Poll: What to do about Ms-Pompous (a rant)

[Internet Kraken]

What did she give out to you about?

She basically gave me a false lecture about how my dog was aggressive (even though my dog plays with little girls and is probably the polar opposite). But my dog was barking, and she told me in a sing song voice that I should 'take better care of my dog, or else she'll think she's the boss'. The tone was rather arrogant, it wasn't kind. When I tried to correct her, she kept going at me Bill O'Reilly-style. Because of that, I started to stutter and get intimidated.

To make it worse, I knew she was wrong because she supports the alpha-dog theories which were proven false by current-day ethologists....But all of this...I didn't have the ability to 'tell her'. It's because when people pressure me, I get really 'flustered', and lose all thinking ability. It's a curse I've had since I was born

Then the problem is with you. Learn how to speak properly under pressure. Then you will be able to tell Ms. Pompous to shove off.

I honestly wish it was that easy. It's harder than you think, bro

I know it's not easy to do, but you should try to get over this problem as soon as possible. Otherwise, it will constantly resurface throughout the rest of your life.

 

[antipunt]

*broken apart below*

Oh dear. I think Ururu is serious. Not only Ms-Pompous, but Ms.-Denialist-Pompous!

"You are simply categorically wrong yet again!"

Just because you say so?

"Temperament is NOT NEARLY the same as personality."

Anyone with even a minimal understanding of psychology would find this an -extremely- laughable notion. 'Not even nearly you say? Not even close'? Right Ms. Pompous, keep going.

"Personality is BASED on temperament (by the way, contradicted yourself already), but is WIDELY varied due to STRICTLY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS"

Which is the same thing as being 'strictly environmental'?

'There is no wuss gene. It is STRICTLY environmental'
^This was you. Sorry, you can't cover your tracts in a -forum-, but keep trying.

"You either mixed up these two words, showing a fundamental lack of knowledge into developmental child psychology, or you are simply ignorant to it!"

Irony at its sweetest. Let's not even talk about fundamental psychology, you lack basic reading comprehension skills...

"Alpha-male theory was shown to be incomplete, but not strictly wrong"

Your pattern: 'X is not -exactly- correct/Y' but then later on, "X -is- correct". Think about it.

"Perhaps you should look into wild pack studies if you are unsure as to just how WRONG you are. Yes, the media has conflated and exaggerated it to a large degree, almost obscuring the theory as it was originally stated, but it IS a valid theory which has shown to be true over large scale models in many different types of pack animals, including domesticated dogs (notably terriers)."

Using big-words and caps-lock doesn't keep you from becoming Ms. Pompous; it only worsens it. A Ms. Pompous will correct others on a moral high-horse, despite being unsure of his/her own 'facts'. So far, this is a perfect account of your behavior (especially considering that you landed the first blow). In addition, if you actually look carefully at your little 'shtick' above, you haven't proven a single thing. Wild pack studies huh? Wasn't I the one who mentioned the wolf-studies? A 'valid' theory?...:

'Also, Alpha-male isn't strictly proven wrong. It is a special case to a more general theory. And she is RIGHT. All things held equal, it WILL think it is the leader....'

So is it 'right' or a 'valid' theory? I hope you aren't 'silly' enough not to recognize this simple distinction. Clearly, you believe it is 'right', but -publicly- announce it as 'incomplete'. In addition, 'alpha-male' -is- the theory, there is no alternative 'general-theory' that links parts of it together. Your 5-minutes of wikipedia-searching was incomplete, try again.

"But you were no less a dumbass "

Resorting to ad-hominem attacks when losing a logical argument. Clearly, Ms-Pompous.

"Newtons model was incomplete, yet it is still used today"

And yet, it was -you- and the woman who jumped on -another- party despite supporting an 'incomplete' theory, while deeming it as fact (contradiction aside!). Clearly, Ms-Pompous.

"*shrug* I think I've made my point that you ARE that woman. Just in a different set of skin."

No, actually, you've proven that you are the worst kind of Ms-Pompous. She'll at least admit she was wrong maybe/probably at a future date (or via body-language). But you...you're just some kind of troll/pompous hybrid.