I guess we’ll see. Lion.
It’s also possible that the comic is not the canonical source on sealioning; it’s just one person’s hyberbolic humerous (and possibly flawed) depiction of a phenomenon already well-known to others.
I don’t have anyone on ignore. I just don’t have much to say about this kind of weak attempt at gaslighting.
ETA:
It’s possible. If you can demonstrate that is true from a cite that predates the comic, I will issue a mea culpa. Until then, my assumption is that the comic is the source of the term.
If you don’t want the public to opine don’t publish publicly. And by opining I don’t mean threats, doxing, intimidation, bike locking or anything of that nature.
Which shouldn’t even need saying since this whole concept is not remotely related to any of that stuff.
Who here has been near actual sea lions? I have lain in sand 10 feet / 3 meters from the smelly beasts. You can too if brave+silly enough. Goto Año Nuevo State Reserve south of San Francisco. But I don’t recommend getting close. Those guys are FAST!
Back to the cartoon. The woman says she’s okay with most marine mammals but can do without sea lions. (Similarly, I’m okay with dishes but I can do without gilded plates. And elephant seals don’t excite me but other pinnipeds don’t much bother me.) A fat, stinky, slimy pinniped pops up and requests evidence supporting her ‘dislike’ - which is not what she said; the critter has raised the heat. Had she responded with, “You’re a fat, stinky, slimy pinniped - now get the fuck away from me!” would the critter have departed? Or would it have asked for evidence of fatness, and then for a definition of ‘fat’, and for cites supporting her position, and then on to stinkiness and sliminess, et al, while following her wherever she goes, in public if not private?
I saw no ethnic-social-religious-economic-artistic metaphors in the cartoon. I saw an annoying-online-jerk metaphor. Maybe I’ve not consumed enough drugs to see deeper meanings. More medications, please.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
k9bfriender “You do not need to accept my definition of treason for your use, but you should accept that I am using it in that way.”
What is the substantive difference?
Cite?
No, I don’t think SlackerInc is the only one having difficulty with the cartoon. I understand what sealioning is, it’s not that hard to get it, because you see it often enough - the description posted by GIGO above from the Guardian (post #208) is a good one.
But I didn’t get my own understanding of the term from the cartoon, and I think the cartoon is useless at conveying it to someone coming across the term for the first time. Even when you know what sealioning means, it’s a struggle to force that interpretation on the cartoon. Some elements are present, but not all; and other irrelevant elements are present.
Holy shit! It’s D’Sealion’s longest post ever!
I have to disagree, simply because the cartoon was my first introduction to the term as a result of just binge-reading Wondermark over the past few months. I didn’t come across the cartoon as a result of Googling “sealioning”; it was just one of hundreds I’d been reading. But as soon as I saw it, I thought, ha! It’s Hurricane Ditka! It may not convey the concept perfectly in all respects, but I think it gets the idea across creatively and humorously. The sea lion metaphor is wonderful simply because it’s so totally nonsensical – it could be a stand-in for anything that conveys the idea of an unfailingly polite but relentless gadfly. So when Bone first used the term, I was surprised because I thought it was pretty obscure, but not mystified as to what it meant.
I think this is a really important point. Other people may be seeing it used in context over and over and get their sense of it from that. I looked at the comic within 30 seconds of first seeing it used, and that has been the basis of my understanding of the term ever since. I think a lot of other people will Google it when first seeing it and encounter the same thing. If people are meaning something else than what is portrayed in that comic strip, they need a different term – unless, as I said just upthread, the term actually predates the cartoon, which I doubt but am willing to be convinced of if provided evidence of same.
The self-awarewolf strikes.
To expand on this:
(1) Sealioning, properly defined, is something like this (from post #208):
(2) The rejection of the principles of free speech among the postmodern Left is also a problem, silencing criticism, “deplatforming”.
The cartoon is very poor at getting across that it’s referring to (1). I can see how SlackerInc jumped to the conclusion that the cartoon is really some kind of weak defense of some aspect of (2). But SlackerInc did so in such an assertive and combative manner, which is kind of odd if he really hasn’t encountered the term before; and deserved an equally combative response. But where that response has included people defending the cartoon, I don’t think they are right. The cartoon does a terrible job of getting across what sealioning means.
When you have to explain what your cartoon was supposed to mean, it’s a poor cartoon. As the author pretty much acknowledges there, along with the explanation.
The cartoon was part of a general context, written by some specific person to some specific people. I don’t believe the comic writer/drawer expected it to become a universal symbol of anything. It’s hardly fair to poo-poo it for not being a perfect illustration of human behavior for future generations.
…you’ve been told over-and-over again thatthe cartoon inspired the term. What the word means was derived from the cartoon, the cartoon isn’t the definition, it doesn’t need to predate the cartoon, in fact it makes no sense that the term would predate the cartoon.
But hey, you were perplexed by the cartoon anyway. So it is no surprise that you cannot seem to grasp this very simple concept.
BUT IT’S THE LATTER WOT IT’S ABOUT, for fuckin’ hell’s sake. The comic doesn’t describe (nor portray) sealions as reasonable individuals participating in a fair marketplace of fucking ideas, dong ma ?
(also, I guess he does have me on ignore. And I’d dropped the wall of sarcasm for his sake, too ! Well, fuck him)
I agree that’s what happened. But it’s a bit odd to derive a new word for a concept from something that is not a clear and archetypal example of it.