House of Eratosthenes

Why do I do this? Because language is culture. You show me a society, with all the concepts that society has deemed to be worth describing with words; and the concepts that society has chosen to ignore, by refusing or failing to come up with words to describe them. You show me that, and I’ll show you the fiber that makes up that society. I’ll show you its passions and its collective apathy.

We have a lot of problems we’re leaving unaddressed, because we haven’t come up with words to describe certain things. So I just make up new words.

It should be noted that I don’t pretend to have any talent at this. But some of these concepts are pretty important, and I figure it’s better to deploy a sucky-ass word to describe whatever it is, than to flail around without the benefit of any word at all.

The latest:

Ji•no (n.)

1. The act of pretending something was intended to provoke a jocular response, when it wasn’t, as a defense mechanism when called out for saying or doing something thoughtless and unacceptable.
2. The act of repackaging something as a “joke” only for the purpose of pretending false things are true, true things are false, right things are wrong and/or wrong things are right.
3. Anything played off as a joke that, on careful inspection, is found to be entirely lacking in mirth.
4. A joke that one must find funny, or else there’s something wrong with that person; a reprimand is sure to arrive after the joke, “You take everything way too seriously, can’cha take a joke.”

Joke
In
Name
Only

I see Congressman Anthony Weiner, during his infamous press conference today, employed (in part) the “joke” defense, much as Sen. John Kerry did seven years ago.

There seems, to me, to be a sharp uptick in this over the last few years. It’s like the accuse-the-accuser method on steroids. I accuse you of slander, you accuse me of not being able to take a joke; the real damage is done by the implication that my inability to take a joke is some kind of a crime, or transgression.

This is extraordinarily dangerous, because there is difficulty involved in distinguishing it from the reasonable. For example, I’d be the first in line to protest if someone were to lodge a complaint against an off-color bit of humor from the South Park cartoon, especially if they were complaining about their young children bearing witness to it. Sit down and shut up!, I and persons like me would say. Change the damn channel if you can’t take a joke! What’s your precious babums doing up after ten o’clock at night anyway.

But you see, there is the difference. South Park jokes are actually funny. They are supposed to be non-family-friendly, but funny. Genuinely jocular. And not thoughtless by any stretch.

Contrast that with some of the JINOs told by repeat-offender Bill Maher:

It’s that fearlessness — he acknowledged that some people would probably be uncomfortable with some of his remarks about religion, not to mention calling Sarah Palin a “cunt” (“there’s just no other word for her”) — that makes Maher the most dangerous person in comedy. He’s painfully well-informed, which means he takes no bullshit from anyone. President Barack Obama took it on the chin almost as much as Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. How dare the President say he would not settle for America being No. 2 — America is already out of the top 10 in most international lifestyle and human rights categories (health care, education, social mobility, women in high political positions). “I’d be thrilled if we were No. 2,” he ranted, noting it’s nice to be behind Bosnia in life expectancy (where the chief cause of death is wolfman attacks, he joked).

It seems like a legit defense as long as you don’t take it too seriously. To take it seriously though, you have to walk a mile in Bill Maher’s shoes…let’s say you hate Sarah Palin and the United States of America, as well. Now try it on for size: Are these remarks honestly hilarious knee-slappers? Or is it more fair to characterize it all as a nervous giggle? Calling a woman you don’t like, a cunt? That’s “humor” right off the elementary school playground.

There’s an awful lot of stuff being presented over the last, let’s say, ten years give-or-take that just isn’t funny. Maybe you think I’m speaking out of my own unique perspective on things, bringing my biases into it. I admit that’s a possibility, but not an altogether imposing one; it’s dealt-with pretty easily. Just take the identities out of it, and with those identities, the objects of loathing, hatred or affection. Pretend Bill Maher referred to some generic, faceless, nameless woman as a cunt. Is it still gut-bustingly funny? If not, then how come it’s that way when you re-insert Palin’s identity? There’s only one answer possible: Audience & comedian are sharing a moment, not of jocularity, but of camaraderie. And only weak camaraderie at that — the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” type.

And so they jiggle their voice boxes to show their unity…and if any outsiders should call out that this says derogatory things about their character, huddling together in agreement that an object of mutual loathing is a cunt, out comes the “can’t ya take a joke” defense. Read that as: We’re good, you’re the problem.

But then, in that situation, this isn’t really a joke. If I have to disclaim everything under the sun as being unworthy of serious thought, in order to find a joke funny, then the joke isn’t funny. If in only inspires laughter in people who feel some strange surreal urge to laugh at everything, then it isn’t funny.

One final point worth mentioning: Some people, and not just a few, manage to straddle the chasm. That is to say, some people have been known to lodge verbal or written complaints of the sort “I do not find that funny in fact I find it offensive” — even on behalf of third parties, who exist in no way except as hypotheticals, as in “someone somewhere might find that joke offensive.” And then, go on to tell JINOs. As if to say: I get to blow the whistle on your jokes, but your complaints about my jokes are meaningless even when my jokes aren’t even supposed to be funny.

See, this is a situation that remains unclear only when we refuse to come up with the words to properly describe it. These nattering nabobs are not declaring this thing or that thing to be funny or unfunny; they’re passion judgment on who matters. The stand they are taking, is one of defining strangers into insignificance and irrelevance, by saying: “Yes, I know this is offensive to you and that is the point. Nothing will come of that. You just need to learn to take a joke.”

I’m a bit surprised you didn’t get around to mentioning Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert in this article.

You yourself have pointed this out, and it’s brilliant – they get to go on TV and say whatever ridiculous thing they like about some they don’t like (Stewart was on his soapbox about Palin AGAIN today)…and when you point out the logical inconsistencies and factual inaccuracies, the host’s defenders have to trot out that tired canard, “Where’s yer sense of humor, ya sourpuss?”

Isn’t it interesting when someone makes jokes at the expense of some liberal, however, that it doesn’t work the other way around? No, no…then, it’s “deeply offensive.”
- cylarz | 06/06/2011 @ 23:18
It’s not that we can’t take a joke, it’s that we are the joke.
- chunt31854 | 06/07/2011 @ 04:44

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

I Made a New Word LMonday, June 6th, 2011

I Made a New Word L
Monday, June 6th, 2011