Disclaimer: This post contains even more venom than usual - so much venom, in fact, it's literally toxic. It's the blogging equivalent of nuclear waste. Consider yourself warned.
I have decided to give out an award. I shall call it The Dumbest Customer Ever Award. This award will not be a statue or plaque; it will be a small piece of my brain forever devoted to mocking the one lucky customer who wins it. Every time my conscience taps against my skull and suggests I lighten up, cut people a little slack, whatever, I will take shelter in that piece of brain. And I will call it...
The Center to Promote Justification for Contempt.
There will be seven contestants. Seven, because I'm still trying to think of an eighth. Oh, what the hell - seven is fine.
OK.
Now, there are rules to this contest. The first rule is that none of the nominees be mentally retarded. By definition they must be at least somewhat deficient, but I draw the line at retarded. See? I can be nice. The second is that they must be eighteen or older. No minors shall be ridiculed in this contest, not because I'm nice, but because it's too easy. I shan't abide laziness. The third is that English be their first language, as it seems unfair to make fun of people when the problem lies in faulty communication instead of thought (or lack thereof). And the fourth is that rude behavior and weirdness on the part of the nominees not be factors in voting. Voters should base their decisions purely on stupidity.
So, without further ado, here are the nominees:
Contestant #1:
Woman standing at cash register with book in hand: I'd like to check this out.
Me, having misheard her as saying "I'd like to check out": Okay. That'll be $6.36.
Woman: What do you mean?
Me: This book - it costs $6.36.
Woman: But I don't have any late fees.
Me: Late fees? ...This is a bookstore, not a library.
Woman: Really?
Me: Yes...
Woman: It looks like a library.
So many clues revealing the function of this business...so few powers of observation. Did she not notice the price tags? The sign out front advertising "Book Trader: New & Used Books"? What about the signs explaining our credit policy, or the cheery, brightly-colored ones alerting the world that, yes, "WE HAVE GIFT CERTIFICATES!"? I can forgive her for not seeing the cash register, since we ring up transactions on the computer and the cash drawer is hidden below the keyboard, but good Lord, lady, unless you've never shopped before, that's no excuse.
Contestant #2:
Woman holding up two different books: What is the difference between these two books?
Me: Well, um, they're different books...
Woman, condescendingly: Yes, I know that. But what is the difference?
Me: I'm sorry, but I'm not really sure what you're asking me.
Woman: I mean, are the stories different? Are they by different authors?
Me: Well, yeah. They're different books.
Woman: That's not what I asked.
This one baffles me because, while it apparently did occur to this woman that these two books were not the same, she was at a loss as to how this was so. One would think that to move past point A (these books are the same), one would have a reason (because they look nothing alike), which would take her immediately to point B (there is no need to ask such an asinine question). Not this lady. I would love to get inside her head to see in exactly which directions her neurons fire. Something tells me it's a mess in there, like a Christmas tree with too many lights - or my apartment.
Contestant #3:
Woman with preteen daughter: What is fiction?
Me: What is it...?
Woman: Is it true? Or not true?
Me: Oh! It's not true.
Woman: Really?
Me: Yep.
Woman: I thought it was true.
Me: No, that's non-fiction.
Woman: Oh. Huh.
This one isn't as outrageously idiotic as some of the others, but it's idiotic enough, and there is the added horror of the fact that this woman has a child. Who needed a work of fiction. For a book report. You want to know why our nation's children are so stupid? Too many morons never practiced putting the condom on the banana in sex ed. Most people can figure out how to get it on themselves, but let's face it: some people need assistance. Solution? Bring in the bananas. And the condoms. And do away with this abstinence-only crap once and for all.
Contestant #4:
Woman holding up book with sticker reading "signed by the author": Signed by the author? What does that mean?
Me: Um...it means it was autographed by the woman who wrote it.
Woman, blankly: Whatever that means.
How can you not know what an autograph is? That's what I want to know. Or an author? Or a signature? Or...ugh. I don't even know what to say about this one. My wit has failed me. Damn you, wit. Damn you for deserting me when I need you most.
Contestant #5:
(I feel silly posting this again, since all you really need to do to read it is scroll down to the previous entry, but for the sake of completion I will include it a second time.)
Middle-aged woman with husband, reading title of book: Old Money. That's money that's not new. All rich people now are new money. And that's why we had the Titanic, so we could kill off all the old rich people and start over with new rich people.
Quickly followed by...
I told you Condoleeza would run. She'd make such a better president than Hillary - I really hope she wins.
Let me get one thing out of the way right now: conspiracy theorists annoy me. I'm not exactly a history buff, but it seems to me that history is interesting on its own without making up crap about aliens, or poisoned produce, or, I don't know, crashing ships into icebergs so rich people die. As for the second quote, let me first note, in fairness, that she was looking at a copy of this book. That said, when was the last time she watched the news, opened a paper, or crawled out from beneath the rock she apparently lives under? That's right - never.
Contestant #6:
Woman, to friend: It says here this book is $15.95. Is that closer to fifteen dollars, or sixteen?
Friend: I'm not sure. I think it's fifteen.
I almost didn't include this one because it's so stupid. It's the kind of stupid that makes me wonder if including it violates my rule about exempting the mentally challenged. It illustrates the same problem suffered by Contestant #2, but it's so much worse. At least with Contestant #2, getting to point B involved looking at two books and noting the differences. With this, all you have to do is recognize the number nine. So if it turns out that these women are mentally challenged, I apologize. Aside from this exchange, I saw no others signs of it.
Contestant #7:
Obnoxious guy at cash register: Senior discount.
Me: Sorry, we don't have a senior discount.
Guy: Well, maybe you should get one. Say, right now.
Me: I'm sorry. I would, but that's not my decision.
Guy: So I have to pay full price for this?
Me: Well, yes...
Guy: Why can't I have a senior discount?
Me: That's not my decision to make. It's up to my bosses if we have a senior discount or not, and as of now we don't. I'm sorry - I'd give you one if I could.
Guy: [Mumble] must be a republican.
Me: Um, no, they're not republicans.
Guy: No, I said you must be a republican.
Me: No, I'm not.
Guy: Then why can't you give me a senior discount?
Me: Because I'm not authorized to do so. I'm just doing my job.
Guy: Well, I don't like the way you do your job.
Me: That'll be $5.30.
Guy: What would it be with a senior discount?
Me: I don't know.
Guy: I bet it'd be less.
Me: Yes, I'm sure it would.
Guy: This is a ridiculous price for this book.
Me: It's 80% off the cover price, which is more than you'd get at most used bookstores.
Guy: Oh.
At first glance this is more rude than stupid, but then again, a lot of rude people are stupid, and this guy definitely qualifies as such.
There is, for example, his belief that calling me a republican will shame me into handing out a discount, when in fact it just annoys the crap out of me, because I am not a republican, thank you very much, and what does that have to do with senior discounts anyway? Then there is his insistence that $5.00 for a hardback is outrageously expensive, which clearly even he doesn't believe, since he paid it. Most importantly, there is this mindset that since being an asshole is often instrumental to attaining success in the corporate world, it works for everything else. Well, it doesn't. It pisses me off and makes me mock you for the arrogant jerk you are. I was inches away from doubling the price out of spite, and you know what? In retrospect, I kind of wish I had.
So there they are: the seven horsemen of my diminishing capacity to be pleasant and open-minded. Place your votes...every comment helps fund The Center to Promote Justification for Contempt.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
my vote is #2
dumb.
Well, #7 certainly pisses me off the most... but I'd have to go with contestant #1 myself!
I tried to pick one, but it made my brain hurt. So I'm going to have to mull it over for a little while and get back to you. But seriously...WOW. To all of them. Even the ones I've heard already!
It's a hard choice between #2, #4, #6, as all choices demonstrate a different sort of unfortunate logic. My gut says #2, but I believe that is only due to the fact that was rude as well.
Also, I never put the condom on the banana in sex ed, and I have not yet had any dumb children. Then again, my having children would either be a miracle or tragic, as I won't have had the opportunity to get pregnant until my wedding night, because I AM practicing abstinence until marriage, though not because my school ever told me to.
MMM. Too much information for so many people.
I think the reason you haven't had any dumb children is because you aren't dumb. That always helps.
Though, by the rules, to vote is to simply indicate my single choice, I feel compelled to offer my unrequested, and unnecessary, comments and reasoning for my vote.
#1: This was a lack of observation which doesn't necessarily indicate dumbness, however much it might suggest it. One might have thought she were blind, but she stated "it LOOKS like a library" so that can't be the problem. yikes.
#2: I think you said it best. This lady's synapses just aren't firing according to plan. She asks questions to which the answers are so painfully obvious, we must assume she is, in fact, extremely dumb.
#3: Uneducated, or a memory like a colander. I think this mother should stick to cooking, cleaning, and delivering her children to their destinations. Let the children learn on their own since she will obviously be so little help. Be supportive...but don't open your mouth.
#4: Tough one. The kicker here is the shortness of the exchange. She doesn't even attempt to pursue the question. She gives up after the first answer.
#5: Conspiracy theories aside, this one must be lacking in evidence. Indeed, how COULD we have possibly gotten enough of the old money on the ship to drown them all? And then to not have the current year or two worth of basic headline news???
#6: And there are TWO of them!!! My oldest daughter is not quite six and, though we've covered decimals, I feel very confident that, if asked appropriately, she could at least confirm that 95 is closer to 100 than it is to zero. Yikes.
#7: Rude and belligerent. Yeah, I pretty much just want to punch him out. Rudeness aside, per rules, I don't see near the dumbness as the others.
Vote: Yeesh, 2, 4, and 6 are good, as already mentioned. #2 at least TRIED. That's worth something. #4 gave up way to easily. #6 could just be a matter of VEEERRRRYY poor arithmetic skills...by BOTH.
I think, today, my vote must go for Contestant #4. She gave up too easily, and there are so many simple words she needs to have NOT known to make this work...
Kindest regards,
Josh
I suppose you're right in regards to #7...I just really hated that guy, and as soon as he sprang into my mind my brain started chanting "must - mock - on - blog." So I did. But he wasn't really that dumb.
I wish you people could agree! My parents both voted for #6. Maybe I'll just share the prize with all of them...
Post a Comment