I got to thinking about "Joe" today. Not Joe the Plummer. Not Joe 6 Pack. Not even Joe Manwich. I was thinking about "Joe."
"Joe" is shorthand for something longer, namely "Joseph." But why is this? Is it because the first syllable of "Joseph" is literally "Joe"? Or is it because the first two letters of "Joseph" are J and O?
Now on the one hand, if it is simply because the first syllable sounds like "Joe" then this is a bit unfair for Jody and Job and Jomamma. Not cool, Joe. Why do you feel so entitled to that name over against everyone else with a first syllable that sounds like "Joe."
On the other hand, if it is "Joe" simply because the first two letters are J and O, then this is quite unfair for Jordan and Joshua and Jocular. Not cool again, Joe.
Either way you look at it - "Joe" is stepping beyond the bounds of what it should. It assumes too much. It discriminates against names like Job and Joshua. It belittles names like Jope and Joliphant. It is puffed up and proud, slinging its tater-tot-loaded weight around in the playground of nicknames, presuming to wear a crown that only belongs to nomenclatures of Joseph alone. Sola Josepha.
But no.
We say no, Joe. Got to get tough, yo Joe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think some of the blame should rest on the brawny shoulders of one G.I. Joe. Real American hero or not.
I think you missed option #3:
-Some people just look like a "Joe"
Some notable "Joe" figures in pop culture:
1.) Mr. A.Bank
2.) Mr. Blow
3.) Mr. Shmoe
4.) Cup of crappy diner coffee
5.) The state of Montana
6.) Mr. Dirt
7.) Mr. Tribbiani
8.) Mr. Stalin
9.) Mr. Of Arimathea
10.) Mr. 's Coat of many colors
In all of these cases the commonality is not in their unabreviated first names, but rather the striking resemblence in their facial features
Post a Comment