People who live on the internet love nothing more than confessing our love for those who spend their lives largely offline.

We see them as higher beings -- practical demi-gods who are blessed to have never even heard of Eric Garland, people who've successfully transitioned beyond the 2016 Democratic primary, saints who would never, ever watch Tide pod porn.

Few online people will publicly acknowledge, however, the consequences of that idealization. But there comes a point in any relationship between online people and their largely offline partners when the latter finally reveals their devastatingly poor taste in their internet -- and oh, how it burns.

Fellow internet kids, it's time for a little game theory.

SEE ALSO:I'm down on my knees, begging you please not to do this to your bookshelf

To be clear, bad web culture taste isn't confined to largely offline communities. I can't tell you the number of times I've turned around at my local coffee shop to find someone reading a George Takei tweetstorm out loud, or watched someone I love -- someone who routinely sends me features from The Cut -- do a Playbuzz quiz about their Hogwarts house because the Buzzfeed community quiz didn't do the job.

Via Giphy

Sigh.

Still, a disproportionate share of people with subpar internet palates -- SIPs for short -- come from anti-internet communities. I'm currently in a wonderful relationship with a largely offline person who was recently diagnosed with this disorder by a professional (me) in a clinical setting (on vacation).

As a licensed internet professional, I attribute her condition to her upbringing in a television-free house in New Hampshire, where she was encouraged to engage in such non-traditional activities as "going outside and playing a game" and "reading a book from the library." Some of the symptoms of her condition, shared by many in the SIP community, include:

• Reading a listicle of jokes from HuffPo about middle-aged couples who've been married for too long, then insisting that those jokes are "good"

• Watching a YouTube video of "Epic fails that became movie masterpieces" for more than the recommended zero seconds

• Sending me viral videos of celebrity animals that peaked around, say, 1998

• Finding a survey on some local FOX affiliate and demanding that we vote not once, but daily, on the next flavor of Krispy Kreme, a donut I don't even like

She's not alone. There are millions of people out there who suffer from a similar pathology, though it may manifest itself differently. If you're concerned that someone you love may be struggling, be on the lookout of any signs of:

Mashable Top StoriesStay connected with the hottest stories of the day and the latest entertainment news.Sign up for Mashable's Top Stories newsletterBy signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.Thanks for signing up!

• Buzzfeed community post content involving Disney princesses

Via Giphy

• Tweets by Eric Garland or Seth Abramson

Guys. Gizmodo/Fusion/Univision's people are tearing off the mask about how they've attacked Trump-Russia investigators.

Everybody, say hello to Susie, Univision's new Trump PR associate! https://t.co/aFuPtUY6CJ

— Eric Garland (@ericgarland) January 7, 2018

• Anything by Chris Cillizza

Why booing Ivanka is wronghttps://t.co/BjBwFlss0X

— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) April 25, 2017

• Listicles that are 100 percent Lin Manuel Miranda/JK Rowling tweets

• New York Timesstories that everyone read yesterday because everyone gets the same damn notification

• Opinion pieces from the HuffPo community contributors section

• Nothing from Mashable, obviously, because everything here is perfect and good, including this.

• Instagram accounts they want to show you that already have 9 million followers

• Most content from YouTube stars, especially the Paul brothers

I find him SO offensive. If Japan can ban Paris Hilton for drug charges then they can ban Logan Paul. GET IN THE BINpic.twitter.com/VPmg8I5m4C

— Sarasa (@sarasat_) January 5, 2018

• Most cooking videos, not limited to Buzzfeed Tasty, that involve cream cheese or are just some iteration of fettuccine alfredo with chicken

There's so much more. And as online people, it's hard to know how to respond when the people we love are so internet basic.

In the early 00s, it was easy to judge people by the books on their shelves. I knew immediately to exit a romantic situation when I saw that a potential partner had Ayn Rand on their bookshelves. I always asked a series of probing questions when they revealed that Fight Clubwas their favorite book. Too much YA fiction was a warning sign, though not exactly a disqualification, assuming their collection didn't include anything from the Twilight series. Dan Brown was the book terrain of no return.

It's so much harder nowadays to judge people on the quality of the content they consume, which isn't on physical display like a book is. In 2018, we have to use a broader, more sophisticated judging system. It is scientifically possible, as in my partner's case, that they're bad at the internet but good at reading physical books and, ya know, everything else.

Accept them for who they are. Don't idealize them.

How to respond? We can try to improve our partner's poor taste by casually sending them links using their preferred medium, email. I've sent a few Hairpin (RIP) and Jezebel stories this way -- great sites for good internet beginners -- as well as more recent viral videos I've found from a casual reading of Twitter. This works, though there's only so much you can change a person if they don't want to be changed -- or, worse, don't think that The Siberian Timesis incredibly good content.

The best response is the most traditional one, advice you can easily find on one of their favorite about.com pages: Accept them for who they are. Don't idealize them. As non-internet people who DNGAF about Donald Trump Jr., they have access to whole worlds we just can't reach. They don't spend their days monitoring the latest Twitter war between Nate Silver and the New York Times. They're not losing sleep over the latest "Trump voters in a diner" article because they haven't even read the first one (!).

Access journalism? What's that?

It's possible they have skills you'll never come close to developing, including the ability to go to a party without escaping to the bathroom to check Twitter on their crumb-encrusted phone. Maybe they like to go outside when it's warm out or even just open a window. Since they don't spend their lives in front of a computer, it's highly likely that they don't look like a cocktail shrimp and are actually capable of standing up straight.

I encourage you to take a look inwards, and examine some of your own shameful content you've consumed recently. How many tweets did you recently like about the are hot dogs sandwiches debate? Count 'em up.

Don't tell me you didn't watch that video of a tiny toddler running around with a knife. And yes, you've followed a branded Instagram account simply because you were intrigued by their bed linens. Be honest with yourself.

The toddler- Selena
The knife- social media
The mom- Courtney pic.twitter.com/gN7VQ9nUj4

— ariyana (@selenasmodel) September 29, 2017

Part of the reason we want to correct supposedly bad internet taste in our partners is because we recognize the desire in ourselves. We all want to consume crap, and not even high quality crap like this award-winning article I wrote about a dog's butthole resembling a monkey in a fur coat.

It's better to embrace our basest desires than try to deny them or project them onto the people we care about. As we say around these online parts, the bad internet gives us life. We won't be able to unwatch this. We are here for it, especially when we tell you that we're not.

---

Featured Video For You

---

The hidden cost of a conveniently connected world

---