• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The last post is the WINNER!

sun rise

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Stevicus said:
Myths are a myth.
Click to expand...

The myth series are good reading
Many of the names, like so much else in this series, are puns; see the parenthetical comments.
  • Klah: Backwater dimension from which Skeeve hails. General populace (Klahds) are afraid of demons and magik. Kingdom of Possiltum and Twixt are the only places worth mentioning. ("clod", slang for "stupid person".)
  • Deva: Merchant capital of the dimensions. Inhabited by the Deveels, traders supreme. As Aahz puts it, "if you think you've gotten a good deal from a Deveel, first count your fingers, then your limbs, then your relatives". The Bazaar at Deva is the only place of interest, a dimension-wide round-the-clock flea market which sells every conceivable magikal device and artifact. ("Devil")
  • Perv: High-tech dimension where Magik and technology are equal. Pervish cooking is one of the worst smells in all the dimensions (besides Gleep's breath). Pervects are short-tempered and disquieting rumors circulate about them, which Pervects encourage so that people do not visit. Do not ever call them "Perverts".
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
sun rise said:
I find I'm miles ahead if I just apply the old duck test. If I hear quacking I assume it's a duck.
Click to expand...
There is more than one kind of duck. To some, people there's a
new meaning of merely being wrong or dishonest. The mis-usage
I particularly dislike is applying the Jack Manningham variety (from
the play, Gas Light), ie, that they're intentionally being driven insane
by being presented with a false reality.
Some people just gotta learn there is diversity of opinion, & to disagree
without feeling victimized....& to not attack others with such accusations.
 
sun rise

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Revoltingest said:
There is more than one kind of duck. To some, people there's a
new meaning of merely being wrong or dishonest. The mis-usage
I particularly dislike is applying the Jack Manningham variety (from
the play, Gas Light), ie, that they're intentionally being driven insane
by being presented with a false reality.
Some people just gotta learn there is diversity of opinion, & to disagree
without feeling victimized....& to not attack others with such accusations.
Click to expand...

Here you go getting serious again. It's a losing thing to do.

As far as species of duck go, there's enough ancillary evidence that Trump & co are gaslighting or insane.

As far as identifying the duck: When it comes to January 6th, for example, trivializing, denial and diverting are in evidence.
  • Countering: This describes a person questioning someone’s memories. They may say things such as, “you never remember things accurately,” or “are you sure? You have a bad memory.”
  • Withholding: When someone withholds, they refuse to engage in a conversation. A person using this technique may pretend not to understand someone so that they do not have to respond to them. For example, they might say, “I do not know what you are talking about,” or “you are just trying to confuse me.”
  • Trivializing: This occurs when a person belittles or disregards the other person’s feelings. They may accuse them of being too sensitive or of overreacting when they have valid concerns and feelings.
  • Denial: Denial involves a person pretending to forget events or how they occurred. They may deny having said or done something or accuse someone of making things up.
  • Diverting: With this technique, a person changes the focus of a discussion and questions the other person’s credibility instead. For example, they might say, “that is just another crazy idea you got from your friends.”
  • Stereotyping: An article in the American Sociological Review states that a person using gaslighting techniques may intentionally use negative stereotypes of a person’s gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, nationality, or age to manipulate them. For example, they may tell a female that people will think she is irrational or crazy if she seeks help for abuse.
What is gaslighting? Examples and how to respond
 
Stevicus

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
200 (11).gif
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
sun rise said:
Here you go getting serious again. It's a losing thing to do.

As far as species of duck go, there's enough ancillary evidence that Trump & co are gaslighting or insane.

As far as identifying the duck: When it comes to January 6th, for example, trivializing, denial and diverting are in evidence.
  • Countering: This describes a person questioning someone’s memories. They may say things such as, “you never remember things accurately,” or “are you sure? You have a bad memory.”
  • Withholding: When someone withholds, they refuse to engage in a conversation. A person using this technique may pretend not to understand someone so that they do not have to respond to them. For example, they might say, “I do not know what you are talking about,” or “you are just trying to confuse me.”
  • Trivializing: This occurs when a person belittles or disregards the other person’s feelings. They may accuse them of being too sensitive or of overreacting when they have valid concerns and feelings.
  • Denial: Denial involves a person pretending to forget events or how they occurred. They may deny having said or done something or accuse someone of making things up.
  • Diverting: With this technique, a person changes the focus of a discussion and questions the other person’s credibility instead. For example, they might say, “that is just another crazy idea you got from your friends.”
  • Stereotyping: An article in the American Sociological Review states that a person using gaslighting techniques may intentionally use negative stereotypes of a person’s gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, nationality, or age to manipulate them. For example, they may tell a female that people will think she is irrational or crazy if she seeks help for abuse.
What is gaslighting? Examples and how to respond
Click to expand...
Sounds like a list of terms that are better than "gaslighting".
But if one wants to feel the victim, it's the go to shibboleth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top