I am not trying to be an ass, I am autistic and I do not understand what the joke is supposed to be.
This reads to me as a contradictory paradox.
If you say the joke is that Gerudo was facetious, ie unserious, sarcastic, didn’t actually mean they liked Seattle when they said they ‘liked Seattle for a reason’… and then they do indeed confirm they do actually like Seattle’s social introversion because they are an introvert…
Then… they were being serious in the first statement… ie, not facetious.
So… that cannot be the joke.
If I exaggeratedly said 'Man I LOVE~~~ hamburgers!" … and someone said ‘wait are you serious?’ and my response was ‘Yes I do really love hamburgers.’
Then again, the only thing I can see as the part that is supposed to be funny in any way is the exaggerated tone.
That to me just reads as … dramatic, quirky, enthusiastic? Not inherently funny though?
… Is the ‘joke’ that they didn’t realize why they liked Seattle untill I described the social norms?
The… joke would then be… it is funny that they couldn’t describe or put words to why they liked something and had to have their own thoughts described by another person before they could articulate them?
That… seems more like an insult than a joke? I guess that could be funny if I were predisposed to enjoy cruelty/mockery against Gerudo… but I’m not, so that just seems rude.
I am at least self aware enough of an autist to know that many people find my confusion in this scenario funny, when I would describe that as cruel, but I am genuienly baffled by how what Gerudo said was ‘a joke’.
I mean it’s not a great joke. Maybe joke isn’t even the right word. They were just being facetious. At most it elicited a “heh” under my breath. But I’ll try to explain it…
The initial comment it was replying to was exaggerating for comic effect. Obviously the chart doesn’t mean people in those areas can’t form human relationships (or whatever it said).
The next person considers themselves an introvert, so they took the previous exaggeration, and being facetious, they quipped that they knew they liked it for a reason. That reason being that it’s a place with introverts. Like themselves.
We know that the exaggeration was obvious, so we know that the reply was attempting to play off of that.
If the joke were funny, explaining it like this would have ruined it. It’s not funny so I had no problem explaining it lol
Edit: It has become clear to me that I should never have entered this conversation and I regret it.
The initial comment it was replying to was exaggerating for comic effect.
The initial comment it was replying to was written by me.
I was not exagerating.
Gerudo just popped in and basically said that they thought I was being intentionally harsh as well.
Both of you have now ascribed a motive, a goal to my description of Seattle… that I do not have.
I was simply flatly stating my lived experience in Seattle.
People in Seattle are actually terrible at forming genuine relationships, that is my completely honest, not exaggerated assessment.
I am also an introvert.
I was just describing that yes, Seattle is full of introverts, who suck at socializing.
There is no joke. There was only an attempt at being contrarian in an equally exagerated manner back toward a percieved exageration that did not exist.
In fact, quite hilariously now imo, this entire course of discussion is itself an example of how an anti-social behvaior, assuming unstated intentions behind statememts, reading in context that isn’t actually there… produces confusion and interpersonal friction.
Oh for fuck sake, I’m out. Why the fuck am I still even in this conversation this is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever been a part of. I guess that’s what I get for trying to explain a joke to someone.
Well if it wasn’t funny before, it certainly is now after this dissertation…
I think you’re over analyzing some random throwaway line. It was immediately apparent to me that the commenter was being facetious.
I am not trying to be an ass, I am autistic and I do not understand what the joke is supposed to be.
This reads to me as a contradictory paradox.
If you say the joke is that Gerudo was facetious, ie unserious, sarcastic, didn’t actually mean they liked Seattle when they said they ‘liked Seattle for a reason’… and then they do indeed confirm they do actually like Seattle’s social introversion because they are an introvert…
Then… they were being serious in the first statement… ie, not facetious.
So… that cannot be the joke.
If I exaggeratedly said 'Man I LOVE~~~ hamburgers!" … and someone said ‘wait are you serious?’ and my response was ‘Yes I do really love hamburgers.’
Then again, the only thing I can see as the part that is supposed to be funny in any way is the exaggerated tone.
That to me just reads as … dramatic, quirky, enthusiastic? Not inherently funny though?
… Is the ‘joke’ that they didn’t realize why they liked Seattle untill I described the social norms?
The… joke would then be… it is funny that they couldn’t describe or put words to why they liked something and had to have their own thoughts described by another person before they could articulate them?
That… seems more like an insult than a joke? I guess that could be funny if I were predisposed to enjoy cruelty/mockery against Gerudo… but I’m not, so that just seems rude.
I am at least self aware enough of an autist to know that many people find my confusion in this scenario funny, when I would describe that as cruel, but I am genuienly baffled by how what Gerudo said was ‘a joke’.
I mean it’s not a great joke. Maybe joke isn’t even the right word. They were just being facetious. At most it elicited a “heh” under my breath. But I’ll try to explain it…
The initial comment it was replying to was exaggerating for comic effect. Obviously the chart doesn’t mean people in those areas can’t form human relationships (or whatever it said).
The next person considers themselves an introvert, so they took the previous exaggeration, and being facetious, they quipped that they knew they liked it for a reason. That reason being that it’s a place with introverts. Like themselves.
We know that the exaggeration was obvious, so we know that the reply was attempting to play off of that.
If the joke were funny, explaining it like this would have ruined it. It’s not funny so I had no problem explaining it lol
Edit: It has become clear to me that I should never have entered this conversation and I regret it.
The initial comment it was replying to was written by me.
I was not exagerating.
Gerudo just popped in and basically said that they thought I was being intentionally harsh as well.
Both of you have now ascribed a motive, a goal to my description of Seattle… that I do not have.
I was simply flatly stating my lived experience in Seattle.
People in Seattle are actually terrible at forming genuine relationships, that is my completely honest, not exaggerated assessment.
I am also an introvert.
I was just describing that yes, Seattle is full of introverts, who suck at socializing.
There is no joke. There was only an attempt at being contrarian in an equally exagerated manner back toward a percieved exageration that did not exist.
In fact, quite hilariously now imo, this entire course of discussion is itself an example of how an anti-social behvaior, assuming unstated intentions behind statememts, reading in context that isn’t actually there… produces confusion and interpersonal friction.
Oh for fuck sake, I’m out. Why the fuck am I still even in this conversation this is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever been a part of. I guess that’s what I get for trying to explain a joke to someone.