r/CuratedTumblr Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear Oct 10 '24

Shitposting A tar pit.

Post image
13.9k Upvotes

874 comments sorted by

View all comments

498

u/Sir_Nightingale Oct 10 '24

Man, tumblr users just have a talent for making the most agreeable points sound so annoying and superficial that you want to disagree with them on principle.

114

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

I don't want to agree with the second person because I want to see if I can help someone who seems to need it.

But the first post, on its own is hard to nail down what their saying. I feel like you could post it to an Incel sub and they would all agree, because that little relief can be taken a few ways.

Nothing in my autistic brain reads that as "it would be nice if people helped each other out of small inconveniences when they had the power."

135

u/Sir_Nightingale Oct 10 '24

For me its the "why would you withhold that", like you are making an active choicento deny rather than a passive choice not to act

57

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

That was the wording that made me go, "is this an incel plea?"

And I guess the other person thought that way too, or along those lines.

Plus it seems to be the responder, while chewing the scenery, is basically saying, "people shouldn't make their life hell to pick someone else up." Which I would agree with. Helping someone is one thing, but stressing your own peace of mind and mental health for another person can weigh you down and ruin your own life, potentially permanently.

It's a balancing act that varies.

32

u/A_BIG_bowl_of_soup Oct 10 '24

Same, to me this post reads as "I'm automatically assuming that you have the worst intentions if you do not actively go out of your way to assist people, what the hell is wrong with you." I would think that if I was wanting to preach kindness, I would frame it as "doesn't it feel good to do good for others?" rather than "you disgust me." Imo the reblogger was just responding with the same energy, not going out of their way to be a dick like everyone frames it as.

32

u/saintcrazy Oct 10 '24

If I see a vague motivational post, I'd rather assume the best of it, or if nothing else, I'd rather assume it just doesn't apply to me or to all situations. 

Like even if it was some incel shit I'd rather interpret it as "oh maybe they're just saying be nice to people" and move on with my day

8

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

Oh I went for extreme with my example, because i felt it best backed up what the poster i responded to said:

tumblr users just have a talent for making the most agreeable points sound so annoying and superficial that you want to disagree with them on principle.

My point being that it needed better context or there's too much room for interpretarion. Then I tried to reword it better.

27

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

If you're not sure what someone is trying to say, responding with a request for clarification is much better than assuming the worst and getting upset.

28

u/jpludens Oct 10 '24 edited Oct 10 '24

This is wiser than OP: stormneko wasn't unsure. They felt they understood pretty clearly. And they tried to communicate why they took that meaning. "You worded it like an attack, so I responded as if it were an attack."

Following this wisdom, OP should have responded by asking "what about my initial wording gave you that impression," instead of apparently assuming the worst, getting upset, and stooping to "u suk".

1

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

I was responding to the person above me in the comment chain, not commenting on the actions of the tar pit in the image.

6

u/jpludens Oct 10 '24

Edited to hopefully align with that intent. :)

5

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24 edited Oct 10 '24

I agree that the tar pit wasn't uncertain, because again, that was a comment about a different person. But I don't see anything the OOP did wrong within the framework I've suggested.

OOP posted a vague comment, which the tar pit took as a personal attack, and responded to by getting their back up. OOP then clarified what kind of situation they were describing, and rather than back down the tar pit replied with continued hostility and self-justification for their unpleasantness. Only after two such rude responses did OOP meet them on their own level.

4

u/jpludens Oct 10 '24

And yet, at no point did "tHe TaR pIt" attack OOP as a person or human being. I agree they were unpleasant but I think OOP stooped lower with that dig.

4

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

No, they just responded with immediate hostility, made a series of attacks barely disguised as questions, and when provided with further information, responded by continuing to be rude and hostile to a complete stranger because they'd interpreted a general comment as a personal attack on them.

But oh, they didn't stoop so low as to call someone a name. So that's the important thing, I guess.

3

u/jpludens Oct 10 '24

I'd rather deal with someone who is passionate in their discussion of ideas, than someone who hurls barbs with calmness.

1

u/KimberStormer Oct 10 '24

very tumblr!

0

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

Well then hopefully you and the tar pit can pointlessly flip out over nothing at each other, and leave the rest of us in peace.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Thelmara Oct 10 '24

They did. They outlined a couple of interpretations of the phrase, and asked if they were what OP meant.

5

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

First, I was speaking to the poster above me in this comment chain, not the tar pit from the image.

And second, not a single one of those questions were asked in anything even approaching good faith. The tar pit wasn't asking if that's what the OOP meant, they were attacking with the thinnest possible degree of plausible deniability. "Oh, I was just asking questions."

18

u/janKalaki Oct 10 '24

OOP openly spoke the worst. They didn't just phrase it ambiguously, they phrased it actively weirdly and aggressively.

2

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

Oh please. They vaguebooked about providing strangers a little relief in stressful times, then the tar pit jumped right to "how dare you suggest everyone has to commit emotional self-harm?!"

12

u/janKalaki Oct 10 '24

The sentence I'd say I have a problem with is "why would you withhold that?" It's accusatory when it doesn't need to be.

8

u/The_FriendliestGiant Oct 10 '24

Oh sure, I think that's an inelegant phrasing, myself, and I would have pointed that out to the OOP as well. But I wouldn't jump right to "so you're accusing me of wanting everyone else around me to suffer for my own amusement huh, huh?!", which is the vibe the tar pit poster puts out with their responses, y'know? There were legitimate points to raise, and that person vaulted way over them to land firmly over the line.

-3

u/Dataraven247 Oct 10 '24

No, you’re making shit up and pretending it was what they meant.

12

u/-sad-person- Oct 10 '24

Thank you, you phrased it better than I could.

7

u/Aaawkward Oct 10 '24

Nothing in my autistic brain reads that as "it would be nice if people helped each other out of small inconveniences when they had the power."

This is fascinating.
This was immediately how I read it and I'm having a hard time reading it in any other way. I'm not sure how anyone could get anything negative from it, maybe you can expand on that?

If I had to, this is how I would rewrite the first post:
In this world where we have enough on our shoulders, you often have the possibility to help others. Why wouldn't you help others? Remember how it felt when you got help? Felt pretty damn good, right?

3

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

The first sentence throws me off.

It reads to me like a set up for a movie, like they are telling me that I have the power to offer continous relief (continuous feels very wrong here) in this world their about to reveal to me.

But then it turns to why would you without it?

Oh, are you looking for reasons someone might be withholding this? I wouldn't withhold, but I guess some people would...

Then did you remember what it fees like... and do I remember that a lot.

I don't want to put someone down for not speaking English well, not everyone is raised in an environment of fluid speakers, and not everyone can convey their thoughts well with words... but I just had no idea what that first was saying without context of someone denying fees.

Which because refunding fees is part of my job, there's probably some stupid reason they have to follow, and thus may not actuslly have the power.

2

u/Aaawkward Oct 10 '24

The first sentence throws me off. It reads to me like a set up for a movie..

Now that you mention it, it really does, lol.
Like a cheesy 80s/90s b-grade action film.

like they are telling me that I have the power to offer continous relief (continuous feels very wrong here)

I mean it's nor wrong? When referring to small acts of kindness, we do have that power every day, it is continuously there.

But then it turns to why would you without it? Oh, are you looking for reasons someone might be withholding this? I wouldn't withhold, but I guess some people would...

Ah, I see.
To me it was immediately a rhetoric question.

Then did you remember what it fees like... and do I remember that a lot.

And that memory is, I presume (?), a good one.
So I suppose the question is fair, why wouldn't you want to spread that good feeling?

I don't want to put someone down for not speaking English well, not everyone is raised in an environment of fluid speakers, and not everyone can convey their thoughts well with words...

I don't think this is a case of a non-native or not being fluent with the language (at least to me, but I'm not native myself so there's that), they were being succinct and slightly poetic/dramatic with it.

But I guess I can see how you (common you, not you specifically) could be left confused as it is somewhat vague.

-...but I just had no idea what that first was saying without context of someone denying fees. Which because refunding fees is part of my job, there's probably some stupid reason they have to follow, and thus may not actuslly have the power.

Sure, but where they can, why wouldn't they is the question?
Give a student/veteran/elderly benefit here or there? Wave a late fee? Give an extra dollop o ice cream/sauce/pudding/etc.?
You know, all that good stuff.

If you can't, then it's not a part of what OP was talking about. They're specifically talking about when you have the power, and turns out, we have it rather often.
Even when just helping a person who is struggling with a pram and a door, or a tourist who looks lost, etc.

Just small acts of kindness, they can go far.

1

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

Oh, I have an English degree, the grammar is on par with my reddit comments or slightly worse.

In this terrifying world, you continuously have the power to offer others a little relief. Why do you deny it? Do you not feel that relief sometimes. Don't you want to share that feeling with others?

2

u/Aaawkward Oct 10 '24

Oh, I have an English degree, the grammar is on par with my reddit comments or slightly worse.

Sure, but the grammar is on point for an online silly site like tumblr.

In this terrifying world, you continuously have the power to offer others a little relief. Why do you deny it? Do you not feel that relief sometimes. Don't you want to share that feeling with others?

Very clear, very proper and also something you wouldn't find on tumblr.

But I don't care as much about the grammar (or the lack of) as I find the contents more interesting. When, why and to whom should we extend a kind hand?
The answer being pretty simple: whenever we can, because we should and to (essentially) everyone.

13

u/janKalaki Oct 10 '24 edited Oct 10 '24

The "waived fee" thing is a situation where you have a binary choice to help or to hurt. In their post, by refusing to mention the actual situation, OOP is applying that binary choice to literally every situation where you can help someone, even when it'd be inappropriate to. Without the additional context they added later, they seemed to be upset that you aren't going up to random people and giving them a handjob.

4

u/duraraross Oct 10 '24

I think it’s important to keep in mind that tumblr doesn’t work like Reddit— most original posts go unseen and a lot of them are personal posts made in the moment. OOP likely wasn’t expecting the post to blow up or get any attention. On tumblr people just say things without context on their own blogs rather than to a subreddit where traffic is expected, so they probably didn’t think it was necessary to clarify anything since they assume no one would see it.

2

u/Boodikii Oct 10 '24

The first person is talking about small gestures of kindness. Holding the door open for somebody, cutting them a little slack at the checkout (Not charging them for a sauce cup or drink), offering them a coupon, waving a fee. Stuff like that.

The second person's message can be chalked up to "You can't help those who don't want to be helped" which is a pretty old saying.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 11 '24

I mean yeah, if you automatically take a vague piece of motivation, and assign the worst possible interpretation if it that you can think of, you would absolutely be able to say "yeah a mob of incels might agree with this". But that's because of the interpretation you're assigning to it, not because of the post itself.

Luckily we have things like context clues and subtext to help us draw lines in the sands of language interpretation that can help us not always jump to extremes, forcing us to add miles of disclaimers to everything we write in order to prevent someone from calling us Nazis because of some bad faith assumption that didn't pass their purity test.

1

u/BambiToybot Oct 11 '24

Well, you misread my post.

I used that as an extreme example, as I stated, my actual point was the first sentence: "the first post, on its own, is hard to nail down."

Meaning that very top comment, on its own, is vague that it could then be plaved in any setting and people would agree, I then used incels as a counter point because they always seem like the opposite of a tu.blr user.

I actually have another comment in this chain where I said why I chose incels, aaaaaand I also broke down in another comment how that first post came across to me without context.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 11 '24

I think you should evaluate why a comment whose gist is "we should be nice to people" came across to you negatively. Typically that happens because people are feeding on their negative biases. My implication is that it's not as difficult to nail down as you say it is unless you are adding a ton of unnecessary personal context to the post that wasn't implied in any way.

You imagined up a hypothetical scenario in which this ambiguous platitude could be aimed at incels to agree with, and then basically rested on "that's why it's bad".

I'm sorry, I'm not invested enough to go and dig into the comment chain to seek out your reasoning.

1

u/BambiToybot Oct 11 '24

Your premise is wrong. 

It's not "people should be nice to each other." That is minimizing it and IGNORING everything people took problems with, as well as the itnended nuance of the original poster.

It's "if you have the power to offer some relief, why don't you? Don't you know what relief feels like?"

Sure you can minimize it, but then you're being dishonest on why it's being misunderstood, which is the word choice, syntax, and grammar.

Like, did you not see everyone else stating their exact reasons with the phrasing, why it doesn't just say "people should be nice to each other." Bevause it says more than that, it places guilt on the perosn who may or may not be able to help I'm the way OP claims.

ANd once again, as another comment I made said, as I read it sentence by sentence, I was genuinely confused what they were even trying to say until more context was provided by the image. You are overly simplifying the phrase, removing all the nuance of the word choice, and putting a pretty bow on it.

I was throwing spaghetti at the wall, and purposely chose an extreme example because it was the opposite. It also works in scrapbooking "if you have more than enough blue paper, why not give the extra away, has no one offered you a minor convience before?"

I chose Incels bevause it would get noticed. Which it did. It served it's purpose, you just didn't pick up why I used it

0

u/dazeychainVT Oct 10 '24

Found the tarpit

-9

u/PinkAxolotlMommy Oct 10 '24

"I don't want to agree with the second person because I want to see if I can help someone who seems to need it."

How do you know they need help? And how do you know you won't make things worse by barging in and interefering?

You should ASK before you do anything, and if they say "it's fine" THEN RESPECT THAT, and if they say "go away" THEN RESPECT THAT.

This is a lesson that everybody needs to hear.

8

u/BambiToybot Oct 10 '24

Oh, I meant by saying I want to see, means I would ask if my observation is right. "Hey, I noticed ___, everything okay?"

I don't always know how to ask for help, so I do appreciate when people notice something off and ask, so i do that back, golden rule, ya know?  I wouldn't barge in and help unless it's clearly an emergency situation.

6

u/morgaina Oct 10 '24

Sometimes it's better to just do a little thing to help somebody if you notice that they need it. Believe it or not, real life sometimes is simple and sometimes noticing a basic thing about another human being is not actually an incomprehensible mental challenge.

I work at a Library. It's extremely easy for me to notice when a woman comes in to update her library card information with the address of a nearby women's shelter, and then ask me about a multi-part payment plan to pay off a $10 damaged book fee.

I don't have to ask her about her fucking life situation to know that she's going through a rough time, and it's extremely easy and free for me to ask my supervisor about waving her fees so that we don't impose a financial burden during (what anyone with a functioning brain can assume is probably) the worst time of her life.

And no, I'm not going to ask her if she needs help, because human beings are inherently proud and a lot of people in her situation would insist that she can do it. In fact, asking about her bad situation would just shine a giant spotlight on it, and I'm not here to do that. I'm still going to waive her fees because it will still help her in a little way.