I’m familiar with one-uppers - like if you say I only got 6 hours of sleep last night and someone has to chime in and say “that’s nothing! I got only 3 hours”

So something similar to that but not one-upping.

Like if you said "I worked in a warehouse once, my boss was cool, and the work wasn’t bad. " And then someone replied with, “I don’t know what gravy-ass, non-real-job place you worked at, but every warehouse I have worked in sucks!”

So, the person is kind of one-upping but that the same time trying to claim that your lived experience isn’t true and their experience is the way things actually are.

Is there a word for that?

  • Aqarius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Depending on the angle (a lot going on there) you could go with “denial”. As in, you’re lying, because if you’re bot, then my life sucked, and that’s unacceptable, so you’re lying.

    • GrayBackgroundMusic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      No, gaslighting is when you say it’s sunny outside and someone argues that it’s actually cloudy. You can see for yourself that it’s sunny, but they insist it’s not. Usually, it’s not so cut-and-dry, my example is absurd to demonstrate how insane it is. Usually it’s more subtle, like you’re sure you put your keys on the key-hook next to the door, but your spouse says that you didn’t and then finds them in the bathroom or something. You’re 100% sure you put them on the hook, but your spouse is 100% sure you didn’t. (Spoiler, you did, and the spouse moved them, then lied and said you must have done it. The point is to make you doubt yourself.)

  • randomdeadguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    This person is one-upping you only to prove to themselves that their experience was justified, by making yours unjustified. I get defensive when someone brings up a workplace I struggled with. I think the perspective of the person that put your experience down as “not-real” is attacking your experience out of defense. It’s rude and ugly, but the alternative is that “warehouses” are Not bad to work in, or that you are better at working a warehouse than they were. It might be emotionally painful to consider those alternatives, and it’s much easier to make younger workers feel overly entitled.

  • Jonathan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t know of a single word or bit of slang that describes that (annoying) type of personality. It’s a bit contrarian with a dash of experience hijacking. There should be a word for that though. Any ideas?

    • tunetardis@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah, the method used sounds like some sort of selection bias (cherry-picking or whatever you want to call it), but the motivation behind it (as there is a definite intent here to steer the discussion) is likely egocentric or just a general need to be contrarian or condescending.

  • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Look, I don’t know what made-up arguments you’ve been in, but whenever I post online, no one has ever tried to dismiss my experiences as untrue.

    /s

  • Shirasho@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    The Linux Argument.

    Non-jokes aside, there are multiple names for this. Anecdotal evidence is the primary one while confirmation bias is discarding statements (factual or fictional) that do not align with your vision.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    As someone with personal experience with interacting with people, I have to disagree. Nobody has EVER done anything like this, and it does not require a word.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Conservative/ reactionary.

    No seriously. Take the time to look at the structure and framing of conservative and reactionary arguments. Its almost ALWAYS rooted in strictly their lived experience: no other lived experience matters. The answers others are giving are technically correct, but also miss how deeply rooted this particular structure is in political identity.