And there are plenty of people who manage to be both unconventional and creative without making a juvenile joke that amounts to little more than slut shaming women for using a dating app.
And you know- those professionals tend to have a scope-creep when it comes to professionalism. Do not talk about this its offensive, do not talk about that its offensive, do not talk about this invention, it could offend our buisness-partner XY. No, i demand the right to offend. And to be offended. Call me animal names. I prefer that much more to that mental-graveyard of smiles and conservation. Insult is preferable to insulation. Always.
If the church still had power, it would be insulted by da-vincis drawing claiming that humans could handcraft angel-wings. And those intestines- what a insult. And that darwin guy, claiming we where ape-decendants. Insult upon insult. How can any professional gentleman take this kind of talk into there mouth and not demean himself. Outrageous. Take your silk-sheated scissors and censor somehwere else.
Also sorry, but the whole process of human sexual interaction is demeaning, always was always will be. You have drug dealers and drug buyers, trades that go bust, and the attempt to cram the whole messy affair into contracts that should outlast the varous value-curves the trade-goods in the relationship perform. Its hillarious and hellirious. To not joke about this existential absurdity is to not be a selfaware human.
K. Make those jokes about a protected class in a workplace and you might be looking at a lawsuit and lawyer telling you to cool it.
> Call me animal names. I prefer that much more to that mental-graveyard of smiles and conservation. Insult is preferable to insulation. Always.
I don't see why going to the other extreme is any sort of solution. Obviously you don't want to work in a PC culture so you can just avoid those workplaces. There are different levels in various fields and locations.
> To not joke about this existential absurdity is to not be a selfaware human.
I think we all get the joke now. We just don't find it funny. So, forgive us if we don't laugh while you continue exercising your right to free speech, and we can continue living side-by-side.
It's discrimination based on sex and against the law to make the workplace favor one sex.
You may not like that trampling of your free speech rights, but there you have it. We agreed as a society to allow women to enjoy the right to earn their own wages in whatever line of work they choose. Good thing too. There are some super smart women out there who have contributed a lot. Can't believe this needs to be said in 2017 but here we are.
I assume there are jokes that would get under your skin. Perhaps white privilege.
If not, maybe you'd rather we lived in a more combative society. Personally I don't. We need to work from today's society's expectation of civility
To be a adult in my opnion means, to be able to handle a rough outside world that constantly atttacks any firm believe i hold. To utilize courts as a artifical replacement parent to create a protected environment, from facts, from ideas, from the very reality of hostility - that breaks down, once not enough economic shield energy is left- what good is that for.
There is after all still the ability, to stop hugging the cactee, turn off that source of media, sit on a meditating pillow and softly shake your head until the arguments to drive back that opposing view emerge from the subconcious stream.
I want a fightcloub of thoughts, insults are great, if they reveal something on the human condition, on what the person im dealing with really thinks and why it its that way and what society can do to realy change that. Not some ilusion of peace at paper-gunpoint, but a real understanding of what we made of allowing for real advances. Not this potemking village of civility, that falls apart at the first twitter huff and puff.
I meant combative as in leads to physical altercation.
Raising mental tensions can lead to that.
We already have a very open combative philosophical society. You're not jailed for any of your speech. That's not true in much of the world.
Perhaps you consider that a low bar, but, in terms of human development, I'd consider it state-of-the-art.
I agree with you that a lot of society doesn't want open debate. But, it is legal, and if you crave it, there are venues for it. Debate club, politics, or really anywhere. There's a difference between legal and cultural.
The widespread cultural change you're seeking is much more difficult to achieve than simply making open discourse legal. And, arguably, making everyone talk and react the way you want, combatively, goes against your desire for everyone to have freedom to say what they please.
In fact, you have that freedom, you just don't want to deal with the reaction from society.
> To utilize courts as a artifical replacement parent to create a protected environment, from facts, from ideas, from the very reality of hostility - that breaks down, once not enough economic shield energy is left- what good is that for
Civility? If no courts, then what? Only money, and total rule by the wealthy? That doesn't sound sustainable.
The existence of courts naturally leads to upholding our written law, which needs to be interpreted as well as applied.
> There is after all still the ability, to stop hugging the cactee, turn off that source of media, sit on a meditating pillow and softly shake your head until the arguments to drive back that opposing view emerge from the subconcious stream.
If there's one thing on which we agree it's this.
> Not some ilusion of peace at paper-gunpoint, but a real understanding of what we made of allowing for real advances. Not this potemking village of civility, that falls apart at the first twitter huff and puff.
It sounds like you want better communication. I do too. I think we're getting there.
Honestly to me the world doesn't seem so bad, and I'm sure you have hobbies that you enjoy. I'm going to do some today. Hope you will too!