Outsiders latching onto inside jokes *clarification post #68*

[CluelessBride]

If anything, Sue and Sally are being a little clique-ish by rubbing their inside joke in Mary's face.

That's what I've been wanting to say but wasn't sure how to put it.  I agree.

So no one is ever allowed to have a shared experience with a friend that becomes part of their short hand? That seems very petty.  Not every person is going to have the same relationship and most people aren't so insecure that they feel like they HAVE to be a part of every.single.thing. 

I also don't understand how Sue and Sally are "rubbing their inside joke in Mary's face" when they were happy to explain what they were talking about.

That's a bit of a hyperbole. 

As I said upthread, I could envision a situation where it was awkward for a person to insinuate themselves into the middle of an inside joke. But in this particular case, to an outsider I would imagine it would feel less like an inside joke and more like a new word. Especially since it has been used several times in front of them and the joke itself wasn't explained.

I have a lot of friends who conversationally use made up, altered, or weirdly emphasized words. One likes to add -licious (like delicious) to the end of random nouns to make them adjectives. "How was seeing the cats when you got back from vacation, were they kitty-licious?" So sometimes I'll use her made up words in conversation with her. If someone else caught on and started using the made up words, I wouldn't even blink an eye.

It's not like Mary's saying "Sally, remember that time when Sue accidentally drank the hot sauce?! Hilarious!" That would feel awkward, because its as if they are pretending to have been there when they weren't. But using silly new slang that is presented to her (that happened to come from that incident) is just conversing in the same language as the other members of the group.

ETA: 2 posts - fast thread!

[bah12]

If anything, Sue and Sally are being a little clique-ish by rubbing their inside joke in Mary's face.

That's what I've been wanting to say but wasn't sure how to put it.  I agree.

I can completely see this point of view, but I don't think it's always the case. For me, an inside joke isn't intended to keep someone out, it's intended to reinforce bonds/intimacy between people who know each other very well. I don't see anything wrong with that, provided that it's not happening constantly. I think it would rub me the wrong way because it's okay that two people have something not everyone is involved in, and I think that it shouldn't have to be avoided or hidden. I don't have to be a part of every inside joke and it seems to display insecurity or a need to be more intimate than perhaps the relationship actually is for Mary to "take over" the joke. If Mary was a close friend, she'd have her own inside jokes with the group. If she's not, then trying to force her way into an already established one is a little odd.

This is resting on the assumption that the in-jokes are not happening constantly and they're not so obscure as to leave Mary out of the conversation altogether. There is definitely a time and place for these kinds of things, and the inside-jokers ought to be aware of it. But I think people who are relative newcomers to a group of friends ought to be able to understand that things happened before they were there, and those things will sometimes be referenced in a joke, and not be either upset by that or try and usurp it.

While I agree that "inside jokes" are not bad and don't necessarily have to be hidden from the public...and while I understand that your point of view is based on the assumption that it's not done constantly, I do think that in general "inside" jokes need to be handled discreetly.

In the example given in the OP, Sue and Sally use "that's spicy" often enough that Mary notices and asks what it means.  They tell her and she uses it too.  I think it's unfair for them to say "Mary, that is a phrase only for Sue and Sally and you aren't 'in' enough to get to use it too."   If they are so protective of that phrase, then they need to not use it so often.  Mary isn't being rude.  Socially awkward, maybe, but not rude. 

DH and I have some code words for different things.  They aren't necessarily jokes but they are only between he and I.  We will use them in public when we want to communicate something just between us and/or share a private moment, but we don't make it obvious what we are doing.  We don't announce "Hey we have an 'inside' thing going on and none of you are a part of it!" 

So that being said, I think inside jokes are great.  But, I do think it's kind of clique-y to make them so obvious. By definition, if it's an 'inside' joke, then someone is 'outside' the joke and pretty much like talking about a party in front of someone that isn't invited, this can come off rude.  And I get that sometimes an inside joke will slip out that someone else asks about.   I say, just tell them, as best as practicle, the story behind the joke.  That's a nice way of letting them 'in'.  And I would think if you don't continue to reference it, those that aren't meant to be a part won't have much opportunity to insert themselves in it uninvited.

[DottyG]

We will use them in pubic

Well, that's just a little TMI!

[bah12]

We will use them in pubic

Well, that's just a little TMI!

Good catch...edited!

[sourwolf]

If anything, Sue and Sally are being a little clique-ish by rubbing their inside joke in Mary's face.

That's what I've been wanting to say but wasn't sure how to put it.  I agree.

So no one is ever allowed to have a shared experience with a friend that becomes part of their short hand? That seems very petty.  Not every person is going to have the same relationship and most people aren't so insecure that they feel like they HAVE to be a part of every.single.thing. 

I also don't understand how Sue and Sally are "rubbing their inside joke in Mary's face" when they were happy to explain what they were talking about.

That's a bit of a hyperbole. 

As I said upthread, I could envision a situation where it was awkward for a person to insinuate themselves into the middle of an inside joke. But in this particular case, to an outsider I would imagine it would feel less like an inside joke and more like a new word. Especially since it has been used several times in front of them and the joke itself wasn't explained.

I have a lot of friends who conversationally use made up, altered, or weirdly emphasized words. One likes to add -licious (like delicious) to the end of random nouns to make them adjectives. "How was seeing the cats when you got back from vacation, were they kitty-licious?" So sometimes I'll use her made up words in conversation with her. If someone else caught on and started using the made up words, I wouldn't even blink an eye.

It's not like Mary's saying "Sally, remember that time when Sue accidentally drank the hot sauce?! Hilarious!" That would feel awkward, because its as if they are pretending to have been there when they weren't. But using silly new slang that is presented to her (that happened to come from that incident) is just conversing in the same language as the other members of the group.

ETA: 2 posts - fast thread!

I don't think it's any more hyperbolic than suggesting that Sue and Sally are "rubbing it in Mary's face" but there you go.

[bah12]

This is kind of reminding me of the term "Special Snowflake".  I don't know where it came from but have only seen it on this board.  Everyone uses it (here at least).  And while I may be the only one that doesn't know where it came from, I'm thinking I'm not.  I don't see the phrase as an inside joke, more than e-hell slang (same with Scrabble, which I do know the reference) and I don't think people have to be involved in the original coining of the phrase to get to use it.  We fall into the language of the group, and that seems like what Mary is attempting to do with Sue and Sally.  For Sue and Sally to take issue with it does seem clique-y.

[LazyDaisy]

The difference as I see: "have a shared experience with a friend that becomes part of their short hand" is of course OK, no one has said it isn't OK. But if a pair/group of friends have developed a special shorthand and they don't want others to pick it up then the onus is on the insiders to keep it among themselves, not on the outsider to know they're not to pick it up and use it.

[NyaChan]

The difference as I see: "have a shared experience with a friend that becomes part of their short hand" is of course OK, no one has said it isn't OK. But if a pair/group of friends have developed a special shorthand and they don't want others to pick it up then the onus is on the insiders to keep it among themselves, not on the outsider to know they're not to pick it up and use it.

That's where I'm at as well.  In this particular case, Mary was taught a phrase & the meaning of that phrase.  She is using it properly in the context where she speaks it & isn't pretending as if she was actually there at its moment of conception.  I don't have a problem with that.  Are there instances where it would be odd?  Yes.  But for me, this isn't one of them.

[Amava]

I agree as well. If you use an "inside joke" in public, then it becomes public. It seems to me indeed cliquish to be all like "Mary shouldn't use it because she wasn't there when it originated".

I see no reason why Mary shouldn't use this vocabulary.

[Eeep!]

The difference as I see: "have a shared experience with a friend that becomes part of their short hand" is of course OK, no one has said it isn't OK. But if a pair/group of friends have developed a special shorthand and they don't want others to pick it up then the onus is on the insiders to keep it among themselves, not on the outsider to know they're not to pick it up and use it.

That's where I'm at as well.  In this particular case, Mary was taught a phrase & the meaning of that phrase.  She is using it properly in the context where she speaks it & isn't pretending as if she was actually there at its moment of conception.  I don't have a problem with that.  Are there instances where it would be odd?  Yes.  But for me, this isn't one of them.

I fall on this side of things as well.  I don't have a problem with inside jokes if they happen once and while - sometimes something just comes up and it reminds you of the joke.  But even then, it can be a little awkward for the person who is not in on the joke so I generally think it should be avoided, if possible.  It gets a bit weird if all of sudden two people are laughing over something you don't understand is funny.  You either have to ask for an explanation - which can get kind of convoluted if they try to explain it - or you just sit there feeling a little silly why you aren't understanding the joke (or that could just be me. heh.)  But I wouldn't say that rare instances of this happening fall into the rude category.  And I think it would be weird if you tried to reference that joke in future conversations.  However, if an inside joke is referenced enough that someone notices the repetition and feels they have to ask about it, then I think it is falling a bit into "cool kids" territory.

[CluelessBride]

I don't think it's any more hyperbolic than suggesting that Sue and Sally are "rubbing it in Mary's face" but there you go.

I guess I'm looking at it as two people using a made-up* word in front of a third person and then trying to find a polite way to say "sorry, this is our word, you can't use it" or being upset/offended that the third person is using it.  That is explicitly putting the third person on the outside, and is actually flaunting it.

Again, I don't think that it's always the case that an inside joke is cliquish (I said as much in my original post, but some of that got lost in the quote tree). But I do think that repeatedly using a new word, claiming its an inside joke and then acting like others shouldn't use that word is less than polite behavior.

And now for some reason I'm picturing Gretchen from mean girls trying to make "Fetch" happen. Except It's Regina and Gretchen telling Cady that she can't use "Fetch" because its "their" word.

*In this case the word is real but the definition is made-up/novel.

[buvezdevin]

I think it is more situational, much like nicknames.  Meaning that someone calling a family member a nickname which might be heard by others would not automatically mean that name could be used by a new acquaintance who happened to hear it, without suggesting an attempt at level of intimacy which is not yet there.  In such a case, one might choose not to say anything to the new acquaintance (assuming they already knew the given name), but it can feel a bit awkward.  Or, for someone who is generally known by a nickname, that would be the name used in introduction, and a new acquaintance using it would be expected. 

Neither a limited, nor a general use of a nickname is "wrong" but who uses it and how can differ.

The OP offered an example, but seemed to be speaking to a more general type of occurrence, and I can think of situations where a newer acquaintance eagerly beginning to use some phrasing, or generally adopting ways of doing or saying things would read as "trying a bit too hard."

[sourwolf]

I think it is more situational, much like nicknames.  Meaning that someone calling a family member a nickname which might be heard by others would not automatically mean that name could be used by a new acquaintance who happened to hear it, without suggesting an attempt at level of intimacy which is not yet there.  In such a case, one might choose not to say anything to the new acquaintance (assuming they already knew the given name), but it can feel a bit awkward.  Or, for someone who is generally known by a nickname, that would be the name used in introduction, and a new acquaintance using it would be expected. 

Neither a limited, nor a general use of a nickname is "wrong" but who uses it and how can differ.

The OP offered an example, but seemed to be speaking to a more general type of occurrence, and I can think of situations where a newer acquaintance eagerly beginning to use some phrasing, or generally adopting ways of doing or saying things would read as "trying a bit too hard."

Thank you.  This was more the way I was seeing it but you expressed it better.

[CluelessBride]

I think it is more situational, much like nicknames.  Meaning that someone calling a family member a nickname which might be heard by others would not automatically mean that name could be used by a new acquaintance who happened to hear it, without suggesting an attempt at level of intimacy which is not yet there.  In such a case, one might choose not to say anything to the new acquaintance (assuming they already knew the given name), but it can feel a bit awkward.  Or, for someone who is generally known by a nickname, that would be the name used in introduction, and a new acquaintance using it would be expected. 

Neither a limited, nor a general use of a nickname is "wrong" but who uses it and how can differ.

The OP offered an example, but seemed to be speaking to a more general type of occurrence, and I can think of situations where a newer acquaintance eagerly beginning to use some phrasing, or generally adopting ways of doing or saying things would read as "trying a bit too hard."

I think names are a bit different because of their inherently personal nature (and sometimes only make sense in the context of a relationship, e.g. Mamu and Pops ).  But even still, I would find it weird if I were introduced by my friend Jane to someone as "Mr. Doe" but all while we are talking she addresses him as "John" in my presence.

I refer to my boss by his first name (after being invited to do so). However the people I supervise are expected to address him with his title. When I'm conversing with my boss, my peers or his peers I use his first name. But when I'm conversing with my subordinates or with my boss/peers in front of my subordinates I always use his title.  It makes it clear to them what the level of formality is.

[citadelle]

Middle school girls use this technique to ostracize other girls. I have had girls tell me that a classmate is "trying too hard" and that's why they don't like her. They are trying to use inside jokes, etc, to exclude other girls.