this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
1404 points (97.7% liked)

Microblog Memes

8568 readers
3095 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 159 points 1 week ago (14 children)

How to order a hamburger that's mostly spit

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 134 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Unrealistic. This is way too coherent. Needs more word salad.

[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 30 points 1 week ago

Also he should start crying at one point.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 90 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (2 children)

McDonalds marketing is getting pretty aggressive if they're sending their cashiers to Wendy's...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.world 82 points 1 week ago (8 children)

He is a racist and a bigot

[–] Banana@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 week ago

Jordan Peterson is a charlatan

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] gjoel@programming.dev 63 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

This is only missing JP coming up with a completely deranged definition of what fries are that he demands the cashier adheres to (I don't think the vodka applies, that's more making fun of the cashier). And also him entirely dodging the question of whether he likes fries, stating that people have discussed whether he likes fries but he refuses to reveal it.

[–] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Obviously fries represent the western civilization. Frying oil is the chaos dragon of woke left that means to destroy the fries, but will instead transform them into something even more beautiful, an entity of culinary perfection. But you would already know that if only you had bought my online course. sob It's so sublime. sob

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 53 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Gets plain fries, but gets charged for vodka. Cashier points to vodka line on the bill and says "potatoes", then points to fries and says "potatoes".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 47 points 1 week ago (2 children)

False inductive reasoning combined with butwhataboutism and sealinoning. All designed to exhaust the opponent and muddy the argument. Conservatives love this form of argument.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 46 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sealioning (source) + whataboutism. A very cheap method of trolling and exhausting the opponent of the argument which relies on the victim being unaware of sealioning and they're being sealioned. It's frustrating seeing JP fans think this is proof he's a genius. it's like Ben Shapiro, another rightwing "influencer" who constantly speaks fast and gish gallops on purpose and his fans think he's a genius for that too

[–] humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don’t forget the constant motte and bailey.

[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That, too. For people who don't know what that is (source)

The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the "bailey").[1] The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, insists that only the more modest position is being advanced.[2][3] Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer may claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte)[1] or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).[4]

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tetragrade@leminal.space 41 points 1 week ago

It depends on what the definition of 'is' is.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"Colloquialism, motherfucker! Do you speak it‽"

Edit: corrected autocorrect incorrection

[–] callouscomic@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The "motherfucker" forced me to hear this in Samuel L Jackson's voice.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Dragging your opponent into the weeds does not a good argument make

[–] spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (2 children)

After not receiving the fried Jordan cries in his car.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

Currently watching a Peterson debate... This is just too perfect.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Watching him debate those atheists was painful. His debating technique is beyond stupid.

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 week ago
  1. Make a statement that is at best wildly controversial and at worst blatantly untrue
  2. Redefine the words in that statement to make it vacuously true and completely uninteresting
  3. When challenged, say that you don't care about common parlance
  4. Everyone loses, because this debate is now pointless and annoying
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Beebabe@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reading this increased my blood pressure.

[–] ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

See? That means he won the argument. Checkmate, atheists.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

My dog is an intellectual powerhouse compared to Jordan Peterson fans.

Lol. I just Googled him and his YouTube channel description reads...

"Join intellectual phenomenon Dr. Jordan B. Peterson for enlightening discourse"

[–] forrgott@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's a phenomenon how much he lacks any intellectual capabilities.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Geodad@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Stupid People glom onto him like he's a genius. I guess he kinda is a genius compared to the average Trump voter.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

My father tried to tell me what a "genius" he is. I told my father point blank, Jordan Peterson is only a genius to morons. He even gave me one of Peterson's self help books, I immediately tossed it in the trash. Though, in retrospect, I probably should have tried to return it to Amazon and used the money to buy something more worthy of reading, like Chick Tracts. 😂 At least they're entertaining.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xorollo@leminal.space 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

So, I haven't heard much about JP in a while,and now I've heard a podcast and this. Is it just coincidence or is there a reason we're talking about him again? The podcast mentioned he'd gone on some show debating Christianity with 20 atheists. It went as you might imagine, where jp argued that atheists were Christian because they didn't understand the thing they say they don't believe in. Idk. Anyway -- any other reason I'm hearing about him again?

[–] Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's mostly just that. The whole thing was a mess. The atheists were told they would be debating a Christian and prepared as such, but he won't define himself as a Christian. So much time is wasted dancing around that. They had to change the title from Christian debates to Jordan Peterson debates. On top of that he will barely engage properly, saying things like he won't entertain a hypothetical because he wouldn't allow himself to get in that situation in the first place. Just generally not acting in good faith.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ansiz@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There is a great impression of him talking about Burger King that I have to share. He's doing this same kind of stupidity in this video. https://youtu.be/-BDgQMGs7Mc

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

Some person was showing me videos of him and telling me he was very smart, does anyone happen to know some good examples to get him to reconsider?

[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Ask about his Benzo addiction that literally gave him brain damage. Which was what all his doctors predicted would happen.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Vodka with my Big Mac

I've had that quite a few times. Doesn't really go together but rather they go sequentially. First you drink vodka then later on you want greasy shit

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CircuitSpells@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I genuinely can't think of a better example of a modern day sophist than Jordan Peterson.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] middlemanSI@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›