Sarcasm
Historically, I’ve enjoyed the use of sarcasm as a means of making a point. The more egregious the sarcasm, the more it resonated with me.
But I don’t feel that way about sarcasm anymore.
Sarcasm is difficult to define. Oftentimes, it’s described as the deliberate use of words, designed to mock someone or something. It normally entails an opposite viewpoint to a prevailing sentiment or belief, wrapped in irony, for comedic effect.
In many instances, it’s used as a weapon. And most weapons are designed to hurt or annihilate the opposing opinion. However, we all know that opinions are generated by people. So sarcasm is actually directed at a person or a group of people and employed likewise.
I suppose I used to appreciate sarcasm the most when I agreed with the prevailing sentiment. But that’s changing because I’m changing.
Once upon a time, I used to believe I captivated some audiences by infusing sexually charged language into my presentations. Not all presentations, but a lot of them. The principle of know your audience helped guide my use of titillating language. Incidentally, the word titillating isn’t sexual in any way; it comes from the Latin root word titillatio, which means “a tickling.” So, fuck off!
When I began to learn just how devastating the manufactured sexualization of society is through indoctrination that spans every communication channel, I knew it was time to change. I was part of the problem. I feel similarly about sarcasm these days.
Yet, it’s challenging to challenge.
But what if challenging an opinion didn’t have to come from an oppositional viewpoint? Buckminster Fuller once said, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
Comedy can be used as a pattern interrupter, but sarcasm is often used as a weapon. And most weapons are designed to hurt.
Fuller’s words resonate with me. Instead of using sarcasm (or sexually charged language), why not simply state one’s opinion and employ the scientific method to validate or invalidate the opinion? Or why not be open to the possibility that seemingly disparate perspectives may often be combined to create a better solution than the prevailing one?
One of the aspects of sarcasm, however, that I appreciate dearly is its comedic effect. Comedy can be used as a pattern interrupter. And when we interrupt something like a thought pattern, it often allows a break in the thought continuum that’s conducive to reflection. And it’s been my experience that in the tranquility of space and rest, insights abound, and creativity becomes an artesian well of limitless possibility. In this space, change may come freely.
I’m inclined to test my thoughts by releasing them without malice. Public opinion will reflect the infinite ways of interpreting my thoughts while my heart and awareness will act as the arbiter of my thought trajectory. In the meantime, I’ll try my best to eliminate the kind of nasty sarcasm that perpetuates divisiveness since my heart tells me that we’re all one.
Questions to Ponder:
Where did I employ sarcasm in this writing and how did it affect you?
If there were no such thing as right or wrong, would sarcasm exist?
How might you use sarcasm in a constructive way to respond to my thoughts and encourage me to continue learning and exploring?