Jokes and funny videos

Benign violation theory, which I've never heard of before, but probably subconsciously thought about, here's the theory anyway, by anon.

Why Nothing is Funny Anymore

By The Vault-Master

Let's face it: some things are just funny.

Somebody getting hit in the crotch with a football?

Hans Moleman getting hit in the junk by a football

That's funny.

Certain classic dad jokes like... "Hi Thirsty, I'm Dad." Dude. Still funny.

A cat getting really extra pumped and wiggling its butt to make a jump to a table or something, then missing the table and falling on its dumb face? Hilarious.

Cat missing jump

Farts. Top tier.

This brutal comment on Reddit. Absolute mastery.

But, if you're like me, you've asked yourself... how can a fart be funny in the same way that a dad joke is funny and are those funny in the same way that saying you'd like to make sweet love to dead guy's wife is funny?

As it turns out, there is actually a catchall, universal theory on why things are funny.

It's called Benign Violation Theory. (Here's a quick video of an egghead explaining it.)

The theory basically says if a situation is a violation of how you think the world should be, but is also considered ultimately harmless or distant or unreal, and both of those things happen at the same time, we find it funny.

The perceived "violation" can be of a physical nature, can involve your mental well-being, or can be any attack on sort of rules centered on society, culture, language, logic, and even morality.

It's the most broad definition I found, but also the one that actually — when you noodle on it — makes the most sense.

To better understand, let's briefly break down the above "funny" scenarios.

To start: getting Joe Namathed right in the ol' nutsack.

You might be saying, but Vault Master... clearly there's a violation on the dude's "physical well-being," he just got Tom Brady'd right in the ol' Peyton Manning and now he's Troy Aikmaning.

True, and you know who doesn't find that sh*t funny one bit — at least a first?

You, when you're the guy keeled over in agony.

Remember: It's got to be harmless. And for us, it is totally harmless. We laugh because we experience the violation ourselves (who can't feel that little twinge when you see it happen?) but we know the poor fella will be okay. It would be different, say, if a guy got hit in the balls with, say, a chainsaw.

That would be something we would probably consider non-benign.

And it would no longer be funny.

And least because it would be pretty messy.

But maybe that's too easy of a way to explain ALL humor.

Okay, let's talk about #2 up there, on the other end of the spectrum: Dad Jokes.

The classic...

Kid: "Dad, I am Thirsty."

Dad: "Hi Thirsty, I am Dad."

This is hilarious to dads because it's harmlessly sabotaging the child's ask.

The BV here is in the violation of the assumption that a dad is actually not too dumb to understand the differences between two definitions of the word "am." (That is, in English, the word "am" can be both used as a condition of a thing — "I am cold" — and being named — "I am Vault Master.")

Keep in mind again how this is all benign. It's harmless. This scenario will lose the jokeyness however, if the kid literally dies of thirst and CPC is called.

At least, because there would be a lot of paperwork.

So that all said, I think you guys can do the math on why something like a fart is funny (it's a social norm not to air-shit your pants in front of people), or the cat (it doesn't die when it falls), or even the dead guy joke (clearly the commenter is having a laugh at the other guy's expense with a well-timed break in the tension created by the sad story).

What I found ACTUALLY most interesting about benign violation theory is that it doesn't only explain why things are funny — it also explains why things we used to think were funny are not funny anymore.

Think about it...

People aren't taking these "violations" as benign like they used to!

And you can take that in two ways.

First... Legitimately.

In some situations, we actually do know better as a society. "Jokes" from the 80s and 90s don't live up to today's standards because they had underpinnings of sexism or racism or misogyny or other bad stuff that isn't cool.

Personal example: I used to (wrongly) think the word "retarded" was funny. I used it liberally to describe my friends. This was until a friend of mine, who has a kid with special needs, explained to me that it's hurtful to him and his kid to use the word. Now, I don't use it and I actually recommend my friends not to use it. I hadn't really known it was so hurtful. I found out. I changed my ways. Badabing.

But then, there's the other side.

There's the not-so-legitimate side.

There's definitely a group of folks out there who think "I'm going to get outraged" even though they know the person/group of people was joking or didn't really mean to cause any harm.

Dr. Seuss getting "cancelled" is a good example of that.

Pepe Le Pew not being in Space Jam 2 might be another good example of that.

Pepe le Pew

Dave Chappelle getting all sorts of grief all the time is a good example of that.

In these situations, these people are on a sort of fake high alert, quick to use outrage as a way to seem important or morally superior.

And, yes, their numbers are growing, as of late. Cancelling things left and right, without taking context into consideration, without noting that the thing is largely harmless (see: Pepe Le Pew).

To some of you who might feel like we're careening to a world where nothing is funny anymore ever at all — except maybe farts — because benign violation theory is in fact, central to something being funny AND the internet makes it really easy to claim stuff that hurtful (AKA not benign).

But, I still think there's a way to tell the difference and it goes immediately back this theory.

When somebody tries to cancel something in the future, let's not get immediately defensive and tell them to piss off.

Instead, let's ask them in all sincerity: How is this thing not harmless to you? (Or some other questions that don't sound so weird/stuck-up, but you get my gist).

When we listen to their answers for ourselves, we'll know what to do.

Because somewhere in there... I still think we can be funny and also not complete dickheads to each other.

But maybe I'm an optimist.

H982FKL was the number plate in question and the Top Gear team gave some bullshit excuse saying the plate was a total coincidence.

Yeah, right.