No limit on stupid

[JCDC]

Or this LePetomane:
http://www.thehumanmarvels.com/le-petom ... -fartiste/

I think this all fits the direction this conversation has headed.

The Le Petomane book was required reading for my independent study class "The Psychology of Magic" taught by C. Shaw Smith. Dr. Workman gave the class credibility. My favorite class at DU. Thanks to Kenny Eiler for dreaming up the class.

[cat44]

A problem with many liberals, besides wanting to spend other people's money, is that they have no sense of humor when it is at their own expense.

I might suggest that this is a larger problem with humanity.

So true. I fall into that trap much too often. It's not always easy to laugh at yourself, even though it makes life a lot easier if we do.

[MadelastCut]

As we all know - in an insane world, the one-eyed man is King! Therefore, self deprecating humor allows the Golden Child to move freely among the commoners as if he were one of them - as did Bing C. in: "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" (movie version, not the Twain book).

[i77cat]

As we all know - in an insane world, the one-eyed man is King! Therefore, self deprecating humor allows the Golden Child to move freely among the commoners as if he were one of them - as did Bing C. in: "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" (movie version, not the Twain book).

"...in an insane world, the one-eyed man is King!" makes no sense. Perhaps in that world, the mildly neurotic would be king. The common expression refers to the blind and the one-eyed. https://idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... n-is-king/

[maber]

As we all know - in an insane world, the one-eyed man is King! Therefore, self deprecating humor allows the Golden Child to move freely among the commoners as if he were one of them - as did Bing C. in: "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" (movie version, not the Twain book).

"...in an insane world, the one-eyed man is King!" makes no sense. Perhaps in that world, the mildly neurotic would be king. The common expression refers to the blind and the one-eyed. https://idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... n-is-king/

Assuming idioms hold up in an insane world...

[MadelastCut]

To lead by making "sense" in an insane world would lead to what exactly? My "senseless" tortured idiom was meant to merely constitute a transparent example of self deprecating humor in that only an idiot savant would believe a one-eyed man exalted in our insane world - one in which combative DU'ers throw ad hominen barbs at each other over perceived insensitive words never meant to be mean-spirited or gender offensive.

Indeed, in a world where hundreds, if not thousands, have been beheaded for refusing to deny their faith in our Lord, where a woman merely accused of adultry is routinely stoned to death - OFTEN BY HER CLOSE RELATIVES as a faith approved HONOR KILLING, and despite an express Presidential commitment that you can keep your doctor and your health insurance, when it is now illegal to do so, I tremble at the priorities demanded in cow-towing to the semantic police.

Well, I guess my attempt to distract our heavy focus on personality disorders thru humor has now succeeded.

[raptorcat]

Or this LePetomane:
http://www.thehumanmarvels.com/le-petom ... -fartiste/

I think this all fits the direction this conversation has headed.

The Le Petomane book was required reading for my independent study class "The Psychology of Magic" taught by C. Shaw Smith. Dr. Workman gave the class credibility. My favorite class at DU. Thanks to Kenny Eiler for dreaming up the class.

Only a man born with the surname "Pujol" could earn a successful living by exploiting his poo hole.

[Speedy]

...which combative DU'ers throw ad hominen barbs at each other over perceived insensitive words never meant to be mean-spirited or gender offensive.

Indeed, in my initial response to the Lewinsky post, I hoped my point had come across that I recognized the language Stan had used was in no way meant to be offensive or sexist, yet nonetheless it could still be construed as such. To be perfectly honest, it wasn't until I had seen Ms. Lewinsky's TED talk that I realized the damage done from years of being the butt of sex jokes. Clearly, I'm no expert on misogyny, self-annointed or otherwise, and have never claimed to be.

Indeed, in a world where hundreds, if not thousands, have been beheaded for refusing to deny their faith in our Lord, where a woman merely accused of adultry is routinely stoned to death - OFTEN BY HER CLOSE RELATIVES as a faith approved HONOR KILLING, and despite an express Presidential commitment that you can keep your doctor and your health insurance, when it is now illegal to do so, I tremble at the priorities demanded in cow-towing to the semantic police.

Just because we do not live in a society that stones women for the actions of men (or men+women) does not mean we have achieved equality. Jokes are one thing, but it's a slippery slope between poking fun at someone and bullying. And some jokes, no matter how light-hearted the intent, end up hurting. We humans are an impressionable species. We may say things in jest, and others hear them as truths. In that way, our speech can influence others' thoughts; our thoughts in turn influence our behavior. To me, it's a pretty easy to draw the connection from a simple Lewinsky joke to feelings of shame and inadequacy. I understand that it's less easy for others, particularly those that can't directly relate to those feelings.

I for one never intended for this to devolve to barb throwing, and I certainly never expected it to become political. I just hoped maybe we'd take a second to consider the possibility that the words we use, in writing, in public, in a place that recruits (and their moms) might see it, could be hurtful to some.

[raptorcat]

It's a shame this thread will be locked down when you're THIS CLOSE to securing the 2016 election with triumphant posts on the internet.

Oh, wait, it can't be shut down. It's the No Limit on Stupid thread, and we're all playing roles in supporting its theme.

Now look at what y'all have done. You've once again provoked stan into giving us the silent treatment. He may not resurface till basketball season. And I was enjoying all this light-hearted banter.

[MadelastCut]

I offer the following suggestion to all those who have been offended by posts by myself or, say, for example, Stan. It is not meant to be sarcasm or humor in any form. When you read our names as the author of the last comment on a thread, deem it to be a "trigger warning", so that not reading that post will achieve the absence of any unintended hurt feelings. Simultaneously, neither controversial author will be thereby hit with a reply post admonishing him for insensitivity or other boorish behavior, seeking by such criticism to marginalize or otherwise censure freedom of speech.

[catnhat]

There are consequences to free speech. One of those is the threat of being called out for apparently stupid or insensitive or factually incorrect or boorish or demeaning or belittling statements. The fact that some of us get called out more than others could be construed to mean that they/we deserve it. After all, this is a pretty discerning board.

[MadelastCut]

CNH: No one should ever be threatened on this board by anyone, yourself included. To be the self defined morally superior judge of the entirely subjective determination of what is "apparently stupid" or insensitive bespeaks of an objective insight into the human condition beyond even the powers of a one-eyed King.

[cat44]

One of Don Miguel Ruiz's Four Agreements is "Don't take anything personally". In this Agreement he states that (1) nothing others do is because of you; (2) what others do and say is a projection of their own reality and dreams; (3) when you are immune to the opinions and actions of others, you won't be the victim of needless suffering. In other words, sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. You may or may not believe this, but I certainly do. When one has principles which they stick by, they will not be swayed or hurt by whatever someone else says about them. Alternatively, those who lack principles, or act that way may be offended and hurt by the jabs of others. Ergo, I doubt Stan was hurt by the personal attacks on him. And I found Wildcat92's inability (with which he meant to disparage my lack of discernment) to explain the difference "between politics and a request that someone acknowledge the basic dignity and humanity of other people, particularly women", to me, laughable.

[citycat]

Proving they are incompetent in general and not just angry at Davidson, today's Observer botches UNCC's upcoming football schedule. They omit UNCC's 11/21 game at Kentucky and move the 11/28 game at Rice to 11/21.

It is not all bad for UNCC, because tomorrow's Observer will have a nice correction, meaning more people will see it.

[i77cat]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/los-angel ... 00699.html