hope you’re joking because if not then you’re providing a perfect example of what sealioning is
Hahaha irony. No, in point of fact, when I read your reply it did not show the link. I see it now of course, but did not before.
I have looked at other materials on the subject, and all of them have differing definitions.
In any case, the technique still works.
Also, this allows me to put forward that it is unnecessary to be defensive with me. I ask questions with true purpose and do not engage in hostility. I also am not ashamed to say when I am wrong. The purpose of discourse is to learn. You cannot learn without first being wrong. I tell you this as an introduction, as I completely understand why you might have been defensive. It is simply unnecessary with me.
Thank you for the link. It adds somewhat to the comprehension.
@ my followers: ive never had a problem with yall going after someone over a miscommunication before, but let’s keep that streak going, hey?
Was that intended to be antagonistic? I haven’t antagonized you. I have simply said my question was honest and I did not see the link. I am used to people being defensive toward me (if you read my blog description you will see why) and I was simply saying it wasn’t necessary as I was legitimately confused and curious. I am afraid that condition has only worsened at this point. I’m more confused than ever.
I currently use the birthday that goes with the Social Security number I have, but that isn’t my birthday
I find points of similarity but Not universals. Because of this I feel simultaneously left out and overwhelmingly aware of the discrepancies in other people’s horoscopes that they ignore.
I feel like that would be really hard to figure out what your birth chart would be. There are ones online to figure it out. But I don’t know how far back they can calculate. It depends on where you were on the planet and where the constellations and planets were at that time. Have you tried using one of the online ones just to see?
I have no details about any of that, so it would be difficult
It’s one of those things where I wish I could help because I love this stuff, but I don’t know how. *Sigh*
what the fuck is going on between poseidon and zeus right now
“Eyes the half of the continent that’s on fire”
Hephaestus can chill too TBH.
*coughs politely*
True, but a racist, Holocaust denier funded a movie about Jesus Christ, the actor and director were struck by lightning multiple times, and half the United States lost their bloody minds for it.
The old ways are dead. People no longer see portents and signs unless they support their causes.
It’s become a culture of narcissism. Not humility and phobia.
No telling how that will turn out, but I wager I’ll be eating my breakfast wheaties one day thinking, “I remember when the planet allowed these children, and now it’s almost impossible to scrounge one up.”
I still think sacrifice is needed. Ya know, to appease the gods. Perhaps flinging Trump into a volcano????? 🤔🌋😁👍
I’m fairly certain threatening the life of the Tangerine in Chief is treachery. There’s a fine line there.
But it’s an HONOR to be sacrificed. 😁😉😏
There is the question of informed consent and whether or not you can give it.
I’m thinking that most human sacrifices weren’t truly consented. Cultures that followed the thought that human sacrifice was the best way to appease and beseech their deities, tended to rely on propaganda, fear and sometimes rope to gain “consent”.
By the by… since consent was brought up… do your meals consent? *question asked with equal parts curiosity and cheekiness*
On the first point, you’re absolutely correct.
On the second…
If they consented to be eaten, then they wouldn’t be edible, as I qualify that distinction. I eat serial violent offenders whenever possible. I don’t eat people who are kind enough to offer.
Call me a “humanitarian”.
While the Trump hasn’t been tried and found guilty of violent crimes (mostly because he has enough money to avoid court)… he has been accused multiple times of sexual assault. He had also stolen from people in the form of not paying bills for goods and services.
I think he is a bad person, consumed with selfish thoughts.
I agree.
I eat based on necessity, convenience, and calculation.
I don’t eat to make humanity happy.
Hmmm… funnily, I don’t eat to make humanity happy, either. Survival dictates that we consume… and so we do. The only difference is how our nature bids us to consume.
Also, I am glad you agree that Trump is a BadPerson™.
So to summarize: Trump is a BadPerson ™, 2017 has been crazy (what with the fires and the flooding), some folks think perhaps the gods are angry….. annnnnd the solution is pumpkin-chunkin’ Trump into a volcano (we settled the whole consent issue).
ps. I hope my horribly dry, twisted sense of humor doesn’t offend you Simon. Though I was being serious regarding the eating bit.
Friend…I pre-date sarcasm.
Side note why would you throw him into a volcano. We aren’t trying to appease Hephaestus.
I think they were planning to do that simply because it sounded like a good time.
One of the Spawn has a toy that I swear is the stuff of nightmares.
Perhaps I will put a video of it on my Instagram. I haven’t decided if I wish to torment you with it yes.
Is it a Furby? If it is you need to get rid of it ASAP. That thing really is evil.
No. After my experience with those awful things, I have made bloody sure they never make it back into my company. This thing is a dog. And I really will put up a video of it, if there is interest.
For reference, I’ve recently learned that “sea lioning” is a description for a person arguing in such a way as to try and make the recipient irrationally angry (even if justifiable anger) so that they can then point to the irrationality as if it disqualifies the argument.
For example, a racist making facetious and intentionally demeaning remarks so that they can trigger the hearer to punch them in the face, so that they can claim moral superiority and hide behind the protections of free speech.
The next time someone does this to you, even a family member, say the following:
“You must be terribly used to arguing with stupid people.”
And then drop the conversation and walk away.
Works every time.
Why? Because it is not a direct assault. They can’t say “im not stupid!” Because you’re not calling them anything. You’re implying that their company is kept by idiots, which is an indirect sort of insult. It’s also one they’d readily accept, since this behavior is commonly enacted by blatant narcissists. Of course they’re surrounded by fools when so intelligent! But you’re also implying that their techniques for making a case are absolutely ridiculous and without merit, and because you walk away, you force introspectiom. This is, as I’ve said, the only way to stop bullying.
So I recommend you try this strategy. And then cease all conversation with them. Period.
Spelling errors amended, if you’d like to reblog the corrected version instead.
That is not what I have been given to understand from reading about it. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
literally more than half of my response was a link to an article explaining that sealioning is persistent bad-faith requests for clarification that has already been provided, so i desperately hope you’re joking because if not then you’re providing a perfect example of what sealioning is
Hahaha irony. No, in point of fact, when I read your reply it did not show the link. I see it now of course, but did not before.
I have looked at other materials on the subject, and all of them have differing definitions.
In any case, the technique still works.
Also, this allows me to put forward that it is unnecessary to be defensive with me. I ask questions with true purpose and do not engage in hostility. I also am not ashamed to say when I am wrong. The purpose of discourse is to learn. You cannot learn without first being wrong. I tell you this as an introduction, as I completely understand why you might have been defensive. It is simply unnecessary with me.
Thank you for the link. It adds somewhat to the comprehension.
Simon's Tumblr Dump 