Description:

See what I did there? I did the English thing, replacing That with What. Which is why there's no question mark here (except in the first sentence of this description). That's funny to me. 

​

What's Kinda Funny

You know what's amazing? That most of the times this word is used (including this context here - but that was necessary to create context) it's about something that does not in fact amaze the person expressing it. 
A quasi Irish bookstore owner once made the point that crisps (or chips) are not actually awesome. And as far as I can tell, they're not. At least I have never come across a single slice of fried potato that left me stunned, a tear in my eye or my mind lacking more suitable words to describe the sensation. 

​

You what else? This has nothing to do with the word amazing. The same can be said many other standalone words or expressions; awesome, hilarious, the list goes own. 

 

I don't know what percentage of people that claim to rofl are in actuality touching the floor with any body part other than maybe their feet. Lol I can understand. It means "it kinda made me chuckle".
 

From personal experience, the number of times I keeled over from laughing have been very few and very far between. And I do like a good laugh. 

 

Now, one could easily say that's just the degeneration of the English language. I'd counter saying this is most probably not exclusive to the English language. 
If the number of times I've heard "OMG" and similar non-words in a foreign language sentence is anything to go by that is. 

​

The thing is, though, I find this is not a linguistic matter. 

 

What is it then? 

 

Tell us!

 

Read the title. 

 

It's a funny matter.

 

It's not. 

 

It's actually something I find rather sad. 

 

Sad little me. I know, right?

 

Like fuck. 

​

I'd say it's more to do with how in recent years almost everything and everyone needs to be extreme in some way to be, I dunno, noticed, accepted, respected, adored, and ultimately still ignored? 
It's like that line "you don't need to shout to get your point across" - at least I thought that from a song...
People need to be amazed by amazing people and in exchange express their amazement accordingly. To feel amazing. Or funny. Or sad. 

 

I mean why would a normal person care about the number of friends, followers, subscribers, whatever, they have to their social-media presence, if not in the vain hope that if there's enough of them, it will finally shut up the stupid voice in their head that perpetually insists "you're the most boring person ever and everyone secretly hopes you'll die already". 

Say you're a football firm. I see why there's strength in numbers. The numbers however don't reflect the commitment and passion of the individual. 

For almost any other scenario, more is not exactly better. If everyone goes to the same shop as I do, it'll  be crowded as fuck. If they want to buy the same oats as I, they'll be sold out. 
 

For all intents and purposes they employ someone to tweet about how green they are. And probably to count the followers. 
 

Because when I am nuking my non-bio-non-organically grown oats in the microwave I am really concerned about their Co2 emissions. 

The bright side is you'll likely die soon enough. And that will make the voices go away. At least I personally hope so - I'd appreciate some peace and quiet every now and again.
 

What's an 80-ish year lifespan compared to an eternity of self-doubt? All things considered. 

 

Then there's the thing with using the word extraordinary in a different way. You can lead an extraordinarily normal life. And, maybe, just maybe, if there's enough others that say they appreciate what you have, then, maybe, you can, too. It gets a lot easier if there's enough people who envy you for what you care to share with them. 

I do not know if that also works if someone only claims to envy you, because 5 minutes ago they didn't know they now need the thing they'd never wanted. 
 

That's not a dilemma of yore.

 

That's the dilemma of more. 

​

And of ever. 

​

We get all hyped up about the hype that leads up to the hype. Rarely, though, do we realise we'd probably have more fun watching the music video of Hyper Hyper. Or not. That's up to you. 
And anyone who claims Germans don't have a good sense of humour, has likely not seen that video. 

​

Also, if you read the title once more: That's kinda funny.

 

See how non-committal I am being about whether or not any of this is funny? It's the right thing to do; a bit of self-awareness paired with self-deprecation whilst sitting politically correct on the fence. 

 

Maybe this is funny to you. Or not funny. Or not at all funny. Or kinda funny. 

 

Maybe you'll piss your pants or wipe the floor with them laughing. 

 

Either way, the point is I wonder if it's us-you that demand that literally everything is exciting and awesome and ultimately worth paying attention to - which is hardly the same as worth giving a fuck about - or if it's them-you that just keep pushing it until we believe it. It's a given that if we hear something often enough we'll accept it as true enough. And get used to it. And get to depend on it. Case in point: smart phones.

​

How did anyone get anything done when they're phones were stupider than the owner? 

 

Watching television was a hell of a lot easier to focus on, that's for sure.

 

You know what's a coincidence? I pretty much stopped watching television around the time I got my first mobile phone. It was a pretty stupid one, though. With an external antenna and pressable buttons. 

 

To finish this on a high note, though, let's have a quick look at a movie. A comedy. 

​

A middle-aged guy and his young female co-worker are at the airport, and he points at a group of Asian travellers to get behind. To get faster through security. They're efficient people, both the Asians and George Clooney's character. 
 

The young lady points out he's being racist. He defends with "I'm like my mother, I stereotype. It's faster."

If, for the sake of argument, there were 2 queues: one with a mixed group of passengers, and another with a group of single moms with their strollers and toddlers. 
 

Is it sexist to say the latter group is probably going to take longer? Yes it - because someone might say you concluded it's because the young mothers are stupid and that's why it takes longer.

 

Probably it's not sexist, though, seeing that it's an extremely pragmatic choice. 

 

Movie time's over - back to reality. 

 

I know a guy who went on a vacation. Some Caribbean island. He was pretty sure that on his arrival back home he'd unlikely get stopped by customs. So he stocked up on some duty-free goodies to not declare.

How did he know? 

 

He stereotyped. 

 

He'd been on vacations before. He knew that amongst the passengers there's usually people of colour. From experience he knew that if customs do spot checks... you know how it works... 
 

In case you don't, it works the same way if you cross a border on a bus in central Europe. Statistics favour some. 

 

Is my acquaintance a racist? Because he knows the stats and maybe even remembers his last arrival back from holiday?

 

The truth is, I don't know either. 

 

And whether the customs officials were racist? I don't fucking know. 

 

For all I know he was, just like I, a stranger in a foreign country; and that there's probably someone out there stupid enough to point out that the two of us clearly enjoy white priviledges. 

​

That's very funny to me.