From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #247 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, July 31 2002 Volume 11 : Number 247 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Cumquats(Rated R) [gSs ] semi-washed-up-indie-musiciancore ["Natalie Jane" ] digging your garden ["drew" ] C--t, t--t, and sq--d [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: What's the buzz, Kay? [The Great Quail ] Re: What's the buzz, Kay? [Jason Thornton ] Re: Yow (NR) [steve ] Re: I was so much older then [steve ] Re: smegmaniax! [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: It's an ugly planet... ["Jonathan Fetter" ] Re: digging your garden [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: It's an ugly planet... [R Edward Poole ] Cumquats cont'd ["Michael Wells" ] in the interest of... [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] another crypto-feg? [R Edward Poole ] Cocks of the United Kingdom ["matt sewell" ] Re: Cocks of the United Kingdom [Michael R Godwin ] wal*mart storefront bones to pick [Stewart Russell ] Re: Arena [John McIntyre ] Thirtysomething and other obscenities [Christopher Gross ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 15:49:37 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: Cumquats(Rated R) On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Silver Leaf wrote: > I must have been born with the evil glint in my eye, cause if in the throws > of all-consuming passion a guy were to say something brilliant like "I love > fucking your garden" I gotta admit he'd find himself outside alone and > without his pants on very quickly. if he said, "i enjoy fucking you in your garden, puddin'", would that make any difference? > > However, if in the middle of a public garden he yelled something dashingly > romantic like "Come on you cunt" he would also find himself alone equally > quickly and, if I was in a bad enough mood to begin with(and there were a > few other evil glint females around), equally pantless. > > Context is all. what if he said "but i love you, my little cunt bunny". > But no matter what guys say about how its no big deal, most woman notice > this. the size of the penis or the number of times a guy can come. > So just for the record. I dont like that. I dont think most woman do. I dont > like that one of the most precious bits of all my bits is an insult. > > In short, I think it sucks. > (Notice a pattern here.) > (Cunt is almost as loaded as word as nigger. The only person you can call a > cunt with impunity is yourself. Otherwise, its an organ, not a person.) i disagree. cunt is universally applicable. nigger can be used to describe someone no matter what the skin color, it isn't or at least so rarely that it has one association. twat to rhyme with cumquat, a word she likes using for her own precious bit. i'll stop here gSs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 14:28:36 -0700 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: semi-washed-up-indie-musiciancore (re. "foxcore" [shudder]) >This was, I believe, Thurston Moore's contribution to his efforts to >portray himself as a way-cool, down-with-the-nineties-feminist-aesthetic >type guy that he surely thinks he is - his name for music produced by >all-female bands. Oh, good god. I really hope he was being tongue-in-cheek. >- - Steve, who thinks YBTPR stomps the crap out of the highly overrated >YHF. Yearly Hint Fest? Yaks Hurl Fast? Yes, Heros Fret? (etc.) >and the 8th song down is Love Ballad For Tabitha Soren. > >Charming band name, btw. Perhaps I shouldn't reveal this to an unready world, but my friend and I did an interview with the Fastbacks long ago (featuring our beloved Kurt Bloch, a very funny guy), and they kept going on about these rumors they'd heard about how Tabitha Soren had fucked someone from Alice in Chains, and supposedly she liked to have pencils shoved up her butt. ("Sharpened or unsharpened?" was my perspicacious, unanswered question.) This conversation culminated with the Fastbacks' bassist shouting, "Tabitha Soren, how's your butthole?" So now I cannot see Tabitha Soren's name without laughing. You must understand. I'm sorry for relating this story, but it had to be told. >And I've thought of the reason that all Fegs should go see Lilo & >Stitch. I wouldn't want to spend $8 on a kid's movie. I'd rather see something I can actually think about a little bit. (Even "Minority Report" qualifies!) I actually did pay full price for "Toy Story 2," but I was in the company of a small child at the time. (re. "Arena") >It sounds like you're describing the Star Trek adaptation more than >the >original story. They're pretty much the same, right? Guy is forced to fight EEEEVIILLL alien, finds an ingenious solution, kicks its sorry communist - err, alien ass. End of fuckin' story, as Dennis Leary used to say. The alien in "Arena" was kind of cool - it was just this rolling red semi-gelatinous sphere, able to extrude pseudopods from its surface. It was a broadcasting telepath, which was how the hero could tell it was EEEVIILLL. >I notice you enjoyed the Stripes disc on the Robyn Sings CD... I almost thought this said "Strokes." I kind of like the idea of Robyn doing a Strokes disc. >Example, I call Nat a cock. > >Hey Nat, you cock you. Well, this has a meaning in Brit slang, yes? The Buzzcocks took their name from a review which ended, "Get a buzz, cock." Perhaps the Brits among us can explain further. n. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 15:00:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: It's an ugly planet! It's a bug planet! I must say I am thoroughly enjoying this latest round of Starship Troopers Discussion. It seems to come and go regularly -- this film is more fun to argue about than Star Wars. I have two Starship Troopers model infantry bugs on my desk at work as I write this. I've had 'em for years. I love the movie. But I'll take a different angle to defend it. The things I like about Starship Troopers include, but are not limited to: 1) interplanetary travel, 2) clean, effective, well-equipped schools, 3) no gender bias (co-ed showers, etc.) or racism, 4) advanced medical technology (put a knife through a cadet's hand? call the medic! catch a bug spike through your leg? spend a week in a tank while a machine rebuilds your leg. cool!) These are some of the things I dream the Human Race will acheive. And I get them all in one film. Oh, and the soundtrack ROCKS, too. . Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:08:11 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Snakeheads Stalk This Land; Robyn follows Steve on Lilo: >>she obviously must be a Feg in waiting. That and her homemade doll >>Scrump, who has only a week to live. Yeah, I though "Kingdom of Love" on that one: bugs laid eggs in her ear. I liked it a lot, too. Kinda loses steam at the end, but the overall feel was really unique and touching. - -------- Here's the real tour schedule: Robyn goes where the Snakeheads are. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020723/sc_nm/environment _snakehead_dc_9 He plays only the ponds where they've been found... Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:48:29 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: What's the buzz, Kay? Kay says: >>Example, I call Nat a cock. >>Hey Nat, you cock you. >>To tell you the truth, I have no idea what message Ive just conveyed to Nat. Wasn't it once a term of endearment along the lines of "cat", and isn't that how the Buzzcocks got their name? Does sound mighty odd, though. There just ain't a universally pleasing term for the girl parts, is there? I think both genders can pretty much agree on "dick" as the easiest shorthand for penis (inasmuch as they can agree on any swear words), "cock" being a bit, ummm, pornier, if you will (and I assure you, you will). But every term for female genitalia has very vocal detractors. Lotsa weird taboos still in place there. One usually doesn't discover any given woman's preferred term until one has been up close and personal with the area in question itself (and it sometimes comes out as a naughty little secret, like)... Ermmm, this thread is starting to get kinda weird, isn't it? Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:40:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "drew" Subject: digging your garden > From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey > Yep. And actually I pretty much agree with you...you should hear me go > off whenever I read some idiot using one of my pet peeve phrases > "thirtysomething" (substitute decade as appropriate): why the hell > should the name of a decade-gone tv show get used to describe people of > whatever age? Wow. See, I never really think of that show, and I find "[number]somethings" a pretty nice and useful abbreviation of "people in their [number]s". I understand how you might hate to be reminded of that show every time you hear the words, but I never watched the show and thus I don't care. > It's laziness: instead of finding a phrase that describes what you want, But to me that phrase _does_ describe what you want. It could be considered allusive, which is yet another wonderful thing that natural language can be, or it could be considered a sort of idiom referring to a shared cultural context, however stereotypical. > (insert rant re Ann Coulter: not re politics but idiocy; to wit: "invade > their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity" > to effect that one can't convert dead people or Coulter doesn't know how > to use pronouns, shifting their referents willy-nilly. Where was her > editor? Staring up her skirt? And how about them Crusades?) I don't get it. Surely the antecedent of all of those pronouns would be "evil turban-wearing terroristic scum." Drew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:00:19 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: C--t, t--t, and sq--d >Well, since he won't tell us himself where he's playing this fall, I think we >can now safely infer a pattern thanks to our friends from the deep... > >http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020729/ap_on_re_us/strand >ed_whales > >For those keeping score, this means Robyn will be playing: a remote beach in >New Zealand, La Jolla (CA) and Cape Cod (MA). Better get those frequent flier >miles ready. And don't forget the recent giant squid hauled up in Tasmania. I'm not holding my breath. But I'd pick the Cathedral Caves in the Catlins if he did (although the acoustics might be a little odd) >>C'mon, what's wrong with "cuntcore"? > >I prefer the term "clit-pop" myself, simply because it rhymes with "brit-pop." and it's in line with the neologism 'cliterature' used to describe erotic novels written by women. >> I never use "twat" because... err, I don't know how to pronounce it. >I've heard it used so rarely that I've never figured it out. > >It rhymes with "taught," of course. you Americans with your little jokes! It is pronounced in two different ways. When you're describing a person, as being a 'stupid twat' or similar, it rhymes with 'that', for the very reasons given in the conversation the other day about the force behind swear-words and the best way to produce it. For some reasons I usually think of it pronounced with a north country English accent (probably because that's the most frequent use of it in movies, TV, etc). When used purely anatomically, it rhymes with 'not'. Rhyming it with 'taught' sounds ridiculous. "Twaaawt". Feh. James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= .-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= You talk to me as if from a distance =-.-=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 20:06:03 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: What's the buzz, Kay? > Ermmm, this thread is starting to get kinda weird, isn't it? Man, I like "pussy," yep: good ol' pussy. It just sounds fine. You can say it all raunchy, like Cheech Marin ("We've got Spanish poossy, clean poossy, dirty poossy; we've even got cheekin poossy!"), or you can say it all playfully sexy with a French accent. It sounds good whether or not you're black, white, or Asian, and it really doesn't have much applicable use as a very nasty word to call someone. I mean, it's a fuzzy cat, you know? Warm and purring. How can that be all that bad? I think "cunt" is kind of thrilling if your lover is into it at the right moment, as is "cock." Both have a shirtless, long-haired Jim Morrison/Baudelaire kind of primitive sexiness. A wild raunchiness that touches an ancient nerve. The word-sounds themselves gnarl in the throat -- a clenched fist balanced with a sudden explosion. I also like calling guys "daft cunts," but I read too much Irvine Welsh. "Twat" is awful, I hate the word, it sounds disgusting. I also hate using the word "dick" to refer to the penis in a sexual context, but otherwise it's cool. For instance, it's ok to say, "I caught my dick in my fucking zipper" to a buddy, but I would blush with shame if a woman said something like, "Let me touch your dick." It's far too perfunctory and casual. And "prick" is way out. And to address Kay's concern that sexual organs lend themselves to profane words, well, that's just the way of it. The profane is the other side of the sacred. I think the best poetic metaphor for the vagina is from Pablo Neruda -- "your rose of dampened fire." Oh, my. And by the way, I love the word "vagina." It sounds great, and it even looks descriptive.... I think that V words are so damn sexy.... - --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:57:10 -0700 From: Jason Thornton Subject: Re: What's the buzz, Kay? On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 05:06 PM, The Great Quail wrote: > I think the best poetic metaphor for the vagina is from Pablo Neruda -- > "your rose of dampened fire." Oh, my. That's right up there with Bowie's "velvet goldmine." - --Jason ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 20:48:07 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: Yow (NR) >> The rest of the short review is at >> >> http://www.salon.com/ent/music/review/2002/07/30/listen3/index1.html >> >> - Steve, who thinks YBTPR stomps the crap out of the highly overrated >> YHF. On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 02:37 PM, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > Young Hausfrau? > > Dammit, people: provide clues for these abbreviations... From the article - > Talk about difficult follow-ups. The Flaming Lips' 1999 release "The > Soft Bulletin" inspired a collective critical spasm comparable only to > the thesaurus-driven backflips caused by the latest Wilco album. And that Wilco album was..... - - Steve __________ Break the cursing seal of love, new devil. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:12:37 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: I was so much older then On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 04:28 PM, Natalie Jane wrote: > I wouldn't want to spend $8 on a kid's movie. I'd rather see something > I can actually think about a little bit. (Even "Minority Report" > qualifies!) I actually did pay full price for "Toy Story 2," but I was > in the company of a small child at the time. You can think about how cute and fluffy Stitch is, or what big teeth he has. You can also think about how on earth these guys ever talked Disney into making this film. (Actually, I bet they thought they'd never be able to do it again, as they've already left to form their own company). I mean, how much can you think about a film that has guys with rocket packs? The Hobbit and LOTR are kid's books, right? And there are many other lesser examples. I'm not saying that Lilo & Stitch rises to the level of a good young adult novel, but it has its virtues, some of which might be slightly absurdist. And I bet they have bargain shows on the upper left coast. ;) - - Steve __________ I know from first-hand experience that a president acting secretly usually does not have the best interests of Americans in mind. Rather, it is his own personal interests that are at stake. - John Dean, on George W. Bush ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:20:56 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: smegmaniax! On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, drew wrote: > Could someone explain to me what the hell "foxcore" is? Thought I had, on this list - perhaps that was in one of those alternate universes. Anyway, to paraphrase what I wrote there: Thurston Moore apparently coined it - which I consider ironic, in that it's so blatantly condescending to all-female bands (what it purports to describe), and Moore seems to like to think of himself as the kind of guy who's all fine with feminism etc. And of course, any given group of female musicians probably has next to nothing in common musically with any other given group. I think I then coined the term "bullcore" to describe the music of all-male bands. And then I said: "I hope Kim kicked his ass." - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Solipsism is its own reward:: __Crow T. Robot__ np: Unwound _Leaves Turn Inside You_ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:22:29 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: It's an ugly planet... How were the bugs getting from one planet to the other? They didn't seem to be a very technological species. Reading too deep, Jon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:28:46 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: digging your garden On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, drew wrote: > > From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey > > > Yep. And actually I pretty much agree with you...you should hear me go > > off whenever I read some idiot using one of my pet peeve phrases > > "thirtysomething" (substitute decade as appropriate): why the hell > > should the name of a decade-gone tv show get used to describe people of > > whatever age? > > Wow. See, I never really think of that show, and I find > "[number]somethings" a pretty nice and useful abbreviation > of "people in their [number]s". I understand how you might > hate to be reminded of that show every time you hear the > words, but I never watched the show and thus I don't care. History is important - or perhaps your age (I'm 40). The phrase originated as the title of the show and was not in general usage prior to that point. That is, it originated as a commercial catchphrase of sorts. > > It's laziness: instead of finding a phrase that describes what you want, > > But to me that phrase _does_ describe what you want. It does, vaguely...but between its cliched status, and the fact that because it annoys me, no one should use it, other, more specific phrases are nine times out of ten better. (Most the time, of course, there's no need to describe the age of people anyway: that's a weird cultural quirk right there. Newspaper article beginning "John Sprunt, 37, was struck by a bus yesterday...": who cares how old he is?) - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::I feel that all movies should have things that happen in them:: __TV's Frank__ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:42:11 -0400 From: R Edward Poole Subject: Re: It's an ugly planet... On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:22 PM, Jonathan Fetter wrote: > How were the bugs getting from one planet to the other? They didn't > seem to be a very > technological species. ahhhhh, but they were crafty bugs. apparently, they could control/re-direct the trajectory of asteroids -- thus sending an extinction-level event our way. I don't recall them traveling between planets, however. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:25:06 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: Cumquats cont'd Kay wisely observes: > Context is all. Absolutely goddamn right. Appreciating the context in which you will be seen or heard can help guide your decisions in most of life's social situations...for instance, addressing an attractive passerby from a downtown construction site ("show us those bagos, you SWINE") is inherently different than trying to nail your boss' wife at the Christmas party ("let's see those cans, you WENCH"). Turns out it's mostly in the inflection, and - trust me on this - takes a long period of study to perfect. Michael "shake it, don't break it mama" Wells np. "In the Bush" - Musique ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 23:17:33 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: in the interest of... It's actually spelled "kumquat." Hope no one's too disappointed. - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::I'M ONLY AS LARGE AS AN ANT AND I'M HIDING INSIDE YOUR CAR:: __cryptic placemat phrase, Madison WI, 1986__ np: Neilson Hubbard _Why Men Fail_ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:43:11 -0400 From: R Edward Poole Subject: another crypto-feg? see item no. 7 in this Onion infographic: http://www.theonion.com/onion3827/infograph_3827.html - -ed ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 10:20:20 +0100 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Cocks of the United Kingdom Over here, to call someone a cock is the same as calling them a prick... calling them a cunt is worse (women get pissed off that the worst thing you can call someone is a word for their genitals, which I agree with to some extent, although to call someone a twat is pretty much the same as calling them a cock). Cock, prick and twat all have connotations of stupidity - someone who is unthinkingly annoying for instance. A cunt tends to be descriptive of someone with malice... Now, to be addressed as cock is something different again... it's older and used only in some places, so for instance oop North where ye Buzzcocks come from, one can be addressed as cock and it's an informal term for mate, man, dude, whatever... down South, you're much more likely to hear "alright cocker?". I hope this clears things up, cock... Cheers Matt >Kay & Nat: >>Example, I call Nat a cock. >> >>Hey Nat, you cock you. > >Well, this has a meaning in Brit slang, yes? The Buzzcocks took >their name >from a review which ended, "Get a buzz, cock." Perhaps the Brits >among us >can explain further. > >n. > > >_________________________________________________________________ >MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: >http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 11:20:02 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: Cocks of the United Kingdom On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, matt sewell wrote: > Now, to be addressed as cock is something different again... it's older > and used only in some places, so for instance oop North where ye > Buzzcocks come from, one can be addressed as cock and it's an informal > term for mate, man, dude, whatever... down South, you're much more likely > to hear "alright cocker?". I was under the impression that it was short for 'cock sparrow' or possibly 'Cockney sparrow', and was exclusively a London usage. But the Buzzcocks are certainly from Manchester, and the "Get a buzz, cock" story has a ring of truth about it. - - MRG PS Who did a record in about 1968 called 'Get a buzz'? The Pretty Things, possibly? Oh yes, here it is: along with several other blatant drug references, such as L S D, Buzz the Jerk and, er, Tripping. n.p. Kevin Ayers, Shouting in a Bucket Blues ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:26:44 -0400 From: Stewart Russell Subject: wal*mart storefront bones to pick There are no Storefront Hitchcocks to be had in the Wal*Mart bargain bins of Scarborough, Ontario. And believe me, we got Wal*Marts the size of New Hampshire here. Unlike Jah Wobble's evil alter-ego, I quite failed to "get turned on by the twisted and contorted faces of people doing their shopping". And Wal*Mart smells funny, too... Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 09:07:15 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: What's the buzz, Kay? On Tue, Jul 30, 2002, The Great Quail wrote: > And by the way, I love the word "vagina." It sounds great, and it even looks > descriptive.... I think that V words are so damn sexy.... Yes. Vagina. Smells like.... Victory. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 10:50:42 -0400 From: John McIntyre Subject: Re: Arena Natalie Jane wrote: > (re. "Arena") > >It sounds like you're describing the Star Trek adaptation more than >the > >original story. > > They're pretty much the same, right? Guy is forced to fight EEEEVIILLL > alien, finds an ingenious solution, kicks its sorry communist - err, alien > ass. End of fuckin' story, as Dennis Leary used to say. > > The alien in "Arena" was kind of cool - it was just this rolling red > semi-gelatinous sphere, able to extrude pseudopods from its surface. It was > a broadcasting telepath, which was how the hero could tell it was EEEVIILLL. That's the alien in the story. In Star Trek it was just a silly rubber suit Godzilla rip-off. As to your question about the two versions being pretty much the same, well, if you reduce it down to "guy is forced to fight EEEEVIILLL alien, finds an ingenious solution, kicks its sorry communist - err, alien ass" then yeah, the two are the same. But that's all that the Star Trek version was. There were deeper elements in the original story that Star Trek didn't bother with. Sigh, I remember the story so well, and I was so disappointed with the Star Trek adaptation that I've tried to block it from my memory so about all I remember of Star Trek is that stupid rubber suited monster. For those not familiar with the story, here come the spoilers. Earth's space ship fleet is arrayed against an alien fleet for a show-down battle that will determine if Earth can survive. Suddenly one random Earth pilot finds himself snatched from his ship and deposited on an alien world. A race of super-aliens has decided that this war cannot go on, so they selected one champion from each side to fight a battle to the death. Whichever species wins that fight will win the war. The catch is there's a force field in the middle of the arena so the combatants can't reach each other. The evil alien builds a catapult and starts bombarding our hero who realizes he's going to lose the long distance war and must get across the force field for a hand to claw fight if he's going to win. Which is where the little lizard comes in. Earlier the eeeviilll alien had found a lizard on its side of the barrier, calmly tortured it to death and then tossed it across the force field at the human, thereby demonstrating just how eeeviilll the alien was and that the force field stopped live flesh, but not dead flesh. Except the lizard wasn't really killed: it was merely rendered unconscious. Now it has come awake and is asking our hero to put it out of its misery. Our hero does so, thereby demonstrating that his species has compassion, and realizes that the force field is blocking consciousness, not flesh. So he utilizes the daring gambit of going right up to the force field and knocking himself unconscious so he can fall into the alien's side of the arena, hoping that he'll be able to wake up before the alien comes to finish him off: a desperate but very courageous move. It works. The alien's suspicions keep it at bay long enough for our hero to wake up and then dispatch the eeviilll alien. Suddenly our hero finds himself back in his space ship, but the alien fleet has simply vanished. Our hero has saved the Earth, but who can he tell about it? In the Star Trek version, the Earthly champion is Kirk, of course, and the whole crew is witness to the combat, so the "who can I tell about it?" angle is completely missing along with the idea of the combatants being randomly chosen; i.e., the fate of the Earth is in the hands of any ordinary pilot, not a leader who has come up the ranks. As nice as it was to see the story adapted for TV, I just really thought Star Trek diluted it way too much. Of course, now that I've posted this, someone will correct my faulty memory. (-8 John McIntyre Physics - Astronomy Domine Dept Michigan State University mcintyre@pa.msu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 11:35:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Thirtysomething and other obscenities On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, James Dignan wrote: [re: "twat"] > When used purely anatomically, it rhymes with 'not'. Rhyming it with > 'taught' sounds ridiculous. "Twaaawt". Feh. I always pronounce it to rhyme with "not," regardless of the context. I've never heard anyone say "twaawt." However, someone with a strong Boston accent might pronounce "taught" and "not" as "taaat" and "naaat;" so in that accent, "twat," pronounced "twaaat," would rhyme with both "taught" and "not." On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: [re: Thirtysomething] > History is important - or perhaps your age (I'm 40). The phrase > originated as the title of the show and was not in general usage prior > to that point. That is, it originated as a commercial catchphrase of > sorts. Are you sure? I am ... not positive ... but *almost* positive that the phrases "twentysomething" and "thirtysomething" were current before the first episode Thirtysomething. I seem to remember recognizing the word when the show first aired (not that I watched it, I just heard it mentioned). The OED cites an example of "thirty-something" as far back as 1981, but says that the TV show "popularized" the phrase, so I guess it could go either way. Re: "cock" -- In Patrick O'Brian's novel "HMS Surprise," Jack Aubrey addresses Stephen Maturin's pet sloth as "old cock." This happens a page or so before Stephen's famed accusation, "Jack, you have debauched my sloth." However, this was because Jack got the sloth drunk and was not a reference to any *sexual* debauchery. - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #247 ********************************