You seem to be under the misapprehension that I didn’t understand what the joke was. I did. I thought it was uncalled for. You can save that shit for when people aren’t talking about trauma and self-harm.

Oh dang, so you’re a member of the thought police too? Since telling people that criticizing others is not cool is definitely something members of the thought police do. You guys need to get with your superiors and straighten that out.

We’re allowed to make dark jokes, and we’re allowed to criticize them. And we’re allowed to criticize the criticism and criticize the criticism of the criticism. Feel free to post a criticism of my criticism of your criticism of their criticism.

Wow.

>sarcasm starts heresarcasm ends here<

I would dearly love to be a fly on the wall and watch your response to someone making a joke that you, Arkone (or Counsel), would at the very least disturb your sensibilities (if not outright hurt you) and your reaction to their dismissal of you by the words, "It was only a joke. Grow a sense of humour or a pair."

Always assuming you’re not just lying for the Internet (or to yourself for that matter), you mean you haven’t yet run into someone who hurt you with their words. Maybe you’ll stay lucky. Maybe you’re already lucky enough to have a thick skin (although it’s reasonable that having thick skin has its downside).

Take the word as a barometer reading, Counsel.

i think we need:
https://media.giphy.com/media/G5h04AkAvAHcs/giphy.gif

there once was a really cool animated one but i couldn’t find it….

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Seriously… you’re so desperate to mock me that you’ve attacked me for holding the EXACT OPPOSITE of the beliefs I expressed there.

You’re talking about jokes and comedy… to a Jew. We frickin’ INVENTED stand-up comedy. We were making fun of the Nazis WHILE THE HOLOCAUST WAS HAPPENING (seriously, check out the old Three Stooges short films where Moe plays a caricature of Hitler. “The world is mine!” *Snatches the globe and plays keepaway with it*).

And not only that, but you’ve established your total ignorance of history with that other post. You ARE the joke here. :p

Yes, I could have simply sat back and done nothing. Assuming nobody else said anything, Arkone and Counsel might or might not have continued with their ridiculing (they do seem to enjoy it); what they had said would have certainly stayed to remind others of what happens when you tell those two you’ve been offended by something one or the other had said.

Maybe I could have posted something directly sympathetic to 3-l, ignoring Arkone and Counsel. I’m quite confident one or both would have mocked anything smacking of sympathy for their victim.

But I’ll have none of it.

(And the only thing that “disturbed their sensibilities” here was that someone dared complain about something they’d said. I don’t believe for a moment they were offended, just ready to prove that only they and their words matter.)

Uhh…. I have no idea what your post means here. 3-I gets butthurt about my making a joke, where the joke is literally my focusing on the WRONG part of Eaton’s post, and demands I pay a mea culpa for my wrongthink, I call him out on being the thought police…. and that makes me the thought police? What?

“Expressing offense about something doesn’t make you thought police.”

When the implication is I shouldnt have said it, it is 🙂

“Although saying they’re not allowed to be offended by your statement is kind of thought police.”

Hmmm where did I say they’re not allowed to say it. I just mocked him FOR saying it. 3-I is allowed to be as fragile as he wants to be by my oh-so-dangerous joke that is about capitalizing on the wrong part of a scene, and express that as much as he wants.

“You could’ve just offered condolences about the way it made them feel and state that while dark humor is not for everyone, it is a valid way to deal with troubling subject matter.”

Okay sir. I could have done that. Or I could have had my own free thoughts and said what I want to say, instead of the prescribed rightthink words which you have told me. I choose to say what I want instead of what you want, since it’s my brain that’s making me do my writing, and not your brain making me do my writing. Which…. yeah we’re back into now you doing thought police territory if you meant that seriously 🙂

“Rather than attacking them for feeling upset about what you said.”
My joke literally is about taking the wrong part of the sentence and reacting to it.

Like Harley Quinn said in Batman: The Animated Series:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqAmT7SN7z0

There’s an excellent set of comics by a woman who decided to make Conan the Barbarian her spirit guide. This one sums it up nicely:

http://www.wealdcomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/51.jpg

(here’s her website for those who are interested: http://www.wealdcomics.com/?chapters=by-crom-the-collected-by-crom )

Well, we all have differing sensitivities to emotions, and in abusive situations, amotional abuse tends to be most harmful.

…it’s a really curious situation. I can understand both your points, but I personally don’t think there’s need to fight over it.

I believe it’s physiologically shown that in a state of post-traumatic stress wiring, perception of words and emotional bonds can be very, very sensitive.

Having worked with many folks in differing levels of PTS, this is the case.

Repeatedly — with all sorts of folks — people will feel attacked or attack back… fight-or-flight.

So, given that it’s basically a physiological thing, perhaps it’s not worth fighting over.

People are going to be a little sensitive in a state of post-traumatic stress or with thigns which trigger those neural pathways.

(I can’t recall the studies, sorry — but I’ve worked with a ton of folk as well. Probably almost enough to get a statistical sample size)

One of the best ways to change this is actually distraction, though it’s complex and there are ways to go through it.

Also….

To put it out there: Everyone is different. I believe on a different thread, we were talking about not attacking those one doesn’t understand.

Perhaps everyone has literally different inborn ability to tolerate post-traumatic stress, or have been through more.

I think Lisa’s comment might have simply been perceived as invalidating the original comment from R Lex Eaton:

“In all seriousness, I’ve been in Patrick’s situation before. Thinking that the best way to alleviate inner pain is to inflict outer pain on yourself. Via bashing your head against the nearest hard object.

(I was not in a good place.)”

Lisa Izo:

“I think we’ve all been in Patrick’s situation before, have we not?

Who has NOT been at that point in every person’s life where their telepathy becomes uncontrollable enough for them to need to smash their head into the wall to make the psychic images stop?”

And that’s probably all that’s happening.

In states of post-traumatic stress, people also tend to be a lot more sensitive to invalidation or the feeling of not existing. If you look around, you can see this happening.

And I think Lisa was also genuinely trying to make a silly joke. 🙂

Maybe everyone can respect everyone’s differences. Perhaps the people feeling hurt or like Lisa’s comment was uncalled for actually are in real pain and have been through more, or anything else.

Either way, we’re all different. From personal experience and talking to others, post-traumatic stress can hurt a hell of a lot, and also not being in that position, it can seem silly.

It may mean that one is a “buzzkill,” sure, but if that’s the case – so be it.

People also recover from post-traumatic stress and aren’t static things.

I don’t think we all need to be “socially acceptable” at all times to all folks, though it can help.

There is no need to character-assassinate each other, verbally attack, or do silly stuff over this.

In defense of Ian Osmond’s feelings:

If words truly don’t hurt, and those who are saying that believe that… then why target someone and try to make them feel smaller about themselves or poke at them?

I mean, they don’t do anything, so poking at them is silly. 🙂

I do understand both points… can’t quite describe Lisa’s point of view as wel; —
think Lisa might feel more attacked and policed by Ian’s response to it.

Apologies if that’s not expressed well.

To Lisa: Thoughts aren’t *quite* equivalent to words, but it’s very complex how individuals perceive verbal expression — whether feeling stifled because someone else felt hurt and thought it might be better not to have said something, or being the person hurt and affected by it.

I mean:

Truly, if words have NO impact, then we wouldn’t all be conversing on this forum and possibly being a tad silly fighting over this trying to be “right.” 🙂

Speaking as someone who’s experienced plenty of trauma and pain (including both the self-inflicted variety, as well as the kind inflicted by others who then told me it was my fault and/or for my own good)…

Comedy’s the best anesthetic against pain. Laughter is the best medicine. And my people have used comedy to help survive for millenia… just to piss off all the people who want to see us dead.

Wait when did this become about zionism? Are you responding to a different thread? Is this because I’m jewish? Elaborate please.

So…. something about my posts makes you want to become antisemitic and rant about zionism? That’s odd, Todd.

Especially since nothing posted was about zionism. Like… at all. You just plucked that out of the aether.

Also I think it’s hilarious that you’re calling me self-righteous because you think you’re morally superior to me, totally unfounded 🙂 When that’s the definition of being self-righteous. Such a lack of self-awareness leaves me in awe.

https://i.giphy.com/media/xUySTD7evBn33BMq3K/giphy.webp

Wow. I’ll give you this much; you didn’t just double down, you triple downed. The only thing you didn’t do was have the guts to admit you’re an anti-semite (especially after going on to hurl yiddish insults at us mean old Jews – er, zionists).

Reported.

And David Dukes would say that there’s nothing racist about accepting that blacks are genetically inferior. Isn’t it interesting how some people think that if they say bigoted things and then say “but I’m not a bigot,” that makes them not a bigot? Including when they bring up Zionism literally out of nowhere while maintaining a diatribe against two other commentators who both happen to be Jewish?

Yes, you’re anti-semitic. Get used to it (or just examine your thinking and get over your hate).

I’m using the words “out of nowhere” because nobody mentioned Israel, or even did more than reference Jews without naming them, before you started in with the continued hateful rhetoric (and you ARE hateful, and denying it just makes you all the more like Dukes).

You still haven’t mentioned any actual behavior by the Israeli government or its citizens as an actual example. You’re accusing me of “fishing for invincibility” when this started with people taking offense at a humorous comment meant to amuse, when you have now gone on to make statements deliberately intended to insult and offend. With the blatant anti-semitism which doesn’t stop being anti-semitism just because you don’t like being called what you are – an anti-semite.

You aren’t mentioning facts, you aren’t talking about specifics, you’re just lashing out with “you two are self righteous jerks and Zionists!” I’m reporting your latest comment as well, and then… I’m going to block you.

if the person in the picture was a woman originally?

Including the kindly old grandmothers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRzBJ6lg1g

Not the hardest result to adapt to.