Unidentified Artist: Danvers, Massachusetts Insane Hospital (c. 1903)

"What does it mean to respond Decently then?"

Decency seems to demand continual adaptation. What constitutes Decency in one context might border on indecency in an adjacent space. Further, emotional states also enter into this calculus. One might easily justify different responses when feeling angry than when feeling secure. Decency does not provide an isolated or isolating platform for responding. Everybody’s inescapably in each fray together, whatever their behavioral or moral preference. It might not prove helpful to equate Decency with morality, especially when subtle senses of superiority creep into the internal conversation. That said, the Decent might behave more consistently, if only because they insist upon certain limits and boundaries. There are probably many more things Decency won’t consent to do than indecency even notices.

I’m fussing today about how Decency can get twisted in the presence of the insane. Insanity has proven to be one of those difficult-to-diagnose conditions that even serious professionals routinely disagree on, so it seems particularly germane to consider here. Specifically, our incumbent repeatedly exhibits behavior patterns that seem clearly insane. How does this behavior influence what I consider to be Decent behavior when reacting? Do I get to blythely disregard my usual self-imposed limitations, defining what I consider to be Decent, because he can’t seem to display even an odd ounce of Decency? Does insanity permit a race to some unimaginable bottom? What does Decency get anybody in a situation where only one side seems capable of even pretending to play the game? I don’t know the answer to any of these questions, which might reinforce the importance of continuing to ask them.

Decency should not be overly situational, or so my instincts about the matter insist. I should not intend to invoke my Decency on anybody’s sliding scale, yet sometimes, like when I find myself in the presence of what clearly seems to be insanity, the urge to escalate indecency in kind more than crosses my mind. I am capable of plotting mutually assured annihilation when properly offended. It does not seem in any way fair that the insane should be able to get away with anything just because they carry some serious brain anomaly. I ache for eye-for-an-eye justice, just as if justice should have something to do with such interactions. My Decency seems poised for over-reaction then. It just wants to win, even when—especially when—the interaction in question wasn’t necessarily a competition. Do the insane somehow make me react out of my usual character? Does insanity carry the power to reconfigure the choices I make in response?

I feel as if I’m encouraging the behavior if I don’t react more strongly than I might otherwise respond. I want them to feel at least a little of what they seem capable of inflicting on me. Their insanity spreads to fill whatever context we share. It feels as if it’s smothering me, depriving me of essentials. I seemingly instinctively strike back as if assaulted. I do not want to acknowledge such behavior as valid. My internal line judge feels sorely offended. I want to inflict some penalty on the offender, even when I feel reasonably sure that any other action than the one that so offended me was probably beyond their capability. Maybe I’m furious about feeling forced to be the adult in a room filled with raging adolescence. Perhaps I want to lie down and roll in the mud with equally blythe abandon. Could I be jealous of the apparently insane because they seem to be getting away with something?

Even attempting to act responsibly can sometimes prove to be a gigantic pain in the butt. I don’t always want to play grown-up. Sometimes, I’d much rather not have to pay attention to anyone else’s limitations or feel responsible for compensating for their more self-destructive behaviors. I’m nobody else’s savior, and even on my better days, I’m barely capable of saving myself. I see only some of what interacting with insanity does to me, and what I probably do to myself in resonance with that presence. What do I owe those who apparently hold nothing but seething contempt for me? What does Decency demand of me then?

Perhaps Decency expects no more of me than to continually ask such fundamentally unanswerable questions, and then to continue choosing. It might be that Decency was never a tendency or a behavior, but a choice, and that each fresh encounter represents something of a MoralHazard. If we could refer to a clear-cut set of rules, we wouldn’t have to choose without fully understanding the ramifications of each choice. But we were apparently blessed with a different class of dilemma than anything that could have been checklist-driven. We’re routinely called upon to consider responses to situations without clear conclusions. We choose somewhat mindlessly, or we forfeit the opportunity to choose at all. When encountering insanity, a break in the logic and reason usually overseeing interactions, the questions become particularly perplexing. So do the feelings. What does it mean to respond Decently then? The answer only spawns an additional, even less answerable question, ad infinitum.

©2025 by David A. Schmaltz - all rights reserved

Tags: #Decency, #PureSchmaltz