I guess you shouldn’t blog when you’re upset. but, I’m not in the habit of deleting entries. These are my thoughts.
I originally wrote a several page entry here, but found it was too directed, and that’s not what I like to write here. so instead, here’s some excerpts that were pulled from that…
—
I have tried to explain this concept of jokes-not-being-jokes-because-they’re-serious a couple of times lately. Maybe I’m not explaining it well enough. But, if I ask you something, all joking aside, in all seriousness, during a serious conversation, and you give me an answer, then I will assume that is what you believe. From that point on, any “jokes” on the subject aren’t really jokes. They’re you just expressing your opinion.
If you take this, and apply it to something that someone is particular sensitive about, or offended by, and you know this, then how are they supposed to interpret that? Example, if I said that in all seriousness, I think you’re stupid, then from that point on, any jokes about me calling you dumb aren’t jokes, are they? You would probably interpret them as thinly veiled insults, or attemps for me to remind you that I think I’m smarter than you.
—-
Maybe I’m hypersenstive to certain statements… but they do seem to keep coming up… Then again, maybe the reason why I get so annoyed lately is I’m just tired of defending myself. I’m constantly trying to explain my politics, religion, education, family beliefs, everything. And I don’t mind debating with people, but not when it’s like an attack. When you start off a debate with a statement like, there are two types of people in this world – intelligent people and religious people (example, not said like that), it’s an attack… you put someone on the defensive, even if you don’t realize it. And when I’m on the receiving end of that, I’m definitely off balance. But I go ahead and take the disadvantage, and argue my way out of the defensive, and when I finally make a good point, I get hit with, well, you’re just from mississippi. what do you do at that point? what do I do? I feel so frustrated.
you know… i’m replying to both entries here because i’m lazy.
first point: there are fundamentalists of every flavor. people who honestly believe that not only do they have the right idea, but also that EVERYONE needs to have the same idea. or else.
you name me a topic, i can find someone who is fanatic and unbending about it. promise. and these people deserve the same reaction, no matter if they’re rabid PETA members or religious/anti-religious zealots or eco-nazis or whatever.
repeat after me: “ok, sugar-dumplin. *pat on head*”
it’s impossible to change the mind of someone who is so invested in their high-held belief that they are willing to demean you in order to make themselves feel more secure about it. it’s also impossible to have a conversation with them on anything resembling that subject. so the best thing to do is just brush it off and keep going.
as for mississippi… i’m sure that eudora welty, jim henson, fred smith, bob pittman, and many others would be amused to hear that they’re all inbred morons. fred smith would probably laugh, then order another glass of $1billion dollar champagne to feed to his dog or something.
of course, we claim faulkner, too. so, i guess that evens out…
it’s interesting; the things you find when browsing back through the mists of time in a blog you haven’t read in a really … really long while.
the frustrating part of your tormentors argument is common, on the list of major logical fallacies, and has a name; in Latin, no less.
ad hominem