“What’s with all the fucking gaijin in this area?” “Dude, don’t say that, use gaikokujin, it’s nicer.” “Oh, shit, right. What’s with all the fucking gaikokujin in this area?”
“The breaded pork cutlet bento box is like mega power. More than ramen. That’s accurate.”
all of them start dragging kiryu for his shitty cheap shirt for five minutes
“Shooting people sends a message.” “So does shooting anything.”
(after being told that massage parlors, mahjong, and hostess clubs were cut from the US version) “I feel sorry for the people who bought the American version. SEGA USA sucks.”
S: I don’t know any ex-yakuza running orphanages. K: There was one a few years ago. A good guy. M: You sure it wasn’t just a tax shelter? K: Sure it was a tax shelter but he ran it like a legitimate thing. You know.
Steven Hawking‘s life proves what we should all know to be true: that intelligence without compassion is meaningless, and that every person who is truly intelligent knows caring deeply for others is the smartest choice a person can make
i.e. why when you or someone else gets stabbed or impaled, you should leave the object in the wound until medical help arrives.
THIS. RIGHT HERE. This is an amazing example!!
If you take the thing out, they’re going to bleed a lot more.
SO. DONT.
News Flash from the Medical Help ™ — we don’t touch it either! Unless the object they’re impaled with is literally too big to fit in the ambulance, We. Don’t. Touch. The. Thing.
The only people qualified to Take-The-Thing-Out are surgeons. End of story.
Okay, but for the love of God, please, PLEASE, if you did, if you panicked and took the thing out…. DON’T…. PUT IT BACK IN.
Or else, congratulations, you just stabbed them AGAIN. I reeeeeally shouldn’t have to say this guys, but I do.
I watched Kiki’s Delivery Service for the first time today and it’s a good movie but I couldn’t shake the fact that Tombo is Anime Griffin McElroy and it definitely took away from my enjoyment a bit
The white male style of debate is to antagonize you until you snap. Then they win by default, because they make up their own rules in which being upset automatically invalidates your argument. The key is also to argue about things that they have no stake and experience in, so they dont snap first. Of course in the event that they do snap first, its of course passion, not anger…
White people are like little kids who make up new rules and obnoxious powers to keep themselves from losing….
At the end of it all, they are happy that you are so civil and can debate things rationally and clearly without getting upset. Everyone shakes hands and thanks everyone for being able to discuss “conflicting” viewpoints. Because after all everyone needs to hear the opposing side to truly be sophisticated. Even if you’ve heard that side all your life and it completely devalues you as a human being.
What i hear is that the mark of civilization to white people is being dehumanized and taking it like a champ.
They also have little to no concept of power dynamics in these ‘sophisticated” discussions.
Why I stopped indulging people who followed this argumentative “format”
This is so real and applicable to every dinner party I’ve ever been to
This is a particularly aggressive form of Sealioning.
Sealioning
is the name given to a specific, pervasive form of aggressive and willfully intentional cluelessness,
that masquerades as a sincere desire to understand.
A
Sealion is someone who, when confronted with a fact that they don’t care to
acknowledge, say, the persistence of systemic racism in America, will ask
endlessly for “proof” and insist that it is the other person’s job to
stop everything they are doing and address the issue to their satisfaction.
The
purpose of Sealioning is never to actually learn or become more informed. The
purpose is to interrogate. Much like actual interrogators, Sealions bombard their
target with question after question, digging and digging until the target
either says something stupid or is so pissed off that they react in the
extreme. The other major reason why people hate Sealioning is because
responding to it is a complete waste of time.
It’s
an insidious trap. Responding to questions asked reasonably is, of course, a
natural thing for people to do. I like to do it myself; educating others is
generally pretty entertaining, especially if they are receptive to learning.
Dismissing those questions can appear condescending or rude, especially if you
actually are condescending or rude.
Of
course, these questions are not asked because the person asking them genuinely
wants to know the answer. If they did, they would do their own digging based on
your statements, and only ask for obscure or difficult-to-discover information.
This is the “debate principle”. It is best explained thusly: When you
go to a debate, you educate yourself on the topics at hand, and only request
evidence when a claim is either quite outlandish or unflinchingly obscure.
No,
these questions are asked to make a responder waste their time. It works, too;
I’ve responded to Sealions before, answering all their questions and claims for
evidence, only to be greeted by even more willful ignorance. It’s a way to
force people into responding to questions phrased neutrally but asked in bad
faith.
The
name “Sealioning” comes from a most splendid webcomic, “Wondermark”,
by David Malki.
Sealions are just “asking nicely” but
they are asking questions that have been asked and answered fully many times,
and are unwilling to so much as open a new tab to look up the answer, nor will they
recognize the validity of your sources, your experience or expertise no matter what you do. It is impossible to satisfy a Sealion.
Make no mistake.
Sealioning
is a specific form of harassment. You may not explain their inquiry has already been address. You may not cite a source. You may not refer to a previous answer. You definitely may not ever point them to a
link. You must spend all your time and energy responding as much as you can to every little details of every innocent, polite little question they ask. Sealioning isn’t a sincere attempt
at anything. It’s a calculated technique to grind an opponent down.
If any of my followers feel like you’re being sealioned, I can play elephant seal and help destroy them.
Not only is this a thing, it’s actually something various hard right groups are teaching their members to do. It’s essentially just never backing down no matter what, never admitting someone else is correct, and always try to force the argument onto the path you want to go down. So I’ve found the best way to combat it is:
A) Call them out on their inability to admit they were wrong. This sounds pretty simple, but it’s very easy to get dragged into whatever they say next instead of just pointing out that you’ve proven their first point is bullshit yet they’re still yakking on.
B) They try to box you into a corner? Box them back. If they won’t accept a link, laugh at them for failing to understand it/read it. Call them out for trying to veer the conversation in another direction without yielding the point. Specifically state that you see their cheap tactics and find them weak and a sign of a poor debater.
C) Never let them move onto the next question. Demand they answer yours instead. Why should they get to set the terms of the debate? Why is it always them who deserves explanations?
D) Suggest that they’re arguing in bad faith. That they don’t really want an answer. And if they say no way? Then point out that someone arguing in good faith would do all the things they refuse to. They’d read links and evidence. They’d agree on at least *something*. And failing that, they’d walk away. Good faith arguers will reach a certain point and then just say agree to disagree. But these guys? Won’t. They will not leave it alone no matter what. That’s the hallmark of a sealion trained to demoralise us.
And when they indirectly admit that, you call them out on it.
Then you don’t leave it alone. Hound that fucking sealion until he honks for mercy.
I think there’s a lot of mess in solidarity, because the point of solidarity is a concept—an emotion. You don’t have to like the people you have solidarity with; you just get to be on the same team, and have the project of making the world better. But one of the things that we debate when we’re trying to do that is: Do we want the same world? We agree that we don’t want the world that exists, but do we want the same world? And a lot of politics, a lot of the humorlessness of the political, comes when you realize that the people who share your critique don’t share your desire.
Lauren Berlant in conversation with Bea Malsky, “Pleasure Won: A Conversation with Lauren Berlant,” The Point Magazine (x)
I’m coining generation Nobody Knows for people born in 1995-2000
generation Nobody Knows has the qualities of both Millennials and Gen Z. We are broke and miserable like Millenials and frothing at the mouth and out for blood like Gen Z.