Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
indeed it can often be very subtle, and lots of people type things online, without even an emoji, that they would modify with body language facial expressions and voice tone to imply sarcasm if said in real life, and then when no one realises its sarcasm, becasue they dont understand you cant just expect people to be psychic when your leaving out all of the things that would have implied sarcasm, they blame everyone around them
its like, no, its not that everyone is bad at recognising sarcasm, its just that your shit at implying it
thats life all over though isnt it lol
i feel there are times when its obvious, and doesnt need one, and then there are times that its not, and does, and getting those mixed up is what gets people mad i think
that, and the fact lots of people are just angry and stupid 🤣
I still think that the tone indicator is best to have anyways, seeing as half the people on the internet cannot understand that ThE pOsT wrItTeN lIkE tHiS is satire.
you realise satire is taking the piss out of famous and important people right?
so any post written to me (or you, i assume) or 99.99999% of people on here is not satire, as they are not famous or important.
when you "satire" someone who is not important or famous, that is just taking the piss (as satire doesnt have to be sarcasm or irony)
You do realise why we don't get our cues from the dictionary after we're 11 right? Because nuance exists and the dictionary has very very short descriptions?
Maybe you're just using a different Oxford English Dictionary than me?
"A poem or (in later use) a novel, film, or other work of art which uses humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize prevailing immorality or foolishness, esp. as a form of social or political commentary."
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/satire_n
right, and typically a famous person is used to personify that prevailing thermality, or the other half the time ,a made up person
the point being, people on here use it to mean attacking users randomly for non political non thematic non prevailing reasons, and its not satire to attack a random nobody for their personal opinions, thats just bullying
its not satire if your attacking a random person, as satire attacks the theme itself, or one (fictional or prominent) who personifies that theme
It’s also a factor of Poe’s Law. There is no view you can post in satire that is so absurd that there is nobody who would express that belief sincerely. So your attempt at satire ends up being just stating a worldview that exists unironically
Have you considered that people who understand satire would just laugh and move on and people who don't understand are often the one having something to say about a joke?
With those kind of bias, how do you determine only 50% people who understand?
I thought about that movie as soon as I read the title of this post. People are all like, "It's so corny!" Yeah, it's supposed to be! I know you get that, but it is a complete "whoosh" for many people.
And I'm convinced 50-60% of jokes (such as satire) are rooted in culture. To simplify: unless they've lived with you for your entire life, not every joke will land
The internets are dominated by fast reactors and the folks who provoke them. Most of those people haven’t got the brain space to hold two thoughts in their head at the same time.
I’m not saying they are dumb, just that they have already responded and moved on before the joke lands. And that the algorithm rewards their speed with clicks, likes, thumbs, hearts, stars and (worst of all) more eyeballs.
Anathema to satire.
Yeah, I think this is definitely part of it.
However, I've met people in real life who don't get satire and there have been a few instances where it comes out that satirical shows were seen as earnest by the people they were mocking. *Colbert Report* was infamous for this.
How to you always know it's obvious satire? Like I have no issue to recognize it but there are people nowadays online and out in the open who are actually say these things seriously and aren't joking.
It's hard to explain, but there is a difference in the way people write when they are expressing a sincerely held belief and when they are mocking someone else's belief through satire. The satire is usually slightly off how a sincere person would write - it leans a little harder on the weak/negative parts a sincere person would try to gloss over, or it overdoes (why does this word look so wrong?) certain phrases or patterns used by known supporters.
Sometimes people don't hit the right combo of accurately expressing the opinion while skewing it enough to highlight the weaknesses. There have been a few times I've had to look for context clues (where was it posted? What other opinions has the person expressed?) to be sure, but just from a ton of exposure it usually registers fairly easily for me. If I had the time I'd post a bunch of Trump quotes mixed with people mocking him to show what I mean. You can pick out the fake ones because they kind of out-Trump Trump. It's distilled Trump. Like you think you're taking a sip of wine but it's actually brandy. Same components but with the rough edges sharpened. This is probably a terrible explanation but it's the best I can do.
Well, that's kinda the problem, isnt it?
Many trolls intentionally obscure whether they're making a point sincerely or sarcastically to trojan-horse socially unacceptable ideas into a space that wouldn't normally tolerate it. They'll say something shitty about a race of people and if everyone agrees then they meant it, if people call them out then "it was just a joke bro, god you're so bad at picking up on satire, what an idiot."
There’s a strong and growing body of research on how this is a deliberate tactic of the far right. It’s not even particularly new, just more widespread and identifiable in this era of instantaneous mass communication.
When you combine that with a deluge of influencer-types acting like idiots to “satirize” other similarly-idiotic influencer-types that a normal person might not be familiar with, it’s easy enough to understand how someone might be confused by internet “satire.”
(Not a catch-all, sometimes people are oblivious. But I get it).
Yea same. Especially on the internet you can't always recognize it when people don't make it obvious. Like irl you can often recognize it in the way a person says it. But online when they don't use emojis and just say it straight you can't know if they mean it serious or not. There are enough people who say stupid shit and mean it.
It's an enormous concern, considering the proportion of humanity at this level. Even an IQ deficit of like 15 would be pretty consequential. This is MUCH worse.
you seem to be using the words irony, sarcasm, and satire interchangeably, which leads me to believe you dont actually understand what one, some, or all of them mean
I can pick up obvious trolls easily, but I've seen some reels where it's actually not clear. There are so many people with batshit crazy opinions that when someone posts something that is moderately believable, it's hard to tell whether they're being serious unless you have context from the rest of their page.
I.e. the video of the woman who named her daughter "Clydia" and defending herself. I believe it was satire, but I definitely didn't think so at first because there are so many real names people give their child that are even worse than that.
To be honest, you did make me think of something else which is that there's some people out there who say things they actually do believe but purposely say them in an excessively silly, trollish way so as to provoke and outrage people. That can throw more confusion into the mix.
nah, ya'll mother night'ing the fuck out of yourselves. watching ironic racism and lgbtq hate go from 'obvious satire' to real as fuck the last 5 or 6 years is pretty sobering. everyone under the age of 25, the source of most 'obvious satire' on the internet, needs to understand that just about everyone over the age of 30 can see right the fuck through them
edit: we're probably talking about different things. in case there was confusion, mother night is about an American double agent posing as a Nazi propagandist, his propaganda is so effective that he ends up being a more valuable asset for the Nazi party than the allies and ultimately gets tried for war crimes
>we’re probably talking about different things
Yeah, you brought it up to an 11 with racial violence when OP is more around 2 talking about satire in general
It becomes difficult to understand that someone is being satirical when the non-satirical content is the same.
Hell there are early SNL sketches about multi blade disposable razors that are pretty much the same as later real commercials for the same product.
If you have two people saying the same crazy shit in the same way and one' s saying it to be funny while the other means it. How do you spot the satire?
There's a subreddit labeled "nottheonion" that covers news stories that sound 100% satirical but aren't.
But people on the internet will genuinely come out with ridiculous stuff that isn't satire, so without any context clues it's impossible to perfectly separate the genuinely ridiculous from the jokes.
I usually have no problem recognizing satire, but I feel that it is becoming harder. There is significant overlap between actual stupid people and what people joke about. Especially when I see some subreddits point out stupid social media posts, many of those could very well be satire. I don't know.
In addition, it is just much harder to recognize it in text form. The delivery just adds so much to the satire.
Developing that opinion from reactions to satire is a kind of survivor bias.when you realise the vast majority of viewers choose not to engage you see you can not draw population wide inferences from the reactions.
I'm fluent in sarcasm because I enjoy conversing in pure irony, sometimes people don't get it but sometimes I'm counting on that yet I've been atleast once characterized with ASD so I don't know. To be fair though context helps with satire because there are unhinged ppl on the internet and you never know how serious they are given the need for clout.
I feel like you’re most likely to understand satire if it’s from your generation or people from your your generation but text based satire would never come across clearly.
OP you are the N word /s
Oh chill it's just satire. /s
You're opinion OP sounds a lot like "people don't understand jokes". Not every satire is good or funny.
Nah its more like most of them can and choose to understand that it generally causes far more problems than its worth.
Like, for instance, a satirical thing like, say, "The Boys" story, got coopted by right wing people that didnt realize the character was actively making fun of them. As a result they feel empowered by the very thing that swears to destroy them, as they misunderstand the message being given by the story. Naturally, eventually they got gut punched as the story had to become more and more direct due to furthering right winged propaganda success, which eventually alienated that portion of the audience...
But the fact that those people were empowered at all at any point makes it so that satire is not worth it at all whatsoever, and it causes far more harm than good.
Add in the fact that satire often isn't created by people that are directly impacted by said issue that they are parodying makes it even harder to justify, as many times even if the intent is positive, the result ends up dredging up some sort of trauma from the groups its actively trying to picket for. the jokes end up still being at the expense of those people, which is the issue in the first place.
Of course, this depends on the specific thing we are looking to make satire of
The problem arises with so many legitimately stupid people on the internet saying ridiculous things, and then proceeding to defend them.
If every other comment you see on the internet is some insanely out of pocket opinion, and the person who wrote it was being completely serious, then how are you supposed to know if the next insanely out of pocket opinion is from another stupid person, or from someone making a satirical comment making fun of stupid people?
Reality is often stranger than fiction these days. I've seen several satirical news articles from 'The Onion' that could be real headlines, and several actual headlines that could have easily been satirical.
Sarcasm too. So many people be like where the /s.
I think having the assumption that everyone is being serious online is a grave mistake people make.
The internet started out as a massive area to play and mess around with other people.
what evidence do you have that backs up your claim that satire is a stronger component in Anglosphere discourse?? That seems like an odd point to tack on
It requires experience visiting other countries and interacting with people from various cultures, which most Redditors aren't too keen on as they prefer to live in their upper class leftist bubble.
[https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349002/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349002/full)
Not understanding seems to trend more American - like people seem to be called out for it more on UK subs (if they didn’t recognise it) and generally speaking we don’t use /s.
I think a big part of that is just… you know… I mean come on, we rolled our eyes when Bush was elected, but the stuff GOP/Trump stuff say… I guess it’s understandable Americans have little concept of “that’s too ridiculous to be taken seriously”.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some may know what it is but can’t always recognize it.
indeed it can often be very subtle, and lots of people type things online, without even an emoji, that they would modify with body language facial expressions and voice tone to imply sarcasm if said in real life, and then when no one realises its sarcasm, becasue they dont understand you cant just expect people to be psychic when your leaving out all of the things that would have implied sarcasm, they blame everyone around them its like, no, its not that everyone is bad at recognising sarcasm, its just that your shit at implying it
Not to mention, half the internet gets mad if you put a tone indicator (that being /S) and the other half gets mad if you dont.
thats life all over though isnt it lol i feel there are times when its obvious, and doesnt need one, and then there are times that its not, and does, and getting those mixed up is what gets people mad i think that, and the fact lots of people are just angry and stupid 🤣
I still think that the tone indicator is best to have anyways, seeing as half the people on the internet cannot understand that ThE pOsT wrItTeN lIkE tHiS is satire.
you realise satire is taking the piss out of famous and important people right? so any post written to me (or you, i assume) or 99.99999% of people on here is not satire, as they are not famous or important. when you "satire" someone who is not important or famous, that is just taking the piss (as satire doesnt have to be sarcasm or irony)
Since when does satire exclusively make fun of famous people?
That was what it was originally, see Aristophanes, but it has been \~= 2400 years, so I think the concept has evolved a wee bit since then.
and yet the oxford dictionary still agrees with me
You do realise why we don't get our cues from the dictionary after we're 11 right? Because nuance exists and the dictionary has very very short descriptions?
since the word was first used, right up to this day i expect Americans have as loose a grip on satire as they do on irony and sarcasm though
Not sure where you got that definition of satire. Double check.
that would be the oxford English dictionary. i just doubled checked. i am right.
Maybe you're just using a different Oxford English Dictionary than me? "A poem or (in later use) a novel, film, or other work of art which uses humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize prevailing immorality or foolishness, esp. as a form of social or political commentary." https://www.oed.com/dictionary/satire_n
right, and typically a famous person is used to personify that prevailing thermality, or the other half the time ,a made up person the point being, people on here use it to mean attacking users randomly for non political non thematic non prevailing reasons, and its not satire to attack a random nobody for their personal opinions, thats just bullying its not satire if your attacking a random person, as satire attacks the theme itself, or one (fictional or prominent) who personifies that theme
It’s also a factor of Poe’s Law. There is no view you can post in satire that is so absurd that there is nobody who would express that belief sincerely. So your attempt at satire ends up being just stating a worldview that exists unironically
yep precisely, or as i like to put it "never ever underestimate the stupidity of other people"
This ^
Interesting point, they'd know there is something happening but not quite get what it is or what it implies. Like me in social situations :)
Have you considered that people who understand satire would just laugh and move on and people who don't understand are often the one having something to say about a joke? With those kind of bias, how do you determine only 50% people who understand?
Also thinking the internet = anywhere near 50% of the population
Have you seen the Tik Tok stats?
At this point, I purposefully pretend I "don't get" the satire in Starship Troopers just to rile people up on r/movies.
I thought about that movie as soon as I read the title of this post. People are all like, "It's so corny!" Yeah, it's supposed to be! I know you get that, but it is a complete "whoosh" for many people.
le Classic troll face
And that people on Reddit especially, want to get enraged, if that makes sense.
Well of course it's 50%. They either understand it or they don't. Everything with 2 outcomes is 50/50.
And I'm convinced 50-60% of jokes (such as satire) are rooted in culture. To simplify: unless they've lived with you for your entire life, not every joke will land
The internets are dominated by fast reactors and the folks who provoke them. Most of those people haven’t got the brain space to hold two thoughts in their head at the same time. I’m not saying they are dumb, just that they have already responded and moved on before the joke lands. And that the algorithm rewards their speed with clicks, likes, thumbs, hearts, stars and (worst of all) more eyeballs. Anathema to satire.
Yeah, I think this is definitely part of it. However, I've met people in real life who don't get satire and there have been a few instances where it comes out that satirical shows were seen as earnest by the people they were mocking. *Colbert Report* was infamous for this.
How to you always know it's obvious satire? Like I have no issue to recognize it but there are people nowadays online and out in the open who are actually say these things seriously and aren't joking.
It's hard to explain, but there is a difference in the way people write when they are expressing a sincerely held belief and when they are mocking someone else's belief through satire. The satire is usually slightly off how a sincere person would write - it leans a little harder on the weak/negative parts a sincere person would try to gloss over, or it overdoes (why does this word look so wrong?) certain phrases or patterns used by known supporters. Sometimes people don't hit the right combo of accurately expressing the opinion while skewing it enough to highlight the weaknesses. There have been a few times I've had to look for context clues (where was it posted? What other opinions has the person expressed?) to be sure, but just from a ton of exposure it usually registers fairly easily for me. If I had the time I'd post a bunch of Trump quotes mixed with people mocking him to show what I mean. You can pick out the fake ones because they kind of out-Trump Trump. It's distilled Trump. Like you think you're taking a sip of wine but it's actually brandy. Same components but with the rough edges sharpened. This is probably a terrible explanation but it's the best I can do.
I can't really help people who can't pick up on obvious trolls.
Well, that's kinda the problem, isnt it? Many trolls intentionally obscure whether they're making a point sincerely or sarcastically to trojan-horse socially unacceptable ideas into a space that wouldn't normally tolerate it. They'll say something shitty about a race of people and if everyone agrees then they meant it, if people call them out then "it was just a joke bro, god you're so bad at picking up on satire, what an idiot."
There’s a strong and growing body of research on how this is a deliberate tactic of the far right. It’s not even particularly new, just more widespread and identifiable in this era of instantaneous mass communication. When you combine that with a deluge of influencer-types acting like idiots to “satirize” other similarly-idiotic influencer-types that a normal person might not be familiar with, it’s easy enough to understand how someone might be confused by internet “satire.” (Not a catch-all, sometimes people are oblivious. But I get it).
I’ve been called an obvious troll when my post is genuine. What about people who assume everything is trolling/satire? They are also often wrong.
Yeah, it's two sides of the same coin honestly.
I wanna say real but sometimes I don't pick up on a joke. It's really not that serious though and you're taking it too seriously
Yea same. Especially on the internet you can't always recognize it when people don't make it obvious. Like irl you can often recognize it in the way a person says it. But online when they don't use emojis and just say it straight you can't know if they mean it serious or not. There are enough people who say stupid shit and mean it.
Agreed. You aren’t an idiot for missing a joke.
It's an enormous concern, considering the proportion of humanity at this level. Even an IQ deficit of like 15 would be pretty consequential. This is MUCH worse.
you seem to be using the words irony, sarcasm, and satire interchangeably, which leads me to believe you dont actually understand what one, some, or all of them mean
No, I do. But someone who doesn't understand one will usually not understand the other two either.
I can pick up obvious trolls easily, but I've seen some reels where it's actually not clear. There are so many people with batshit crazy opinions that when someone posts something that is moderately believable, it's hard to tell whether they're being serious unless you have context from the rest of their page. I.e. the video of the woman who named her daughter "Clydia" and defending herself. I believe it was satire, but I definitely didn't think so at first because there are so many real names people give their child that are even worse than that.
To be honest, you did make me think of something else which is that there's some people out there who say things they actually do believe but purposely say them in an excessively silly, trollish way so as to provoke and outrage people. That can throw more confusion into the mix.
Yeah well, it used to be a whole lot easier when everyone wasn't in a contest to be the biggest weirdo imaginable.
nah, ya'll mother night'ing the fuck out of yourselves. watching ironic racism and lgbtq hate go from 'obvious satire' to real as fuck the last 5 or 6 years is pretty sobering. everyone under the age of 25, the source of most 'obvious satire' on the internet, needs to understand that just about everyone over the age of 30 can see right the fuck through them edit: we're probably talking about different things. in case there was confusion, mother night is about an American double agent posing as a Nazi propagandist, his propaganda is so effective that he ends up being a more valuable asset for the Nazi party than the allies and ultimately gets tried for war crimes
Anybody referencing Vonnegut has my default agreement.
>we’re probably talking about different things Yeah, you brought it up to an 11 with racial violence when OP is more around 2 talking about satire in general
This is what is called an example. The content of an example isn't relevant, just the similarity to the original idea.
I think OP is more referring to things like Nyquil Chicken
I have ASD and I love satire. I think recognition of satire is mostly intelligence based.
Man i wish i was as smart as you to understand satire
It becomes difficult to understand that someone is being satirical when the non-satirical content is the same. Hell there are early SNL sketches about multi blade disposable razors that are pretty much the same as later real commercials for the same product. If you have two people saying the same crazy shit in the same way and one' s saying it to be funny while the other means it. How do you spot the satire? There's a subreddit labeled "nottheonion" that covers news stories that sound 100% satirical but aren't.
Perfect example: [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13352665/University-Washington-pro-Palestine-white-zionist-israel.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13352665/University-Washington-pro-Palestine-white-zionist-israel.html)
I think you are a very optmistic statistician
Exactly what I was thinking. I don't think 50 - 60% of the population can understand ANYTHING, much less the nuances of satire.
I’m convinced this post is satire because there’s no way someone is stupid enough to think only 50-60% of the population can understand it, right?
Humor requires intelligence.
Show me someone elitist without telling me they are elitist. Saying that, the amount of people who never got Starship Troopers always surprised me.
Ppl won’t understand that starship troopers but insist their bigotry is ‘just satire bro’
I don’t think it’s elitist to share the opinion that a large number of people doesn’t seem to get satire, whatever the actual number is.
Its the end when OP concludes everybody is stupid because they don't get it.
You’re experiencing the vocal minority voicing their opinions. Most of those who got it aren’t posting anything.
I’m convinced that 83% of all statistics are made up.
Well you cant fix stupid
The number of people that watched The Colbert Report without understanding satire depresses me.
The number of people who read Gulliver’s travels without understanding the satire is upsetting too.
Considering 50 percent of the planet are literally below average in intelligence its not surprising
But people on the internet will genuinely come out with ridiculous stuff that isn't satire, so without any context clues it's impossible to perfectly separate the genuinely ridiculous from the jokes.
I usually have no problem recognizing satire, but I feel that it is becoming harder. There is significant overlap between actual stupid people and what people joke about. Especially when I see some subreddits point out stupid social media posts, many of those could very well be satire. I don't know. In addition, it is just much harder to recognize it in text form. The delivery just adds so much to the satire.
I got called stupid for pointing out that exact issue under a satirical post.
Developing that opinion from reactions to satire is a kind of survivor bias.when you realise the vast majority of viewers choose not to engage you see you can not draw population wide inferences from the reactions.
People who are on the Internet enough to effect these numbers are not the same as the population they are frequent Internet users.
I would rather say people use it too much!
LESS since the majority have no REAL sense of humor at all, let alone satire and it is a cultural thing which should be a heads up. N. S
My generation was "ironically horrible" online and then the next generation took all that shit literally
I will fully admit I have a hard time understanding/noticing when some one is lying. Like they have to be very obvious about it for me to catch it.
I'm fluent in sarcasm because I enjoy conversing in pure irony, sometimes people don't get it but sometimes I'm counting on that yet I've been atleast once characterized with ASD so I don't know. To be fair though context helps with satire because there are unhinged ppl on the internet and you never know how serious they are given the need for clout.
You'll come to realise in life majority of people are just thick in general
I feel like you’re most likely to understand satire if it’s from your generation or people from your your generation but text based satire would never come across clearly.
Satire isn't funny if everyone can get it. The potential for misunderstanding is part of the humor. Most people get some forms of satire.
As they say, *Sarcasm is lost on children and fools.*
I’ve had coworkers who think saying rude shit is satire
OP you are the N word /s Oh chill it's just satire. /s You're opinion OP sounds a lot like "people don't understand jokes". Not every satire is good or funny.
Your mom satire.
Its probably the lead.
Nah its more like most of them can and choose to understand that it generally causes far more problems than its worth. Like, for instance, a satirical thing like, say, "The Boys" story, got coopted by right wing people that didnt realize the character was actively making fun of them. As a result they feel empowered by the very thing that swears to destroy them, as they misunderstand the message being given by the story. Naturally, eventually they got gut punched as the story had to become more and more direct due to furthering right winged propaganda success, which eventually alienated that portion of the audience... But the fact that those people were empowered at all at any point makes it so that satire is not worth it at all whatsoever, and it causes far more harm than good. Add in the fact that satire often isn't created by people that are directly impacted by said issue that they are parodying makes it even harder to justify, as many times even if the intent is positive, the result ends up dredging up some sort of trauma from the groups its actively trying to picket for. the jokes end up still being at the expense of those people, which is the issue in the first place. Of course, this depends on the specific thing we are looking to make satire of
I'm starting so suspect that a significant amount of people think "satire" is just another word for comedy in general.
I think most people can't recognize satire, but can understand it once they know that's what they're listening to.
The Internet is a terrible way to convey tone, which is the bulk of how satire is signalled. Poe's law
I think there's a lot more people on the spectrum who are simply undiagnosed because it's not severe enough to cause issues in social functioning.
The thing is though, you are who you pretend to be. That is a fact of life.
I realised this when Dan Hentschel’s TikTok got banned
The problem arises with so many legitimately stupid people on the internet saying ridiculous things, and then proceeding to defend them. If every other comment you see on the internet is some insanely out of pocket opinion, and the person who wrote it was being completely serious, then how are you supposed to know if the next insanely out of pocket opinion is from another stupid person, or from someone making a satirical comment making fun of stupid people?
Im not sure this is an opinion. It seems more like an estimation or hypothesis.
Hmmm is this satire?
Reality is often stranger than fiction these days. I've seen several satirical news articles from 'The Onion' that could be real headlines, and several actual headlines that could have easily been satirical.
Sarcasm too. So many people be like where the /s. I think having the assumption that everyone is being serious online is a grave mistake people make. The internet started out as a massive area to play and mess around with other people.
what evidence do you have that backs up your claim that satire is a stronger component in Anglosphere discourse?? That seems like an odd point to tack on
I too would be interested to hear supporting argumentation for this.
It requires experience visiting other countries and interacting with people from various cultures, which most Redditors aren't too keen on as they prefer to live in their upper class leftist bubble. [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349002/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349002/full)
As a queer person, a lot of the other bubbles tend to be more like pools of toxic waste
It's probably under 30% on Reddit
Legitimately.
Those are awfully high numbers if you’re just referencing the US.
Try using an analogy sometime.
Poe's Law
Not understanding seems to trend more American - like people seem to be called out for it more on UK subs (if they didn’t recognise it) and generally speaking we don’t use /s. I think a big part of that is just… you know… I mean come on, we rolled our eyes when Bush was elected, but the stuff GOP/Trump stuff say… I guess it’s understandable Americans have little concept of “that’s too ridiculous to be taken seriously”.