Expedition: general discussions.

It's all quite simple in the context of interpersonal relationships within small groups of people. If a joker continues to joke, seeing that the target of his joke is offended and doesn't respond well, then he is unbalanced. If he doesn't notice, then he also has some problems. It's generally unpleasant to deal with such people. In general, if a joke isn't met with a joke or someone tells you to go away, a normal person won't continue to joke.

Well, I was just thinking about it, as a thought experiment. Let's say you don't find it unpleasant to deal with someone on the first day. Let's say it's not unpleasant on the seventh, thirtieth, or even sixtieth day – you don't feel the need to tell them to go away because of the constant bullying right here and now. But sooner or later, it will accumulate, right? A person can't tolerate it forever – whether they are a man, a woman, in a creative field, or a practical one. So, it turns out that you still have to tell them to go away. Otherwise, the bully won't get the message. And how else can you act? Imagine yourself in Donald Trump's place, but if it were important for you to hear the opinion of those who are reading you. At least just to understand that you, you scoundrel and vile creature (Donald Trump, I mean), are still causing some people to feel dislike with your jokes, even if they don't express it here and now. Even if these jokes are not active, but passive-aggressive. That is, until you receive feedback – at the very least – you will continue to do it without a shred of empathy, even if, let's say, you, in this example, are Donald Trump, and you were, say, taking antidepressants and being bullied in school. And now, in the moment, you feel some kind of power, or rather, impunity, from the fact that 99.99975% (minus three zeros) of people haven't told you to go away for your specific tweets. I am absolutely sure that he thinks this way: "I was constantly bullied my whole life, and therefore, that's how it should be, and I will do the same at this point in my life, that's human nature." Otherwise, he wouldn't have become Donald Trump. Well... it's true, of course, but if I were in his place (which I will never be), I would think about it a little from this perspective. At least a little. In a creative field, in a practical field, in economics, in psychology – it doesn't matter, even in philology. This would, in any case, be food for thought. And after finishing these reflections, I probably wouldn't consider myself entitled to judge certain events from the point of view of morality or empathy, because I would definitely know that I don't have it, and therefore, I don't have such rights. Well, luckily, I'm not in such a position, and there's no point in me stressing myself out with something like that. But the thought occurred to me, yes. I like to philosophize sometimes.