500 Words: Semantics

The following is the inaugural edition of a new weekly blog feature where Funny and Handsome Guy Mark writes 500 words about a topic of our listeners choosing. Make sure to put your suggestions for next week's topic in the comments, or tweet them to @fhgpodcast.

Semantics.

What can I say about semantics that some tool won't flippantly dismiss as semantics?

Semantics is actually the study of meaning, or at least that's what Wikipedia tells me. They actually said a lot more about semantics too, but it's Wikipedia, so I'm going to assume it's all nonsense and Brony posturing. I can understand why people would spend their time talking about the meaning of words, trying to distill them down to their platonic ideals. After all, there are only so many times you can watch "Arrested Development" on Netflix to remind yourself that you're smarter than everyone else (for the record, I completed my 6th complete viewing a few weeks ago).

With marketing like this, it's a wonder nobody watched it...

Semantics has primarily become a way for people to try to win arguments. If there was an argument as to whether or not Batman had super powers, either side could just yell "SEMANTICS!" and storm off feeling like they were a genius. Because Batman's abilities aren't "super"-natural so they aren't really "super" but his abilites are above an average human's, and considering that the internet tells me one defintion of "super" is "very good", you could say that Batman's skills at detectiving and scowling and gadgetizing are all "very good," you could say that he does have super powers. So both sides are right because of semantics, but the first one to say it's a semantic argument actually loses by demonstrating that he's a douche who doesn't want to have a fun discussion about badass super heroes.

This guy definitely has super powers.

The problem is that meaning is subjective and let's be real, there aren't more than a handful of things in the world that we can all agree on. For instance, "Two and a Half Men" (or "Two Men and a Boy", as I've been known to call it) was once the most popular television show in America. A show that relied on tired premises that were retreads of television tropes that were refined over 50 years of greatness only to be mugged through by an ego maniacal self-proclaimed wizard, Ducky, and a fat kid. I'm not going to argue that fat kids aren't funny (it's the one thing we can thank bullies for. If fat kids didn't have to develop humor as a self-defense mechanism, we wouldn't have the Chris Farley Chippendale sketch, Bluto in “Animal House, or the comedy stylings of Earthquake) but “Two Men and a Boy” was a step back for comedic arts.

You're laughing already, I can feel it!

Even still, ALL THOSE PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT SHIT WAS FUNNY! How many times can we laugh at a middle aged man trying to fuck anything with tits and a willing hole? Apparently a lot if “we” doesn't include me. In the semantic argument as to whether or not “Two Eighties-Stars and a Kid Who Will One Day Be Pissed that Everyone Remembers Him as The Fat Kid in that Bullshit Show With that 'Winning!' Jackass” is funny, it all comes down to what your definition of “is” is.

God bless semantics.

This concludes this week's 500 words... Don't forget to leave your suggestions for next week's topic in the comments or tweet it to @fhgpodcast...mabye throw in the hashtag #500words so we can be all trendy!