In the spirit of inclusiveness, do I cater to the double-null sarcasm recognition genotype?

 I think it’s a well-established fact to anyone who reads comment threads on web-posted articles and videos that there is a subset of people who fail to detect attempts at humor through sarcasm and satire.  Such persons self-identify through posting certain types of critical comments, or corrective comments, assuming the author is being serious.  It is true that it can sometimes be difficult to know the true intent of a person’s comments, especially if one is not familiar with that person.  For example, one particular Youtuber, Beau ofthe Fifth Column, turns his hat patch upside-down to indicate when he is being satirical. Still, many viewers miss his point, and comment as if he is being serious.  He ends up “dumbing down” his satire to help ensure that not too many people misunderstand him.  But some still do – they seem not capable of recognizing sarcasm or satire, even when tipped off to it.  I for one, love subtle satire and sarcasm.  I appreciate the art of it.  I end up practicing it myself, and find some people misunderstand my intent.

The question is, should authors of original content avoid sarcastic content in order to not confuse those with the double-null sarcasm recognition (SR-minus) genotype?

Case in point, I recently posted the following image on Facebook, which was a direct mailing from President Trump encouraging me to register for mail-in voting.

  

I found this completely outrageous, given his overt opposition to mail-in voting. So my Facebook post accused the Democrats of trying to rig the election, by sending this fake mailer, making it appear as if it came from President Trump, in an attempt to blame the rigging of the 2020 election on the president.  Some people took me seriously, even though what I said was ridiculous.  Exposing the duplicity of the president using sarcasm seems not to register with the SR-minus genotype.  For those possessing the SR-minus genotype who are also supporters of the president, the post had the OPPOSITE effect, by reinforcing their belief that the Democrats ARE attempting steal the election, and the president was correct in accusing the Democrats of rigging the election.

Moreover, thinking about the marginalized in our society, and the efforts being taken to be supportive and inclusive, is it even appropriate to make use of satire and sarcasm, knowing full well that those with the SR-minus genotype cannot consume either form of communication?  Isn’t this really a version of an accessibility issue?  And like other accessibility issues, should we not provide accessibility to the intended message, without the risk of confusion or misunderstanding that sarcasm and satire brings?

What do you think?  Leave a comment below.