I took this photo yesterday, and I remember setting up the image, but for the life of me, I can't remember where I took it... Yesterday!! Normally. images are a catalyst for my memory and I use them to remember the circumstances I was in when I took them. What the hell?
And the reason I took the photo in the first place was because when I saw it there, my head immediately said "two short" and as a short person, I found it amusing -
I have always liked double entendres.
Which probably explains a lot of my titles and humor in general -
in bad taste.
But that is okay, isn't it?
I was having a discussion with my wife the other day when she brought up something from several years ago when I insulted her in front of friends and she has been carrying it around since. The problem is, it never actually happened, because it wasn't an insult, it was a joke that might have been poorly delivered, but can't be an insult, because there was no intention for it to be so. As I said to her,
If I am going to insult you, there will be no shadow of a doubt in it.
I rarely aim to insult people.
I won't say never, but I am a bit of a tease, meaning that I tease people mercilessly, if they are friends of mine. I tease other people too, but don't go anywhere near as hard.
But a friend and I were talking about this the other day and how there is a difference between for instance, the Americans and the Brits in terms of humor. He (an American) really enjoys the British humor because it is darker, and far more cutting. It is like there is no topic out of bounds, as long as the intention is to be funny, not cruel. Australian humor is similar to the British.
Though I believe that a lot of the good humor is getting washed away with the social identity movements, where everyone is so sensitive to what is said, and will ascribe the worst possible intention to the words, even if they know it was never intended to be take in that way at all. And as I have said before, I dislike it when people are offended on behalf of other people, it is rude. It makes the assumption that the person isn't able to stand up for themselves.
One of my colleagues for example has a mentally disabled sister, which is even more interesting perhaps because both her mother and other sister are professional psychotherapists. They family are a family of insulters, with sharp wit, but no malice, but after the accident that caused the damage, they changed their behavior toward the younger sister. Until - the sister got incredibly upset with them for treating her differently, to treating her with kiddy gloves, and not including her in the ribbing, which for them, is a sign of deep love and affection.
She is part of the family, she wanted to be included.
So they do tease her openly and she is gives back as good as they give.
That might sound strange to some people perhaps, especially if you overheard their conversations, but who is to judge what is healthy for the individual? Isn't it belittling and oppressive to make the decisions for an individual at social convention level, saying, you are not allowed to tease mentally disabled people.
I have a brain injury.
No one (including me) has a full understanding of what is actually broken in there and how it affects my thoughts and behaviors, but isn't that the case with all of us - aren't we all on various mental spectrums where in some regards we might be as sharp as a tack and in others, as dull as a nun's dildo? And unless there is a long history of discussion, no one knows what triggers a particular person has, which is being used as a reason to not say anything offensive to anyone.
Which is impossible.
But, the social movement to try is one of the reasons that the world is in such a mess, because while people aren't meant to offend anyone, there is a rapidly growing list of divisions and categorizations that demand adherence, where breaking the line means automatic offense. And the funny thing is that the people who are the most active in punishing others, seem quite happy to break the rules against others.
So people speak less in depth, which means the information that is actually important and the topics we need to discuss, get avoided, just in case someone takes offence. It is social censoring, under the guise of inclusion - even though it is actually exclusionary. If you want to be included into the important conversations, you have to be prepared to hear some things that you might not agree with and are uncomfortable.
But, in a world where we are able to filter our experience to only see what we want to see and the algorithms support our views, the skill of dealing with contrary to our belief content is very, very poor and our reactions are from a polarized position, no understanding of nuance, no tempered approach. On or off.
Which if you were to compare the average social behaviors of today with the averages of a few decades ago, the people of today would be considered to have emotional and psychological problems that likely require some kind of intervention. As long as it is "the norm" though, it is all fine.
As I said to my wife who had been carrying around this chip for a while, just because something I said as meaning to be funny wasn't, it doesn't mean that it immediately becomes a problem. It is just a joke that missed the mark, in the same way that all comedians will do at least occasionally, and some far more often in an attempt to make the audience laugh.
She said,
"You are not a comedian"
And you are a terrible audience.
I came across a quote for double entendres, from someone with a far sharper wit than mine.
I like double entendre because then the people who get it enjoy it, and the people who don't get it, don't know about it.
~Betty White.
And perhaps this hints at one of the problems with eavesdropping on conversations and taking it personally - you aren't the audience it is meant for. You aren't in on the joke in the same way that looking at people's holiday pictures is not much fun, because you weren't the one on holiday. But this is essentially what most of the social media discussions are like, with people commenting on the often take out of context words of others, with an agenda in mind in order to punish them.
They take a joke and make it serious. Intentionally.
Which side actually has cruel intentions?
Maybe the reason that people are so sensitive to humor these days, is that they don't have true friends. Friends are the cruelest in terms of making personal jokes - but they are also the first to rush to defense, if the real need arises.
The culture of today is one of instant gratification, which jumps to conclusions, rushes to decisions, is quick to spend, fast to dispose of and unable to commit to a relationship or investment long enough to realize the value.
The whole culture, is too short.
And only thinking about number one.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
