imhho, I prefer the ambiguity, the increased hilarity, the increased mental work of considering whether a statement is in good faith or being sarcastic/sardonic, the opportunity to understand how people can be hurt and the motives of barbs and lashes and how to discern the distress and deeper needs of "violent" people, and eventually the remembered insights on how to better generate boundaries and equanimity
in the way of Buddhist psychology, phenomenological bracketing, non-violent/compassionate communication, Brechtian principles, deconstruction, clowning, DBT, etc
lol
though I know this doesn't scale to situations without a boundary, where you can get abuse just for existing. I would use /s in a commons that expects a higher standard of good faith/well-being interactions
(does thoroughly confusing or disrespecting people for a jape equate to an abuse? how much of memeing is not just legal but moral? these are rhetorical questions, you are allowed to save your mental labour on this for yourself, self-care is prime, though I hope you all have a appropriate levels of support)
Stuart Lee is my favourite comedian, they are masterful in playing with this
