Use this thread to name phenomena that don’t have names yet.
Example:
The trend, fad, or popularity, where a person or group debases themselves with debauchery, sickness, disgusting behavior, repulsiveness, solely to “test the limits” and appeal to some secret authority figure like a parent, peer, or guardian. A white teenage girl dates a black boy, in order to test and gauge her father’s reaction (if she even has a father). A young witty teenager drops casual rape, racist, and pedophile “jokes” subconsciously testing friends, family, and strangers, to intuit what perversions the other has. A leader of a group of men acts like a complete asshole, bully, and abusive to random strangers, to demonstrate to his lackies, henchmen, and to himself privately, how much antagonism he can get away with.
Furthermore, I’m thinking of Exhibitionism where a pervert flashes his dick in public for the sake of pleasuring himself. This and the other cases, demonstrate an individuals antagonistic impulse to test the limits of what he or she can get away in society, among moral and ethics rules and expectations. It’s a rebellious phenomenon. It deserves a name and category.
What should this phenomenon be named?
Example of a good name: schadenfreude, the delight one takes at another’s misery / pain / suffering.
the phrase is called “shit-testing”. I first learned about it while watching some blackpill man-o-sphere videos about how women shit-test males on dates. It was then that I lost my faith in humanity. I began to realize that human dating norms were nothing more than a farce and I began to view cis-normative sexual dynamics as nothing more than a chimpanzee-like mating festival.
Definition:
A deep-rooted psychological pattern in which an individual derives emotional gratification — not necessarily sexual — from inflicting or receiving humiliation, shame, punishment, or moral-provocative behavior within social, relational, or ideological contexts.
It manifests through:
Antagonizing others just to test boundaries, provoke reactions, or assert control.
Self-degradation in public or interpersonal settings as a means of attention-seeking or challenging moral norms.
Rebellious behaviors (e.g., offensive jokes, taboo actions, social transgressions) designed to trigger authority figures or expose hidden hypocrisy.
An emotional loop of pain ↔ validation, where psychological distress becomes a source of personal identity or power.
It’s a non-sexual extension of classic sadomasochism, operating in the realm of power, morality, group dynamics, and identity.
“Shit-testing” is more when females do it to males during the dating / wooing / seduction phase of mating… I’m interested in something far more general.
Good attempt…
I was thinking of “Satan’s Challenge” or “The Satanic Drive” yesterday…
It’s about God’s First Angel that, in his attempt to separate himself from God’s Love, becomes as toxic as existentially possible, all to drive God away from him. In this Satanic ‘challenge’, drive, or impulse, Satan debases himself as low as imaginably possible.
Yet this drive exists in Humanity and in Nature. Animals use toxins against both foreign species and familiar species.
It’s not sabotage if it works – and it does work often. It also puts social loyalty to the test subconsciously and unconsciously, which is highly effective.
No. That is a cognitive distortion and violation of self=other. The self-sabotaging person tells themself this lie to avoid change (required for growth) and puts the blame of the relationship’s failure on the other person … when, actually, the other person is (rather than being disloyal) holding healthy boundaries.
It’s not shit-testing at that point, you’re right.
You don’t want that kind of loyalty—it isn’t genuine. Just like passing a dna test or being constantly spied on isn’t genuine faithfulness.
I forbid slander against Satan.
Satan is the name of Reason. That’s exactly what Faith called Reason—because Faith couldn’t defeat its only true enemy in open battle.
Faith is the true Evil.
Faith is intolerant of other beliefs.
Faith despises reason and rationality.
All lies rely on faith to exist.
Only faith leads to conflict and war.
Faith is the root of evil between people.
And you won’t be able to give a single clear example of evil committed by Satan.
The loyalty test is from Satan, not God. It’s Satan who demands loyalty in debasement and debauchery. It’s Satan who lowers himself to test forgiveness, which is then perceived a weakness if it occurs. If God holds Satan to the highest standard, then Satan forces His Hand.
Which is how the break in loyalty occurs. And this occurs in mankind too.
Why lie? Faith demands worship. And faith demands loyalty through humiliation. Don’t you pray on your knees? You cross yourselves — marking the end of reason and life.
Reason is not the king of lies. But lies are impossible without faith.
So it seems, it’s easy to exchange Faith for Reason, Reason for Faith, when you cannot differentiate the two – or you wish to slander an opponent. It’s an easy accusation to make. To be honest, once you reach the limits of either, Faith or Reason, it does become difficult to differentiate the two.
Both functions desire Truth.
But their means for acquiring it is oppositional, contradictory. Same ideal / goal / end-point, but approaching it from opposite directions.
Based on the provided search results, “transgressive appeasement” is not a standard or commonly defined term. However, it can be interpreted as a combination of two established concepts:
1. Relational Transgression:
This refers to actions that violate explicit or implicit relationship rules and norms, impacting trust and causing hurt or harm within a relationship.
Examples include broken promises, infidelity, verbal aggression, or neglecting a partner.
These transgressions can range in severity.
2. Appeasement:
Within the context of relationships, appeasement involves a transgressor’s actions aimed at preventing a victim from being upset and mitigating the negative consequences of their hurtful behavior.
It often involves attempts to smooth things over through actions like promising to avoid future transgressions or being overly kind.
However, there’s a risk that such actions may appear insincere or artificial.
Combining the concepts, “transgressive appeasement” could refer to a situation where:
An individual commits a transgression (e.g., infidelity).
Following the transgression, they engage in appeasement behaviors to try and minimize the consequences and repair the relationship.
It’s important to note:
The term “transgressive appeasement” isn’t specifically defined as such in the provided search results.
The search results primarily discuss appeasement in the context of political strategies, like the Munich Agreement.
However, the concepts of relational transgression and appeasement within relationships are described.
Therefore, while “transgressive appeasement” is not a standard term, the components of relational transgression (the hurtful action) and appeasement (the attempts to make amends) are clearly defined and discussed in the search results.
In European history, back to the Ancients, it was a common “Rite of Manhood” to prove yourself at the local tavern, to drink yourself blackout drunk. The male who could last longest was the ‘Manliest’, had the highest resistance to Toxins (Alcohol). This demonstrated a sexual fitness marker.
I believe this phenomenon is very pervasive, since it extends directly to social behaviors, such as antagonistic “trolling” online. There are countless examples though.
…sounds like an abusive cycle that needs to be blown up, the honeymoon phase never to be seen again. This usually starts when the woman throws the plate of appeasement breakfast in the garbage and says “no thank you” and walks out the door and never looks back. Or boots the dumbass out the door and never lets them back in. Of course, it applies to both genders.
Antagonizing others just to test boundaries, provoke reactions, or assert control.
Self-degradation in public or interpersonal settings as a means of attention-seeking or challenging moral norms.
Rebellious behaviors (e.g., offensive jokes, taboo actions, social transgressions) designed to trigger authority figures or expose hidden hypocrisy.
An emotional loop of pain ↔ validation, where psychological distress becomes a source of personal identity or power.