Married Role-play

Inspired by the below article from The New Yorker:

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/married-role-play

Pizza Delivery Boy
H: Ma’am. Your pizza is here!

W: You are late!

H: No Ma’am. I'm 15 min early.

W: Is that so? 

H: Yes Ma’am. Its 45$.

W: Do you take a credit card?

H: No Ma’am. Only cash.

W: Can I give something else? I think you would like it.

H: No Ma’am.

W: Just come in and see what is it..

H: Ma’am. Please. It's getting late.

W: You said you're early. So we have time sufficient to do things.

H: Ma’am. Just 45$ in cash...please?

W: My husband never gives me cash.

H: Woah!

W: What?

H: I cannot go on to that again and again.

W: What you never give your woman cash... even 50$?

H: Not every day!

Police issues speeding ticket

W: What is it officer?

H: Lady... you know how fast you were on?

W: Was it too fast for you?

H: You would have gotten in to trouble if I din't stop you.

W: I know. You'll be there to help me.

H: License please.

W: Here. Don't you think those are some pretty?

H: I've have to issue you a speeding ticket.

W: Officer. I don't think that would be necessary if you get chance to have these. Please get in the car.

H: (scoffs)

W: What?

H: Your car?

W: Why not?

H: It stinks even for a dead man!

W: That's it! Fuck you!

H: Oh! fuck you! Stinky Bitch!

Tic-tac-toe at men's urinals

Primary purpose of a tic-tac-toe game is make strategic moves such that the player forms a straight line (horizontal / vertical / diagonal). The opponent moves in such a way to deny you the opportunity to form such a straight line.

But why am I talking about tic-tac-toe at men's room? Because my common sense says that the men's urinals is definitely not the place to complete a tic-tac-toe line.

It made me to ponder if this is spoken in a wider forum. A little search in google took me to this website that detail about the very issue. 

On further research I landed up at International Center for Bathroom Etiquette (http://www.icbe.org) who's logo simply captures the essence of this article :)

We are a long way to go to follow this in a world where people queue up right behind your rear-end and wait for their chance!

Thumbs up

Social networking sites such as Facebook has revolutionized the idea of 'liking' something: an idea or an activity or an update. Though these 'likes' are virtual, there is so much emphasis given to this. Many users have been addicted to see the number of 'likes' that they receive. There is a sense of pride attached to it.

FB 'likes' are now the thing in WhatsApp messages through a 'thumbs up'. Once again users feel elated when they receive thumbs up!

Are these 'likes' and 'thumbs up' confined to the walls of Facebook and WhatsApp messages only? Or are they transcended to the real world too? Having caught in this thought, I observed people around (esp. those who are engrossed with the idea of 'likes'). I have not seen anyone 'liking' something by raising their thumb up. There are alternate means such as verbal appreciation, pat on the back or 'good job' mail to show your appreciation. Hardly anyone (of course except for Roger Federer) raises the thumb to show quick gesture of appreciation or 'liking'. 

I laid this thought aside for a while until today morning when I received a thumbs up from a two-wheeler whom I let some space to maneuver around amidst a messed-up traffic. She drove past me and was quick enough to raise her hand for a thumbs up and moved on. It just took her small gesture to make me feel good: not about my great deed of letting her some space to move but about my research on whether such quick gestures transcend to the real world and if it does would it have any positive impact.

From the little incident I believe a quick 'thumbs up' may mean something to those who receive it and will have a positive ripple effect (such as writing this article).

So, the next time don't try to construct any appreciatory sentences. Just a quick thumbs up will be a good start!

Dangerous null hypothesis

When you start a new relationship, your null hypothesis should not be "I can't trust this". To reject this hypothesis, you will end up spending lot of time and effort which otherwise could have been made productive. Imagine yourself trying to build a new engagement with a potential client. During the initial discussions, you start opinionating the client on various grounds. You tend to compare with your past experiences. You tend to factor the person sitting at the other side of the table (without factoring who he/she represents). You tend to like a few things and hate many other. Quickly and unconsciously you feel that you can't trust this client. That is the null hypothesis that you set not just for yourself but also for your organization. This hurts the engagement. The time and effort that you would end up spending to reject the null hypothesis, i.e. to come to a state where you have built a trust-able relation, will eat up your energy and focus.

Instead imagine you give yourself and the client ample chances to create a mutually cooperative and conducive environment (of course without hurting your primary objectives). You should believe that the client also wants to build such a relationship. Why else would someone spend time on it? A slight tweak in the mindset could be a game changer.

Your null hypothesis could be: "This relation will be mutually beneficial"

This is also applicable in many relationships such as new accomplice, new partner at home, and new manager at work. If only one realizes this, the relations would be much simple and pleasant.

Image source: Google Image search