Tag Archives: sarcasm

Have the day you deserve

I like this little phrase. It’s simple, sharp, and sneaky.

Someone’s being a jerk to you? “Have the day you deserve.”

Someone is rude? “Have the day you deserve.”

Someone intentionally cuts you off in traffic? “Have the day you deserve.”

It’s a rather condescending phrase, but sometimes it’s just the right thing to say to a person who doesn’t deserve to be treated nicely.

I’ve never actually used this. I’ve mostly heard it used on TikTok’s when someone does a reaction video to a rude commenter. But it has a nice ring to it. Someone goes out of their way to be mean… what do you do? Don’t stoop to their level, don’t be rude, just tell them to have the day they deserve.

Anti-Yellow Line

That’s it, I’m fed up! I’m sick and tired of rules limiting my freedom. The roads are public, the government shouldn’t be able to tell me which side to drive on.

It’s my car, my choice.

Prohibitive yellow lines are a symbol of tyranny.

I will not succumb to someone else’s fear.

It’s not about road safety, it’s about control.

When injustice becomes the law, resistance becomes a duty.

I’m not a sheep that you can keep in line.

Motor vehicle death statistics are exaggerated to scare you.

I should be able to drive as close to other cars as I want to.

Mandatory lanes are illegal. They limit my rights and freedoms.

Yellow lines are a symbol of false security.

—–

How ridiculous would it be if we didn’t obey the laws of the road that kept us from colliding with oncoming traffic?

How ridiculous would it be for us to ignore laws and norms designed to keep us, and those more vulnerable than us in our community, safe during a pandemic?

Ad Hominem Attacks on Social Media

Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. (Wikipedia)

It used to be that an ad hominem attack during an argument was a (weak) defensive move, but that is no longer the case… especially on social media. Don’t like someone’s ideas? Attack their character, their physical features, their business acumen, or even their choice of clothing. As for the point they are making, the very thing that was upsetting, this is not dismissed with any points of merit. No, instead it is simply assumed that the opposing view is already a lost argument with no need to fact check or provide counter evidence or opposing rationalization.

I’m not sure when this became so acceptable? It is a weak and counterproductive approach to disagreeing with someone’s ideas, and yet it is pervasive on all social media platforms. While ad hominem attacks used to be used as a poor, defensive response, now it is done as a knee jerk reaction with little thought as to how it undermines any points made in conjunction with it. While ad hominem attacks used to be used by weak people avoiding having to put forth a weak argument, now it is used as fuel to feed the rage that social media can invite. ‘Here is my point, and here is a personal attack I’ll add for good measure.’

Ultimately, here is the problem, an ad hominem attack is literally an argument that preaches only to the converted. It undermines any valuable information or argument that is shared along with the attack. Sure it scores a point with the people who agree with the person on the attack, but it does the opposite with those that disagree, those that the attacker would actually want to convince otherwise. Think that through to its logical conclusion: Ad hominem attacks are great for convincing people who are already agreeable, while angering or being fully dismissed by those that disagree. What does this accomplish?

____________

Addendum: Sarcasm works the same way, pandering to those who need not be convinced, while being dismissed by those that it would be desirable to influence.

Also, this brings me back to the post: Ideas on a Spectrum.

Sarcasm, even spelt right too!

2011-06-20_07

I think Cassie was only 3 years old when she started asking me, “Dad, are you being tar-tas-tic again?”
This is from her Father’s Day card.
It’s interesting but I really don’t think that my sarcasm plays out online. I tend not to use it as it is too easily interpreted as rude or at times even scathing. So instead I barrage my kids with it. I’m sure as they get older their eyes will role-over as I embarrass them in front of their friends, (the eye-rolls have already started), but my editing filter shuts off at home. So, my girls will just have to put up with me… even with my sarcasm. 🙂