Friday, January 27, 2006
Friday Vocabulary Lesson
projection (Noun; psychiatry): a defense mechanism by which your own traits and emotions are attributed to someone else. Example:
As a friend of mine has pointed out, the problem with the Oil is a fragile psyche: when things are going poorly, we're entirely convinced we couldn't beat a team of retarded seals, and play as such. However, when things are going good, man, we could probably beat the Russian Fifth Calvary in a land war. We seem to have found our confidence again...
# posted by Matt @ 12:50 pm 
Comments:
I've noticed that.
I've also noticed that it's almost the opposite for Flames fans. Well, Matt anyways.
Get a winning streak going and Matt cautions that, odds are, a loss is bound to happen - can't win forever; and if we lose a few not to worry - we always come back strong, confident in the team's long-range success.
That's how I see it, anyways.
I prefer to think of it as identifying with the team.
Also, there was a good article a couple years back about sports fans and how they talk about their teams. Researchers noticed that they teneded to use phrases like "we" and "us" when things were going good, and "they" or "those guys" when things went bad. I like to think I always use "we," though I'm not inclined to actually look that up.
I recall the same point a couple of times, PM. And it makes total sense.
When things are going good, well, "we" just need to keep doing what we're doing--I can certainly manage that!
When things are sour, well, it's hard to say that "we" need to do something better or differently, because that's the point at which it becomes obvious that there's not a goddamned thing that *I* can do.
Watching games at home on TV, poor play by the Flames result in my dogs slinking out of the room and cowering under the bed. I doubt I use "we" when yelling colourfully at the TV.
I remember that from 1st year Psych, my prof talking about that. I notice most hardcore fans (ie on blogs, messageboards) stick with "we" almost no matter what.
Except when referring to specific things though, then it's usually "they've gotta get better at cycling/hitting/PKing". The general things are usually "we" though, "we need a goalie", "we need Jarmoe to score more than a point every other game" etc etc.
Wow, that's funny.
I've always thought that, historically, way back to the Nelson Skalbania times, the Flames were a(n Oilers') projection.
Well,maaaybe ... from a clinical point of view, the Oilers were a projection of the Skalbania's brain. I'll work it over: but
for better or worse, however the Oilers perform, to be antagonist is the Flames destiny - ain't no
denying.
Post a Comment
<< Home
I've noticed that.
I've also noticed that it's almost the opposite for Flames fans. Well, Matt anyways.
Get a winning streak going and Matt cautions that, odds are, a loss is bound to happen - can't win forever; and if we lose a few not to worry - we always come back strong, confident in the team's long-range success.
That's how I see it, anyways.
# posted by 
: January 27, 2006 1:35 pm
: January 27, 2006 1:35 pm I prefer to think of it as identifying with the team.
Also, there was a good article a couple years back about sports fans and how they talk about their teams. Researchers noticed that they teneded to use phrases like "we" and "us" when things were going good, and "they" or "those guys" when things went bad. I like to think I always use "we," though I'm not inclined to actually look that up.
I recall the same point a couple of times, PM. And it makes total sense.
When things are going good, well, "we" just need to keep doing what we're doing--I can certainly manage that!
When things are sour, well, it's hard to say that "we" need to do something better or differently, because that's the point at which it becomes obvious that there's not a goddamned thing that *I* can do.
Watching games at home on TV, poor play by the Flames result in my dogs slinking out of the room and cowering under the bed. I doubt I use "we" when yelling colourfully at the TV.
# posted by : January 27, 2006 2:01 pm
: January 27, 2006 2:01 pm I remember that from 1st year Psych, my prof talking about that. I notice most hardcore fans (ie on blogs, messageboards) stick with "we" almost no matter what.
Except when referring to specific things though, then it's usually "they've gotta get better at cycling/hitting/PKing". The general things are usually "we" though, "we need a goalie", "we need Jarmoe to score more than a point every other game" etc etc.
# posted by : January 27, 2006 2:11 pm
: January 27, 2006 2:11 pm Wow, that's funny.
I've always thought that, historically, way back to the Nelson Skalbania times, the Flames were a(n Oilers') projection.
Well,maaaybe ... from a clinical point of view, the Oilers were a projection of the Skalbania's brain. I'll work it over: but
for better or worse, however the Oilers perform, to be antagonist is the Flames destiny - ain't no
denying.
# posted by : January 28, 2006 4:27 am
: January 28, 2006 4:27 am Post a Comment
<< Home
