this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2025
426 points (97.8% liked)
Political Memes
9934 readers
2261 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is why "I'm not going to explain it to you" is the biggest and reddest of all the red flags.
Ignorance is the natural state of all humans, and the whole point of language is so that you can help reduce that natural ignorance!
The only almost exception is in response to sea-lioning, when the request for an explanation is made in bad faith
But that's what LMGTFY links are for.
http://lmgtfy2.com/?q=sealioning
While I don't disagree, I do feel like people are over-quick to label any hard questions that don't align with thier viewpoint as sealioning.
I've more than once asked questions about the practicality or edge cases of a particular stance and been called a sealion for it.
But the thing is, I want to know how that thing handles the practicality or edge case issues, and am trying to have someone who is deeper into the weeds on the issue than I am explain it to me, but just get called a sealion for it.
To be fair, this has only happened to me 2-3 times, but it's super annoying, because I'm actually trying to understand, and might even be on your side if you'd address my concerns.
Agreed completely.
There are folk for whom reductio ad absurdum is a personal attack, and those for whom it's a perfectly reasonable form of asking for refinement.
To pick an easy example -- if we support neo-genders, we absolutely should treat someone who claims to "identify as an attack helicopter" as such and strive to use their claimed neo-pronouns. (Thankfully, one doesn't need to support neo-genders to respect trans-gender and a-gender individuals or those unsure of their gender ).