I’ve been doing this for some time now. Even if it’s something that I consider important.
I just don’t see the value in participating in a discussion that I have seen countless times already where the same points and arguments happen over and over again. One that I know wilI turn ugly. It’s exhausting and I’ve decided to just opt-out.
I’m a massive Doctor Who fan and discourse surrounding it has been ‘difficult’ for the last few years. As the quality of the show has varied, some fans have denounced more recent series, and others have become angry that they don’t enjoy the same things as they do. At the end of the day we’re all fans of Doctor Who, we just can’t agree what Doctor Who is, but I think we should accept that and all let each other enjoy the Doctor Who we want to.
Yes. I’m on Lemmy for entertainment. If I’m not having fun or learning something interesting, I try to recognize that and disconnect. Easier said than done sometimes.
Yeah on another community there is a single user who tends to say stupid stuff just to entice a hell thread I started arguing with them once I realized that there was no further need for the conversation I had won because they started calling me a liar I just block them and went about my day
If the question is open, e.g. “do you like apples?” and the question is in my area of interest, I usually give an answer. But if the question assumes an answer or is deliberately polarizing, e.g. “why don’t you like apples?” I pass.
You know who else liked apples? Hitler. Coincidence? No.
Coincidence? No.
Of course it’s not a coincidence. Everyone likes apples. If you disagree it obviously means you’re lying because everyone likes apples.
Everyone is Hitler?
That’s a great point! Not what I was driving at but the logic makes sense to me…
How do you like dem apples?
As bottom jeans
Don’t forget the boots with the fur.
Yes, I do. Sometimes I disagree with something but I know my opinion will not be appreciated and I will be called names for just a different opinion. Often, it’s not that I out those opinions in public but I just think them to myself but let other people be as they are. But that nuance will not come across online.
Yes.
i usually do. it also helps to check first if the sub is light-hearted and sharing is very welcome.
there’s a chance the sub is already at a devolving to name slinging and memes and that requires a different touch.
Religion.
Holy crap are do people on Lemmy seem to have a seething hate for them all. Not interested with debating over something we’ll disagree on. It’s just not a welcome topic here.
People online in general, and it’s becoming people in society at large at an alarming rate.
I think most of us are tired of the vocal minority that exist IRL that are actively harming others (especially lgbtq+, women, and minorities) and the silent majority that are complicit with it, especially in the US.
Religion also seems to have a hatred of every other belief, explicit or implicit, e.g. if you don’t believe in Jesus, you deserve to be tortured eternally. Why would I be tolerant of people that think that’s capital g Good?
Plus, how can you have a debate when one side won’t keep to the basic rules of evidence.
One last thing you might notice is that it’s probably not Buddhism or Daoism that get hostile reactions. That might be worth inspecting.
See, I think this is what they’re talking about though. I hate Christianity. I was raised Protestant and because of other factors in my life, Christianity effectively ruined large swathes of my lifespan. It’s still an active threat to me, and likely will be for my entire life. I’m likely to be a fairly stringent atheist forever.
All that said, edgy internet atheists are one of the most annoying archetypes to run into online. If even a whiff of a religious topic comes up, they pounce and nip and bark. They satisfy almost every stereotype the religious people have of them because they often seem to delight in the cruelty of knocking on beliefs. Like, my whole top comment still being relevant, religion has a reason to exist. It gives people feelings of hope, love, and belonging. Anyone who has experienced a lack of those can understand why people fall into religion and why it’s like any other addiction.
I’m breaking one of my rules right now, talking about religion on social media, but I figured the “meta” aspect of this thread would make it productive. I hope I don’t regret it.
Which edgy internet atheist are you referring to? I’m not understanding how your comment relates to the person you replied to?
Yknow, it’s really something else to come into a thread discussing topics people don’t want to talk about because they get treated to shitty behavior and sealioning, and proceed to sealion on one of those topics.
No one suggested any of the things you are ranting about though. That’s why I’m confused. Someone said that they don’t like talking about religion because it seems to them like lemmy users hate all religion. Someone else responded with a comment saying they believe it’s not all religions and it’s really specific things that most people seem to take issue with, and then you came in ranting about how they are the problem. Wtf?
I just don’t understand how you got that from their comment.
Not doing this with you. If you can’t follow the logic between the post topic, this thread’s OP, and the common experiences of anyone on the internet, that’s fine, just don’t discuss. Not going to do the thing where you’re “just asking questions” and critiquing every pedantic little point along the way. That’s sealioning and it’s tiring and lame and why half of the people here don’t want to discuss the issues they’re bringing up. The only one here who can’t seem to follow the logic is you.
Yeah that’s not what I’m doing. You specifically are not making any logical sense, and instead of engaging in conversation, you’re attacking. I was just confused if you misread the comment above you or you replied to the wrong person. Take a look in the mirror at all the accusations you’re hurling.
No, lately it’s literally been, “all religion is a scourge on humanity.” Christianity doesn’t even broach the subject anymore.
Religion is like genitalia. We assume everyone has one and thats not a problem. You go pulling your dick out in public however…
Honestly that sentiment depends on where you are in the world.
There are some parts of the world where it’s very common to discuss religion, there are other parts where it’s taboo, like you say, it just depends on where you live in the world.
The cool thing is that the internet has brought us all together. However, I find it common that we also assume that others share the same “common sense” that we do, even when “common sense” itself can vary widely from one community to the next.
What you’re doing isn’t a bad thing. I went through something similar.
Your mental health is more important than any online discussion could ever be. If that means less food for the troops and sealions, so be it.
I know you’re trying to say the opposite, but I agree with the sealion in this regard. The human was being racist, and when the sealion chalkenged them to actually defend their beliefs they proved that they couldn’t, and instead of admitting they didn’t have any logical reason to hate sealions, they made excuses such as them being busy with other things, when they could have ended the discussion quickly by admitting they were wrong for hating sealions - or, if they did have a good reason for hating sealions, saying it. He was dodging the question and putting it on the sealion for being rude.
You forgot /s right?
Right?
Replace ‘sealions’ with ‘black people’. Do you still think it’s ok?
Sealioning is not about the content of the discussion my friend. It is about a discussionstyle.
Don’t get the two mixed. If you’re trolling: good job! Have some meaningless internetpoints from me!
If you genuinly don’t know what the problem with sealioning is, I suggest you read up on it some more:
“Rhetorically, sealioning fuses persistent questioning—often about basic information, information easily found elsewhere, or unrelated or tangential points—with a loudly-insisted-upon commitment to reasonable debate. It disguises itself as a sincere attempt to learn and communicate. Sealioning thus works both to exhaust a target’s patience, attention, and communicative effort, and to portray the target as unreasonable. While the questions of the “sea lion” may seem innocent, they’re intended maliciously and have harmful consequences. — Amy Johnson, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society (May 2019)”
I can see why only seeing that comic makes you come to questions like you asked (“what if it were black people?”) But these questions are questions about content rather then the form of sealioning. Of course it is not wrong to ask for sources in a debate. Or to ask questions. It is however, harmful to impose bad-faith, or even ignore boundaries that are given by the other party (hence the sealion being in bed with its debater in the comment, which is entirely inappropriate of the sealion.
Or another definition
*"Internet trolls sometimes engage in what is called ‘sealioning’. They demand that you keep arguing with them for as long they want you to, even long after you realize that further discussion is pointless. If you announce that you want to stop, they accuse you of being closed-minded or opposed to reason. The practice is obnoxious. Reason should not be silenced, but it needs to take a vacation sometimes.
— Walter Sinnot-Armstront, Think Again: How to Reason and Argue (June 2018)." *
Now you see why I didn’t even bother replying
Yeah, I thought about discarding the whole explanation beneath it. But then I remembered that the first time I saw the sea lion comic I was kind of confused about what sealioning was and had similair questions.
If interpreted wrong, the sealion comic seems like a fight against questions and evidence. I interpreted it like that the first time I saw that comic. Now I know better though 😜.
Yeah. Why argue with cunts?
Or worse yet, Americans.
Lemmy has some awful communities (no names), that are heavily skewed in one political view, and discussing anything other than their “absolute facts” or agreeing with the group gets you heavily downvoted and insulted.
It’s not a friendly place at times.
After leaving Kbin (for unrelated reasons), where those spaces are blocked by default, I started to wonder if I should leave Lemmy, then realized it was not all that way but only certain spaces, easily blocked ever since 0.19.3. (Reddit had become virtually all that way, so it was making sense to me to think that social media was just becoming that way in general.)
However, saying the names of those spaces out loud is likely to trigger removal by a mod.
This is a real problem for wanting the Fediverse to grow in the future, as unsuspecting new people see that and - the sane ones anyway - don’t want any part of it. Every one of us, unless we were warned, learned the hard way about “those places”. By ignoring the issues, e.g. by leaving it up to each individual user to block those instances, we allow this situation to perpetuate. I for one think it would be far friendlier to block any instance where there is a >75% chance that a new user would be not merely downvoted but outright insulted and make such communities opt-in rather than the current situation of needing to first detect which ones are that way and then opt-out of each one individually.
Yeah. I figure there’s little to no point trying to engage with people online anout topics I feel strongly about. And I mean anything. Like I quit trying to convince people Mike V is actually a worthless skateboarder and king of the kooks, all the way down to the Sex Pistols are a boy band. Not to mention actually important topics like healthcare and reproductive rights. Though, I’ve quit doing it irl too. I think if anyone I talk to can be convinced to change their mind after talking to me, they’re just going to change their mind next time someone else tries. I find it’s better to just be the person I want more people to be and live by example. It’s the same thing I tell my kids- strive to be the person you want as a friend.
But I also tell my kids no one is allowed to play guns and roses in my house, so come to your own conclusions.
I was typing something, was going to just delete. So yeah
Some topics are way too depressing for me to talk about.
People are only ready to receive so much Truth.
And
evenespecially then, likely with anger.… and ofc that includes ourselves as well btw.
It’s not all that different from irl conversations then, except you cannot look in each others’ eyes to gauge sincerity. So ask yourself: why have irl conversations at all - especially when you know they will turn ugly? We cannot really help you further b/c you have hidden behind an alt account here, though I hope this gives you some stuff to think about.
Honestly, my only thought right now is “?”
We cannot really help you further b/c you have hidden behind an alt account
I don’t understand this, do you think I’m someone else from here that’s using an alt? Because if you do, I’m not, you got it wrong.
So ask yourself: why have irl conversations at all - especially when you know they will turn ugly?
I do avoid some conversations IRL because I know they will get ugly and me giving my opinion isn’t necessary or important. There’s a saying in my country about never discussing politics or religion. Seeing how some people can get when you disagree with them, I’ve found it wise to follow it.
Absolutely and specially in this place. But most topics are ok.
Just pretend that we all vaccinate when we are told and you will be fine. :)
