I learnt early on in Life that there is a difference between laughing "because something is funny" and laughter "because someone has been humiliated".
If I think back to what I thought was funny when I was about three, then it would be cartoons I saw on television particularly Warner Brothers Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera Toons but also Disney shorts with Mickey Mouse, Donakd Fuck and Goofy.
I liked Goofy because I liked slapstick.
By the time I was about six, I was nearky totally off Disney shorts.
What ..? A spelling mistake ... Really? I'll check later.
Bugs Bunny and the Riad Runner in Looney Tunes had a shtick whereby it was usually the tunnel-vision of their antagonists that led to the antagonists causing their own downfall. Not so much "humiliation" as "come-uppance" which I still like.
Disney shorts just seemed like a series of not very good set-pieces (the visual equivalent of "one-liners") inside a simple three-act story structure; peaceful set-up, conflict, revenge.
I learnt about people's love of humiliation by being a black child in a white-society where the goal of that society is preservation of white-conceitedness. Their ove of white mental fragility was greater than all other concerns, greater than Defence of Nation or cultural continuity.
I was constantly asked to find the insulting and humiliation of others as something to laugh about. But, if you are asking me to laugh at a "paki" then I will assume you would also, if ever with that person, try to get them to laugh at "niggers".
The British Establishment is built on this type of othering at that schoolchild level of targeting.
What? Riad Runner? Really!?
I can kind of imagine that as a cartoon!
Two-Reelers and Animation Shorts use slapstick especially when a Silent Film because it is easy to interpret the visuals. One paid actor-stunt-person hitting another paid actor-stunt-person in a film or watching Wile E Coyite get blown-up by his own machinations (ACME is a reliable company, their products do work) can be funny. Doing that in-real-life reveals how damaged the perpetrator is and how dys-empathetic their friends and the bystanders are. Especially, if they laugh.
What I learnt from being the target of attacks (from behind) is that I was more likely to be blamed as being an aggressor. (Sarcasm Mode :- because that's how violence works.) Perpetrators would be treated as victims and they would be asked if they were all right. I don't recall any of those people ever asking if I was all right after a usually larger person snuck up and punched me in the back of the head.
((I'm sticking to incidences where I did not punch the perpetrator after I was punched. In a courtroom, the opposing counsel will ask "And, you retaliated?" and you should reply "Go fuck yourself you in-bred small limp dick cunt" or sonething of that nature. The Law says Retaliation shows mental capacity and inclination towards violent ways of thinking. You can say that you defended yourself from attack. Further bullshit will follow from opposing counsel.))
Places I have been punched in the back-of-the-head by complete strangers and been blamed for it :-
School, the pub, the street, nightclub, Birmingham-Solihull Tax Office.
What is fascinating is the incredibly complex stories that perpetrators, their associates and bystanders would make-up to explain my violent behaviour of being hit in the back of my head by their new hero.
I like using the concept of Joint Enterprise in stories; any grouping where individuals act criminally with common purpose. I think that when people make excuses for an attack and do or try to join in with more violence even just encouraging it or telling stories to incite further violence then those people should be charged as willing accomplices by joint enterprise.
Or.
Just shut the fuck up unless you are actually calming the situation.
The telling and building of attack fantasies should never happen; at the particular time when that starts there should be direct preventative ((See what I did there?)) education which explains the simple truth about targeting others as a form of juvenile peer bonding.
Can you imagine working in a multinational corporation or central/local civil service and having that as the basis of your social personality?
You don't have to imagine that.
No comments:
Post a Comment