Innocence

Last weekend we were watching a show featuring kids where kids showcased some ideas to 'make the world a better place'. The ideas were uh.. 'cute' (which means they were dumb, but since kids have the IQ roughly equaling a jar of mayonnaise, I guess they were okay).

My friend told me that she found the ideas 'cho chweet and creative' and that she likes kids mainly for their innocence...

What made me realize that my own IQ was no better was that I chose to tell my friend what I thought about the ideas. Needless to say I spent the next half hour or so with a glazed look while nodding reactively every 35 seconds, all while imagining Anna Kournikova and Bipasha Basu mud wrestling. (Its great to be a guy ain't it?)

Seriously though, once Anna and Bips were thru, I spent some time thinking what was wrong with me. Why was 'innocence' so highly regarded? Was it the idea by itself that was 'cho chweet' or was it the kid?

It couldn't have been the kid. I mean if the kid was mouthing profanity it wouldn't have evoked the same reaction.

If a 40 year old pot-bellied drunk gave the same lame-brained idea? Would he be considered cute?

Then it struck me...

Innocence is a function of age.

If you are stupid but it’s considered okay for your age, you are cute.

E.g.

12 year old girl askin "Daddy, how are babies born?" - Cute and potentially embarrassin for dad.

32 year old girl askin her husband "I wanna have a kid. Any idea how they are made? Do I fill in a form?" - See what I mean?

I know you will not take in my point of view, so I got I googled and found a nice quote from a famous (I hope) dead (am guessin) person which kinda points to what I have been babbling all along.

It's innocence when it charms us, ignorance when it doesn't. - McLaughlin, Mignon

P.S. All you guys, in case you are wondering. Bips won the contest.

Stop Press: Mignon McLaughlin was an American journalist and author who lived from 1913 to 1983.