User Deleted@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Asklemmy@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 year agoDeletedmessage-squaremessage-square52fedilinkarrow-up119arrow-down15file-text
arrow-up114arrow-down1message-squareDeletedUser Deleted@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Asklemmy@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 year agomessage-square52fedilinkfile-text
minus-squarePicoBlaanket@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 year agoThis is a very short story about sarcasm: Ted opposes racist rants. Yesterday - Ted posted a few exaggerated racist rants (sometimes with the /s). 2,177 people saw Ted’s racist rants. 50% of them guessed he was joking. 98% of them would not have seen a racist rant yesterday, if it weren’t for Ted’s little gag. So the question is: Despite the sarcasm… isn’t Ted just spreading more of what he honestly deplores? Is Ted subverting his own integrity? Why not say how we actually feel?
minus-squaretikitaki@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoi think there’s merit to sarcasm depending how it’s done. satire can be a powerful tool to poke holes into ideas. but like many things in life, you need tact and a bit of self awareness
minus-squarePicoBlaanket@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoI agree, there is a time for purposeful sarcasm. To me, it requires two conditions: A person has already expressed their real perspective to a specific ‘opponent’, and That specific opponent cannot see the hole in their own logic. This Norm MacDonald radio clip is a good example. He explains his true perspective, and only switches to sarcasm for one sentence (at 5:25), to show the opponent how she is being goofy [and it works]. His foundation of sincerity gives context to the sarcasm. Conversely - nowadays - a common ‘communication style’ is to just spray aimless sarcasm at distant or imaginary foes, which (to me) reflects a deeper cultural issue… a hiding behind mockery, a suppression of real constructive bravery, just dunking on one-dimensional charicatures of strangers (who might not actually exist). [So I agree with you - there are times for purposeful sarcasm.]
This is a very short story about sarcasm:
Ted opposes racist rants.
Yesterday - Ted posted a few exaggerated racist rants (sometimes with the /s).
2,177 people saw Ted’s racist rants.
50% of them guessed he was joking.
98% of them would not have seen a racist rant yesterday, if it weren’t for Ted’s little gag.
So the question is:
Despite the sarcasm… isn’t Ted just spreading more of what he honestly deplores?
Is Ted subverting his own integrity?
Why not say how we actually feel?
i think there’s merit to sarcasm depending how it’s done. satire can be a powerful tool to poke holes into ideas.
but like many things in life, you need tact and a bit of self awareness
I agree, there is a time for purposeful sarcasm.
To me, it requires two conditions:
A person has already expressed their real perspective to a specific ‘opponent’, and
That specific opponent cannot see the hole in their own logic.
This Norm MacDonald radio clip is a good example.
He explains his true perspective, and only switches to sarcasm for one sentence (at 5:25), to show the opponent how she is being goofy [and it works].
His foundation of sincerity gives context to the sarcasm.
Conversely - nowadays - a common ‘communication style’ is to just spray aimless sarcasm at distant or imaginary foes,
which (to me) reflects a deeper cultural issue…
a hiding behind mockery, a suppression of real constructive bravery,
just dunking on one-dimensional charicatures of strangers (who might not actually exist).
[So I agree with you - there are times for purposeful sarcasm.]