Poll: "Haters Gonna Hate": the most infuriating defense in the world

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

I submit for consideration as the most obnoxious, idiotic, and infuriating defense against obnoxious, idiotic, and infuriating behavior: "haters going to hate".

The catalyst for this thread? Lebron James. The man is almost universally reviled for the bullshit stunt he pulled last summer, a spectacle of narcissistic arrogance that soured a previously favorable public perception beyond repair.

But despite all the hate, a not-insubstantial number of people defend his behavior on the grounds of, well, "You're all a bunch of jealous haters, and haters gonna hate!"

Every time I read or hear this, my head explodes. Seriously, I've gone through like two dozen heads this year.

It's obviously not just sports. Basically any time an arrogant, self-absorbed tool does something incredibly egotistical and/or moronic, you run into this defense. It's so self-insulating as to completely bypass the rules of logic and reasoning, but that doesn't stop its deployment in the face of intelligent and accurate criticism.

So I'm proposing a very simple rule: if you're not a reasonably humble guy or gal trying your best to meet reasonable expectations, you don't get to use "haters gonna hate" as an excuse for your behavior. Attempting to do so instantly labels you as 100% wrong and worthy of ridicule.

Haters Gonna Hate!

Meanwhile, I find it more of a funny thing rather than a douchebag thing.

 

[messy]

How many people actually use "haters gonna hate" seriously? I say it for a joke some times.

I don't think its worth this level of anger to be honest. Its just a bit of fun, I've never used it in a serious argument. Because it doesn't actually make much sense.

 

[Always_Remain]

No because I know they're just trolling. Nothing wrong with a little trolling.

But if someone legitimately used this in a discussion with me irl, I'd probably sock 'em in the face or something.

 

[Thaius]

It's not a good defense at all, but it is sometimes true. There are people that have irrational reasons for hating something, and rational arguments do very little against irrational thinkers. I've seen tons of this, on everything from Halo to My Little Pony. As much as I hate it as an argument, I understand the rationale behind it.

 

[Outright Villainy]

"Haters gonna hate" isn't meant to be a defence, it's just shorthand for "There will inevitably be someone who dislikes you and/or the things you like, so don't waste time to deal with all of them on an individual basis". Or at least, that's what I mean when I use it.

Exactly, it's more of a philosophy than anything, and in that respect it's actually pretty good. As a pointed defence though, well, not so much. Not sure how that bastardisation happened.

 

[Jordi]

"Haters gonna hate" isn't meant to be a defence, it's just shorthand for "There will inevitably be someone who dislikes you and/or the things you like, so don't waste time to deal with all of them on an individual basis". Or at least, that's what I mean when I use it.

Yes, it is used to dismiss the opinion of everyone who happens to disagree or dislike something, and that is stupid. It also implies that those people are "haters" who can do not help "hating" (everything?) because that just happens to be what they do. The reasoning I often see is "you dislike/hate what I say, therefor you are a hater and I can safely dismiss your opinion without looking at the merits of your arguments".

If your philosophy is that you can't please everyone and you don't want to set your own bar too high, then that is fine, but I think "haters gonna hate" is a horrible way of expressing that sentiment. Also, maybe it would be wise to try and please as many people as possible anyway, and to do that you need to listen to what it is that the haters hate so it can be improved.

I use that argument against the arrogant, self-absorbed tools.

"Halo 4 suks caus halo has no stry and is lam and ful of kids lawl"

Oh, well, you're a tool. Haters gonna hate.

But against someone that makes a well formed argument and tries to be civil, I'll actually give them my time.

I basically use it as a way of dismissing trolls. "This dude is a hater. He won't see reason and won't pay attention and will do nothing but spout the same shit over and over. Haters gonna hate. This is pointless." But never otherwise.

Even when you're right, using that phrase will still make you come across as a massive idiot to me. In your hypothetical strawman example with the illiterate Halo hater I think that your response is more stupid than his criticism. I don't know what "stry" is, but it sounds to me like it may be a legitimate criticism of the game, and the "full of kids" is a legitimate criticism of the game's ecosystem. Instead of dismissing his arguments because you disagree and he can't right, why not address them?

 

[ZeroMachine]

I use that argument against the arrogant, self-absorbed tools.

"Halo 4 suks caus halo has no stry and is lam and ful of kids lawl"

Oh, well, you're a tool. Haters gonna hate.

But against someone that makes a well formed argument and tries to be civil, I'll actually give them my time.

I basically use it as a way of dismissing trolls. "This dude is a hater. He won't see reason and won't pay attention and will do nothing but spout the same shit over and over. Haters gonna hate. This is pointless." But never otherwise.

Even when you're right, using that phrase will still make you come across as a massive idiot to me. In your hypothetical strawman example with the illiterate Halo hater I think that your response is more stupid than his criticism. I don't know what "stry" is, but it sounds to me like it may be a legitimate criticism of the game, and the "full of kids" is a legitimate criticism of the game's ecosystem. Instead of dismissing his arguments because you disagree and he can't right, why not address them?

Because in my example, if you read further, he's a hardheaded asshole who won't change his view no matter what I say.

I literally only use it when I can tell that talking to the person is pointless and they'll keep spouting stupid, pointless hate-speech.

It's a simple dismissal of a troll or someone that argues with insults rather than reason. If the person actually seemed willing to take and give point and counter point and discuss it rather than fling mud, then I'd totally get into said discussion.

Take, for instance, if you keep insisting that I come across as a massive idiot just because of a simple meme. Fair warning (and this is purely an "if" situation so don't take it as a personal attack) I'm going to dismiss you as someone who refuses to see my side of the argument and will do nothing but attempt to insult me and make me feel bad about myself, and are therefore a waste of my time and an asshole. So, I will say to you, "Haters gonna hate", as there is nothing else I could say to make you see reason, so I may as well get a little laugh out of it. Then, we will both go on with our lives... me not caring what you think, and you (IMO) being too picky about how I deal with trolls, and needlessly insulting everyone that use the phrase rather than just those that use it to cover up their own asshatery.

But, if you reply with an actual reason rather than just insisting on your insult, I will gladly continue the discussion (though I don't see how anything else could be said).

See my reasoning here?

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

"Haters gonna hate" isn't meant to be a defence, it's just shorthand for "There will inevitably be someone who dislikes you and/or the things you like, so don't waste time to deal with all of them on an individual basis". Or at least, that's what I mean when I use it.

Yes, it is used to dismiss the opinion of everyone who happens to disagree or dislike something, and that is stupid. It also implies that those people are "haters" who can do not help "hating" (everything?) because that just happens to be what they do. The reasoning I often see is "you dislike/hate what I say, therefor you are a hater and I can safely dismiss your opinion without looking at the merits of your arguments".

I don't know where you got the idea from that I'm equating anyone who disagrees with me with 'haters'. At that point we wheel out the big guns, with 'let's agree to disagree' or perhaps an actual strcutured argument. I would not, for example, dismiss someone's political leanings with the phrase 'hater's gonna hate' nor would I use it to defend against someone who has actually taken the time to make a decent argument. It is instead reserved for those times when people will repeatedly enter a discussion to voice their disapproval without actually having any points to make or reason to be there.

See for example: any My Little Pony thread.

If your philosophy is that you can't please everyone and you don't want to set your own bar too high, then that is fine, but I think "haters gonna hate" is a horrible way of expressing that sentiment. Also, maybe it would be wise to try and please as many people as possible anyway, and to do that you need to listen to what it is that the haters hate so it can be improved.

Well I'm so glad that you were able to impart that wisdom upon me, perhaps now I can finally fix my life. I was unaware of the fact that pleasing people can be beneficial.

You're not seeing the point here. The only times I've seen 'haters gonna hate' used is when people are getting angry over the idea of someone being happy for harmless reasons they disapprove of without justification. The only time it's used as a defence is when no defence should be needed to explain an action. For example, I like Halo, it is a game I enjoy. I am informed that I'm not allowed to enjoy it, because it's not a 'proper' FPS. My response? Haters gonna hate. If they had instead pointed out flaws within Halo and why they therefore don't enjoy it then we could have a debate on the subject, but until they do they shall be irritated with over used memes.

Spoiler: Like this one

 

[aba1]

I didn't realize it was actual argument I thought it was a joke... wait so people actually try to justify there actions with haters going to hate lmao


ok by that logic murderer's going to murder let all the criminals go from prison now *rolls eyes*

 

[Jordi]

I use that argument against the arrogant, self-absorbed tools.

"Halo 4 suks caus halo has no stry and is lam and ful of kids lawl"

Oh, well, you're a tool. Haters gonna hate.

But against someone that makes a well formed argument and tries to be civil, I'll actually give them my time.

I basically use it as a way of dismissing trolls. "This dude is a hater. He won't see reason and won't pay attention and will do nothing but spout the same shit over and over. Haters gonna hate. This is pointless." But never otherwise.

Even when you're right, using that phrase will still make you come across as a massive idiot to me. In your hypothetical strawman example with the illiterate Halo hater I think that your response is more stupid than his criticism. I don't know what "stry" is, but it sounds to me like it may be a legitimate criticism of the game, and the "full of kids" is a legitimate criticism of the game's ecosystem. Instead of dismissing his arguments because you disagree and he can't right, why not address them?

Because in my example, if you read further, he's a hardheaded asshole who won't change his view no matter what I say.

I literally only use it when I can tell that talking to the person is pointless and they'll keep spouting stupid, pointless hate-speech.

It's a simple dismissal of a troll or someone that argues with insults rather than reason. If the person actually seemed willing to take and give point and counter point and discuss it rather than fling mud, then I'd totally get into said discussion.

Take, for instance, if you keep insisting that I come across as a massive idiot just because of a simple meme. Fair warning (and this is purely an "if" situation so don't take it as a personal attack) I'm going to dismiss you as someone who refuses to see my side of the argument and will do nothing but attempt to insult me and make me feel bad about myself, and are therefore a waste of my time and an asshole. So, I will say to you, "Haters gonna hate", as there is nothing else I could say to make you see reason, so I may as well get a little laugh out of it. Then, we will both go on with our lives... me not caring what you think, and you (IMO) being too picky about how I deal with trolls, and needlessly insulting everyone that use the phrase rather than just those that use it to cover up their own asshatery.

But, if you reply with an actual reason rather than just insisting on your insult, I will gladly continue the discussion (though I don't see how anything else could be said).

See my reasoning here?

I do see your reasoning. I still don't like the phrase though. It probably means different things to us. I've seen it used badly so often that I immediately associate it with idiots. There are way better ways to deal with trolls than to use a phrase that is used incorrectly by idiots 99% of the time. For instance, you can ignore them, report them, or call them out on trolling. "haters gonna hate" is not a smart comeback.

Also, maybe you can define for me what the word "hater" means to you. To me it means someone who can do nothing other than hate (because that's what they're "gonna do"). I don't really believe in that. People don't hate things for no reason. Their reasons might be bad, sure, but they are rarely if ever non-existent. There are of course people who pretend to hate something to get a reaction out of you, and they are trolls, not haters. So since I don't think haters exist, the phrase is never appropriate to me.

You may think I'm picky in how I think you should deal with trolls, and that's your right. But what makes you think that saying "haters gonna hate" is a good way?

 

[Jordi]

"Haters gonna hate" isn't meant to be a defence, it's just shorthand for "There will inevitably be someone who dislikes you and/or the things you like, so don't waste time to deal with all of them on an individual basis". Or at least, that's what I mean when I use it.

Yes, it is used to dismiss the opinion of everyone who happens to disagree or dislike something, and that is stupid. It also implies that those people are "haters" who can do not help "hating" (everything?) because that just happens to be what they do. The reasoning I often see is "you dislike/hate what I say, therefor you are a hater and I can safely dismiss your opinion without looking at the merits of your arguments".

I don't know where you got the idea from that I'm equating anyone who disagrees with me with 'haters'. At that point we wheel out the big guns, with 'let's agree to disagree' or perhaps an actual strcutured argument. I would not, for example, dismiss someone's political leanings with the phrase 'hater's gonna hate' nor would I use it to defend against someone who has actually taken the time to make a decent argument. It is instead reserved for those times when people will repeatedly enter a discussion to voice their disapproval without actually having any points to make or reason to be there.

See for example: any My Little Pony thread.

If your philosophy is that you can't please everyone and you don't want to set your own bar too high, then that is fine, but I think "haters gonna hate" is a horrible way of expressing that sentiment. Also, maybe it would be wise to try and please as many people as possible anyway, and to do that you need to listen to what it is that the haters hate so it can be improved.

Well I'm so glad that you were able to impart that wisdom upon me, perhaps now I can finally fix my life. I was unaware of the fact that pleasing people can be beneficial.

You're not seeing the point here. The only times I've seen 'haters gonna hate' used is when people are getting angry over the idea of someone being happy for harmless reasons they disapprove of without justification. The only time it's used as a defence is when no defence should be needed to explain an action. For example, I like Halo, it is a game I enjoy. I am informed that I'm not allowed to enjoy it, because it's not a 'proper' FPS. My response? Haters gonna hate. If they had instead pointed out flaws within Halo and why they therefore don't enjoy it then we could have a debate on the subject, but until they do they shall be irritated with over used memes.

Spoiler: Like this one

Apparently our experiences are very different. I have pretty much only seen this phrase used as a non-funny joke, or to dismiss other people's opinions. In my experience people call others "haters" when they disagree and can't be bothered to put up a good argument, because when they "hate" your idea/favorite show/whatever, they must hate everything right?

I've also seen it used in situations like this: "I think there should be lightsabers in Skyrim. Sure, some people might not like that, but haters gonna hate, right?" This is a little more closely related to what you said. I know you didn't mean it in the obnoxious way that I'm putting it now, but you did say that you shouldn't waste time dealing with the people who will inevitably dislike you or the things you like. I think that you probably meant something like "don't worry too much about what other people might think" and I think that's fine (to a certain extent). But for me the way you said it exemplified one of the very poor ways in which I often see "haters gonna hate" used.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

I use it occasionally, because there are a few things I think that there's just an unreasonable and indestructible amount of hate for something, such as CoD or Halo for example. Whilst it's fair enough that people don't like it and there are a lot of good arguments, I also think that's there's just a load of people making frankly stupid arguments against them for the sake of hating them.

 

[KafkaOffTheBeach]

Just putting this out there - but "haters gonna hate" is nowhere near as bad as "u mad?"
Or "u mad bro?" "y u mad tho?" etc.
Haters gonna hate is, at least, a kinda stoned conversation diffusal device - while 'u mad' is a confrontational attack daring the other participant to, indeed, become slightly frustrated - thus proving the secondary point and dismissing whatever was the primary point.

 

[Wuggy]

I don't even like the concept of "hater", I find it bogus. If someone dislikes something, they probably have a reason to do it. It's not just because they are a "hater". And if there is actually no reason, the correct word would be "troll".

And yes, the phrase "haters gonna hate" is a bullshit way to try to preempt yourself from criticism by basically denigrating the critics beforehand.

 

[lord canti]

I don't think people actually are serious about it. To me it used more just to make a stupid argument even stupider and no one actually uses it seriously.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I use that argument against the arrogant, self-absorbed tools.

"Halo 4 suks caus halo has no stry and is lam and ful of kids lawl"

Oh, well, you're a tool. Haters gonna hate.

But against someone that makes a well formed argument and tries to be civil, I'll actually give them my time.

I basically use it as a way of dismissing trolls. "This dude is a hater. He won't see reason and won't pay attention and will do nothing but spout the same shit over and over. Haters gonna hate. This is pointless." But never otherwise.

Even when you're right, using that phrase will still make you come across as a massive idiot to me. In your hypothetical strawman example with the illiterate Halo hater I think that your response is more stupid than his criticism. I don't know what "stry" is, but it sounds to me like it may be a legitimate criticism of the game, and the "full of kids" is a legitimate criticism of the game's ecosystem. Instead of dismissing his arguments because you disagree and he can't right, why not address them?

Because in my example, if you read further, he's a hardheaded asshole who won't change his view no matter what I say.

I literally only use it when I can tell that talking to the person is pointless and they'll keep spouting stupid, pointless hate-speech.

It's a simple dismissal of a troll or someone that argues with insults rather than reason. If the person actually seemed willing to take and give point and counter point and discuss it rather than fling mud, then I'd totally get into said discussion.

Take, for instance, if you keep insisting that I come across as a massive idiot just because of a simple meme. Fair warning (and this is purely an "if" situation so don't take it as a personal attack) I'm going to dismiss you as someone who refuses to see my side of the argument and will do nothing but attempt to insult me and make me feel bad about myself, and are therefore a waste of my time and an asshole. So, I will say to you, "Haters gonna hate", as there is nothing else I could say to make you see reason, so I may as well get a little laugh out of it. Then, we will both go on with our lives... me not caring what you think, and you (IMO) being too picky about how I deal with trolls, and needlessly insulting everyone that use the phrase rather than just those that use it to cover up their own asshatery.

But, if you reply with an actual reason rather than just insisting on your insult, I will gladly continue the discussion (though I don't see how anything else could be said).

See my reasoning here?

I do see your reasoning. I still don't like the phrase though. It probably means different things to us. I've seen it used badly so often that I immediately associate it with idiots. There are way better ways to deal with trolls than to use a phrase that is used incorrectly by idiots 99% of the time. For instance, you can ignore them, report them, or call them out on trolling. "haters gonna hate" is not a smart comeback.

Also, maybe you can define for me what the word "hater" means to you. To me it means someone who can do nothing other than hate (because that's what they're "gonna do"). I don't really believe in that. People don't hate things for no reason. Their reasons might be bad, sure, but they are rarely if ever non-existent. There are of course people who pretend to hate something to get a reaction out of you, and they are trolls, not haters. So since I don't think haters exist, the phrase is never appropriate to me.

You may think I'm picky in how I think you should deal with trolls, and that's your right. But what makes you think that saying "haters gonna hate" is a good way?

I can't tell you what "haters" means exactly because I never thought about it myself (though I seriously doubt it's supposed to be a term for a being of perpetual hate, as those are called Creepers and they explode). You're trying to deconstruct a saying that came from the internet (or at least was popularized on the internet, it may have come from somewhere else for all I know). Really think about it here: do you realize how fruitless of an endeavor that is?

I use it in place of "eh, oh well" simply because I find the images associated with it to be funny.

And if you're gonna ask me why I think it's a good way, I'll ask you why you think it's a bad way other than "I've heard idiots use it"? I've heard PLENTY of people say "WOW, that was ironic" when it was, in no way, ironic. I still say that myself when I see something ironic.

I feel like this is another one of those situations where neither of us will be able to make any headway to understand each other. I don't understand why you're so against a simple saying but, then again, I don't understand why my parents are so against the simple saying "my bad".

"Live and let live" is the best thing to do here. Just, if you see me say that (which has, for the record, happened once on this forum) don't think of me as an idiot.

 

[Latinidiot]

It's exactly the same as: 'WEll, that's YOUR (note the italics, they're very important in ronouncing this sentence) opinion!'

'Or well, that's (again, italics) your reality.'

It implies not caring about a remark because fuck your remark.

 

[hyker]

sorry, but I'm an over-educated prick and don't know what lebron james did
could someone tell me? couldn't find it through google