OT: Fluoroscopic shoeboxes
Dena Jo
pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
--
Dena Jo
Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email.
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if
> a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
I remember them and was thrilled to see a greenish X-ray of the bones in
my feet. It wasn't really a shoebox per se but some contraption on the
floor into which one put a foot with the shoe on.
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
Don Aitken
I remember them too; they were in use in the UK in the middle 50s.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
Ben Zimmer
Murray Arnow wrote:
>
> Dena Jo <TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if a
> > pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> > sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> > just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> > anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
> >
>
According to Cecil Adams, most states outlawed them in the late '50s.
Dean
look through two viewers and the person being fitted could look through
another. What that did to eyes and reproductive organs and ovules I don't
know, but I could not have been good. Just think of the heavy lead aprons we
wear for dental x-rays.
Kids used to visit the shoe department and play with the fluoroscope while
parents shopped elsewhere.
I remember a unit at Szolds' department store in Peoria, Illinois, USA, in
the early 50s.
Here's a link.
http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/shoefittingfluor/shoe.htm
Dean
"Dena Jo" <TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9457A58C...@130.133.1.4...
rzed
> pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
>
Yes, I managed to persuade my mother to allow me to use the machine (at
Lauerman's department store, as I remember, though it could have been at
Aronson's clothing store, if anyone cares) one time. The machines were a
danger more to the store clerks than to their customers, I'm sure. The
repeated, rathen than rare, exposure could have caused problems.
--
rzed
sage
> pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
>
> --
> Dena Jo
>
Yes, in some shoe shops or the shoe departments of larger stores in the late
40s/early 50s in England. One stood on a special stand and placed one's feet
under the tall-ish box. Fascinating green glow and one could see the bones
of the feet. Not that one's Mum let one stare for long; even she had an
inkling it wasn't very safe.
Cheers, Sage
Tony Cooper
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if a
>pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
>sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
>just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
>anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
Oh, yes. Every time I went to Marrott's Shoe Store when I was a kid.
Watched my bones wiggle, I did.
For a picture of one, and some more information, see
http://www.mtn.org/quack/devices/shoexray.htm (double click to
enlarge) The kid would look at his feet from one viewing system, the
mother from the one next to it, and the salesman from the one in the
back.
Dena Jo
A big thanks to everyone who responded!
--
Dena Jo
Spring Chicken
Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email.
sand
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
>
>A big thanks to everyone who responded!
I saw one in a Florsheim in New York but never used it. It looked
somewhat like a commercial weighing scale at the time where you put in
a penny and got your weight. They have disappeared also. Considering
the current flap over American overweight, there may be a commercial
opportunity there.
S&
Bob Cunningham
<jan_...@hotmail.com> said:
> On 21 Dec 2003 03:54:26 GMT, Dena Jo
> <TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
> >
> >A big thanks to everyone who responded!
>
> I saw one in a Florsheim in New York but never used it.
Is he saying he saw an old fart in a Florsheim in New York,
or am I reading wrong?
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>They were horribly unsafe sales gimmicks. A parent and salesperson could
>look through two viewers and the person being fitted could look through
>another. What that did to eyes and reproductive organs and ovules I don't
>know, but I could not have been good.
For sure. That is why I never even attempted to put my gonads inside
one. I doubt if they did my feet any harm, but then I don't worry
about cigarettes either.
--
Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggsŚatŚeircomŚdotŚnet
sand
Whatever the language, there is always the presumption that the reader
has a certain mental flexibility to make some sense of a sentence
within the context of discussion. Of course, AI software frequently
makes amusing errors of the nature demonstrated, so it is not out of
line to wonder if the correspondent is merely a piece of inept
software.
S&
Laura F Spira
> Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
>
> A big thanks to everyone who responded!
>
It seems that I too am an old fart. They were common in England in the
early 1950s in shoe shops and in department store shoe departments. I
have yet to detect any harm that they did to me.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Truly Donovan
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if a
>pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
>sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
>just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
>anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
Certainly; it was a standard shoe-department item in my childhood. You
got to look at your own toes, in luminous green, seen through the
shoes you were trying on. Of course, the salesman still pressed his
thumb down on the toe of the shoe to show your mother that there was
room for you to grow.
Fluroscopy notwithstanding, I never owned a pair of shoes that really
fit well and felt good at first wearing until I discovered Bruno
Maglis at the age of 45.
Harvey Van Sickle
> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine
> if a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally
> banned sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing
> until today -- I just read about it in a transcript I'm editing --
> so I'm curious if anyone's had personal experience with such a
> device.
I recall seeing my foot bones at least once, but I was very, very young
-- they must have been banned by the time I was aged 5 or 6 (1957-ish).
--
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
Ross Howard
wrought:
>On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 23:36:13 GMT, "Reinhold (Rey) Aman"
><am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>Dena Jo wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if
>>> a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
>>> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
>>> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
>>> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
>>
>>I remember them and was thrilled to see a greenish X-ray of the bones in
>>my feet. It wasn't really a shoebox per se but some contraption on the
>>floor into which one put a foot with the shoe on.
>
>I remember them too; they were in use in the UK in the middle 50s.
And up to at least the early 60s. In Clarks
dealerships/concessionaires/franchises/whatevers, IIRC.
--
Ross Howard
John Dean
> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if
> a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today --
> I just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
I never saw one in the wild, but I remember a large chain of shoe stores
(Clarks?) advertising on UKTV in the late 50s that they had such gimmicks,
all the better to fit you with the right size shoes.
I have a vague recollection of shoe shop assistants more recently suing for
the damage done by obliging them to operate such radioactive boxes.
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
M. J. Powell
<dean_s_...@yahoo.com> writes
>They were horribly unsafe sales gimmicks. A parent and salesperson could
>look through two viewers and the person being fitted could look through
>another. What that did to eyes and reproductive organs and ovules I don't
>know, but I could not have been good. Just think of the heavy lead aprons we
>wear for dental x-rays.
Not any more, over here. I stood next to a machine, part of which
revolved once round my head. The image was viewed on a computer screen
and could be manipulated to give a view from any direction. Brilliant!
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Dena Jo
> Fluroscopy notwithstanding, I never owned a pair of shoes that really
> fit well and felt good at first wearing until I discovered Bruno
> Maglis at the age of 45.
Sometime during the '76-'77 academic year, when I was going to school
(BrE: university), oops I discovered a particular style of Clark's, I
think they were, that required no breaking in whatsoever. I used to
call them my Robin Hood shoes because on the upper leather, they had an
odd seam which ran along the outside of your foot around to the front
where your big toe would be, and for some reason, that struck me as
very Robin-Hood-like. I couldn't find the style in the U.S. When I
returned to Europe in 1980 (for the Passion Play in Oberramergau), I
stopped first in England, purchased a new pair, then went off to Europe
with them as my only pair of shoes, fully confident that they'd require
no breaking in at all.
They were the most comfortable shoes I'd ever worn, but the sole was
unusual in that on every pair I owned, the sole ended up splitting
widthwise at the ball the foot. It wasn't a rubber sole. It wasn't a
leather sole. I don't know what it was, but it happened with every
single pair.
mUs1Ka
Perhaps you didn't break them in properly?
m.
Tony Cooper
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On 20 Dec 2003, Dena Jo wrote
>
>> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine
>> if a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally
>> banned sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing
>> until today -- I just read about it in a transcript I'm editing --
>> so I'm curious if anyone's had personal experience with such a
>> device.
>
>I recall seeing my foot bones at least once, but I was very, very young
>-- they must have been banned by the time I was aged 5 or 6 (1957-ish).
Nice meld of threads. So, your feet turned to jelly in the 50s?
Harvey Van Sickle
Do "moulded [AmEng "molded"?] soles" have anything to do with the
thread about jelly?
MC
Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Nice meld of threads. So, your feet turned to jelly in the 50s?
>
> Do "moulded [AmEng "molded"?] soles" have anything to do with the
> thread about jelly?
I believe that's known as "toe jam" in AmE.
R H Draney
A shoe store in the town in which I spent my first decade had one of the
machines, but as I recall it had been disabled and was left in place merely for
show....
The topic of these devices came up on alt.folklore.urban a little under two
years ago, and there was a bit of reminiscing, with a common theme being that
the machines were sufficiently entertaining that parents would leave their kids
at the shoe store while they went off to shop elsewhere...a remark I made at
that time got turned into .sigs by at least two people in the months that
followed:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3c5228d7.675906217%40news.earthlink.net
....r
Dena Jo
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3c5228d7.675906217%40news.eart
> hlink.net
I quote it for you:
"Maybe I'm just an old fuddy-duddy, but when good parenting requires
the use of radiation, I have to think you've crossed some kind of
line....r"
Hehehe.
Ray Heindl
> Yes, I managed to persuade my mother to allow me to use the
> machine (at Lauerman's department store, as I remember, though it
> could have been at Aronson's clothing store, if anyone cares) one
> time. The machines were a danger more to the store clerks than to
> their customers, I'm sure. The repeated, rathen than rare,
> exposure could have caused problems.
Where was the Lauerman's? The only one I've ever seen was in
Marinette, Wisconsin, and has since been converted into apartments and
cutesy shops. I never knew if there was more than one.
--
Ray Heindl
(remove the Xs to reply)
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
> Dena Jo wrote:
> > Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
> It seems that I too am an old fart. They were common in England in the
> early 1950s in shoe shops and in department store shoe departments. I
> have yet to detect any harm that they did to me.
No harm done? You became an *accountant*!
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
rzed
"Ray Heindl" <rahe...@xnccwx.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94589FFC...@216.168.3.44...
This was a sister store (the only other branch, as far as I know) located on
Main Street in Oconto, Wisconsin (26 miles from Marinette). It's been
converted to other things for years: first, to a hole in the ground, then to
a new building on the same site. Which, if I'm not mistaken has also been
converted to an empty lot since that time.
--
rzed
david56
ait...@freeuk.com says...
> >
> >> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if
> >> a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> >> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> >> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> >> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
> >
> >my feet. It wasn't really a shoebox per se but some contraption on the
> >floor into which one put a foot with the shoe on.
>
> I remember them too; they were in use in the UK in the middle 50s.
Considerably later than that - we had one in Bromsgrove up to about
1970. We used to go into the shoe shop after school just to see our
feet inside our shoes.
The thing was about 3' tall with a screen at the top, pointing upwards.
You stood right up against it and slid your feet into a slot at the
bottom; you could then see the ghostly impression of your feet on the
little screen.
--
David
====
SW France
david56
la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk says...
> Dena Jo wrote:
> > Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
> >
> > A big thanks to everyone who responded!
>
> It seems that I too am an old fart. They were common in England in the
> early 1950s in shoe shops and in department store shoe departments. I
> have yet to detect any harm that they did to me.
I think the one I used damaged me to the point that I never fulfilled my
potential as a great novellist.
david56
TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com says...
Clarks (already plural, so Clarks's if you must) Nature Treks, or one of
the similar shoes, did this in the 70s. They seem to have sorted it out
as I never had problems with them after that.
Dena Jo
> Clarks (already plural, so Clarks's if you must) Nature Treks
Hmm. Nature Treks is ringing a bell...
Laura F Spira
It certainly seems to have affected your ability to spell...
Dena Jo
> david56 wrote:
>>
>> I think the one I used damaged me to the point that I never
>> fulfilled my potential as a great novellist.
>>
>
> It certainly seems to have affected your ability to spell...
I just assumed it was a British spelling.
Skitt
> Laura F Spira posted thus:
>> david56 wrote:
>>> I think the one I used damaged me to the point that I never
>>> fulfilled my potential as a great novellist.
>>>
>>
>> It certainly seems to have affected your ability to spell...
>
> I just assumed it was a British spelling.
And then again, maybe he was intending to write novellas, not novels.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Tony Cooper
That's because he's not good at thinking on his feet. He said archly
to meld threads.
Robert Bannister
> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if a
> pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
>
Yes, although I think they called them X-ray devices even though they
weren't.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> They were horribly unsafe sales gimmicks. A parent and salesperson could
> look through two viewers and the person being fitted could look through
> another. What that did to eyes and reproductive organs and ovules I don't
> know, but I could not have been good. Just think of the heavy lead aprons we
> wear for dental x-rays.
Usually, only the dentist wears that. The pretty girl (dental assistant,
nurse, receptionist, girlfriend) usually stands back, and the patient
rarely get any protection. Of course, things may be different in America.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
You could hear it from there?
--
Rob Bannister
Spehro Pefhany
In Canada we get a nice heavy lead apron to cover the 'nads. The
government is probably concerned that random changes to our DNA could
be for the worse.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
John Varela
I believe that's called a panoramic and they cost a good deal more than a pair
of bite wing X-rays. I changed dentists because the old one was always coming
up with new ways to add fees, or else trying to sell me something. But even
he did panoramics only every couple of years, with supplementary bite wings in
between times.
--
John Varela
(Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.)
I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much.
Charles Riggs
<la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
>Dena Jo wrote:
>> Wow. Lots of old farts in this newsgroup...
>>
>> A big thanks to everyone who responded!
>>
>
>It seems that I too am an old fart. They were common in England in the
>early 1950s in shoe shops and in department store shoe departments. I
>have yet to detect any harm that they did to me.
We may need a newer machine to detect that. I take great exception
(Hi, andrew!), by the way, to you calling yourself an old fart. Old
farts, like old geezers, are necessarily of the male sex. I can't
think of similarly polite terms for mature women, but there must be
one or two.
--
Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggsŚatŚeircomŚdotŚnet
R H Draney
>
>On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:30:03 +0800, the renowned Robert Bannister
><rob...@it.net.au> wrote:
>
>>Dean wrote:
>>
>>> They were horribly unsafe sales gimmicks. A parent and salesperson could
>>> look through two viewers and the person being fitted could look through
>>> another. What that did to eyes and reproductive organs and ovules I don't
>>> know, but I could not have been good. Just think of the heavy lead aprons we
>>> wear for dental x-rays.
>>
>>Usually, only the dentist wears that. The pretty girl (dental assistant,
>>nurse, receptionist, girlfriend) usually stands back, and the patient
>>rarely get any protection. Of course, things may be different in America.
>
>In Canada we get a nice heavy lead apron to cover the 'nads. The
>government is probably concerned that random changes to our DNA could
>be for the worse.
I get a large lead bib when it's x-ray time...I believe they're more concerned
about the thyroid and thymus than the gonads, on account of they're closer to
where the particle nozzle is pointed....r
Spehro Pefhany
<dado...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Spehro Pefhany filted:
<snip>
Now, what in the world does "filted" mean? It doesn't show up in any
dictionary I have. In Google it seems to be mostly a misspelling of
"filtered", "filed", "filled", "fitted" or "felted" (as in "felted
yarn"). There are a few occurences of "filted kitchen" that are
probably "fitted kitchen" in Euro-speak and one that I can't explain
away:
http://www.classicpyx.com/public/movie.php?MOVIE_ID=365
"Norma Shearer is filted Mary Haines, who ultimately learns to claw
without runing her manicure."
Maria Conlon
> R H Draney wrote:
>> Spehro Pefhany filted:
>
> <snip>
>
> Now, what in the world does "filted" mean?
ISTR that "filted" was in some thread a while back, but I don't remember
what it's supposed to mean. I'm curious, too.
>.....It doesn't show up in any
> dictionary I have. In Google it seems to be mostly a misspelling of
> "filtered", "filed", "filled", "fitted" or "felted" (as in "felted
> yarn"). There are a few occurences of "filted kitchen" that are
> probably "fitted kitchen" in Euro-speak and one that I can't explain
> away:
>
> http://www.classicpyx.com/public/movie.php?MOVIE_ID=365
> "Norma Shearer is filted Mary Haines, who ultimately learns to claw
> without runing her manicure."
That's from a movie discription, I would think. The word could be
"jilted." That is, NS was playing a character who had been jilted but
learned to claw... etc.
--
Maria Conlon
Please send any email to the Hot Mail address.
Laura F Spira
I suspect that we have discussed this particular issue of nomenclature
before but ICBA to look it up. But, seasonal goodwill notwithstanding,
please note that I take great exception to your taking of great
exception: I assert my right to call myself whatever I like!
R H Draney
>
>Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>> R H Draney wrote:
>>> Spehro Pefhany filted:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Now, what in the world does "filted" mean?
>
>ISTR that "filted" was in some thread a while back, but I don't remember
>what it's supposed to mean. I'm curious, too.
Original appearance here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bilnrc019d1%40drn.newsguy.com
Line shortened for the first time here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bio53f02f25%40drn.newsguy.com
First questioned (which I apparently missed):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3F521667.24183B9B%40Verizon.net
Genesis of the word itself explained, after a fashion:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=biuod60k7a%40drn.newsguy.com
Others first played with it in earnest here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bjh9bf0de2%40drn.newsguy.com
The world outside aue begins to take notice:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ybq8b.1073%24Mt2.835%40nwrdny03.gnilink.net
For a questioning foreigner, I throw together a full explication of events
leading up to the invention of the word (I thought I had done something similar
here, but I don't see it in the archives):
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=blr42v0lls%40drn.newsguy.com
>>.....It doesn't show up in any
>> dictionary I have. In Google it seems to be mostly a misspelling of
>> "filtered", "filed", "filled", "fitted" or "felted" (as in "felted
>> yarn"). There are a few occurences of "filted kitchen" that are
>> probably "fitted kitchen" in Euro-speak and one that I can't explain
>> away:
When I did the same, I couldn't entirely rule out the possibility that some of
those hits reflected the reasoning "filter (agent noun) -> filt (base verb) ->
filted (preterite)"....
>> http://www.classicpyx.com/public/movie.php?MOVIE_ID=365
>> "Norma Shearer is filted Mary Haines, who ultimately learns to claw
>> without runing her manicure."
>
>
>That's from a movie discription, I would think. The word could be
>"jilted." That is, NS was playing a character who had been jilted but
>learned to claw... etc.
"Runing"?...this *was* in the days before designer nails, no?...scribing a
futhark into one's claws would be unremarkable here in the 21st century....r
Mark Brader
>> Usually, only the dentist wears [the lead apron]. The pretty girl
>> (dental assistant, nurse, receptionist, girlfriend) usually stands
>> back, and the patient rarely get any protection.
This must be some upside-down Australian way of doing things.
Spehro Pefhany:
> In Canada we get a nice heavy lead apron to cover the 'nads. ...
Yeah. At my dentist's office, the patient gets the lead apron, the
hygienist (who is in fact rather pretty) stands back behind the wall
and operates the control, and the dentist is off in another room
still denting the previous patient.
--
Mark Brader "Male got pregnant -- on the first try."
Toronto Newsweek article on high-tech conception
m...@vex.net November 30, 1987
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Dr Robin Bignall
>On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 01:08:04 +0000, Don Aitken <don-a...@freeuk.com>
>wrought:
>
>>On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 23:36:13 GMT, "Reinhold (Rey) Aman"
>><am...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Dena Jo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anyone here remember fluroscopic shoeboxes, used to determine if
>>>> a pair of shoes fit correctly? Apparently they were legally banned
>>>> sometime in the '60s. I'd never heard of such a thing until today -- I
>>>> just read about it in a transcript I'm editing -- so I'm curious if
>>>> anyone's had personal experience with such a device.
>>>
>>>I remember them and was thrilled to see a greenish X-ray of the bones in
>>>my feet. It wasn't really a shoebox per se but some contraption on the
>>>floor into which one put a foot with the shoe on.
>>
>>I remember them too; they were in use in the UK in the middle 50s.
>
>And up to at least the early 60s. In Clarks
>dealerships/concessionaires/franchises/whatevers, IIRC.
I remember them in Clarks, and my elder son was fitted with shoes using one
when he was a toddler in the mid-60s.
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
My dentist and her assistant step out of the room for a second or two when
they take X-rays. I've never seen a lead apron used other than in a
hospital, where, during many months in intensive care, I had daily X-rays.
Robert Bannister
> Robert Bannister:
>
>>>Usually, only the dentist wears [the lead apron]. The pretty girl
>>>(dental assistant, nurse, receptionist, girlfriend) usually stands
>>>back, and the patient rarely get any protection.
>
>
> This must be some upside-down Australian way of doing things.
>
> Spehro Pefhany:
>
>>In Canada we get a nice heavy lead apron to cover the 'nads. ...
>
>
> Yeah. At my dentist's office, the patient gets the lead apron, the
> hygienist (who is in fact rather pretty) stands back behind the wall
> and operates the control, and the dentist is off in another room
> still denting the previous patient.
We certainly have dentists who do this multi-tasking, multi-room thing,
and I have been to dentists who cover the patient, but it's like the
shoe thing we were talking about: the dentist needs the protection far
more than the patient, because the patient only gets dosed once or twice
a year, while the fang doctor may use x-rays several times a day, so I
wouldn't call it an 'upside-down' thing at all.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
'Bag' comes to mind, but I wouldn't say that in the presence of ladies.
--
Rob Bannister
mUs1Ka
Biddy.
m.
sand
Perhaps geezerette.
S&
Charles Riggs
I recall they didn't even though they are. Might have scared the
public if they did. By the way, Dena, the spelling for the device is
"fluoroscope", thus "fluoroscopic", unimportant as the correction is.
Dena Jo
> I recall they didn't even though they are. Might have scared the
> public if they did. By the way, Dena, the spelling for the device is
> "fluoroscope", thus "fluoroscopic", unimportant as the correction is.
Typo. You'll note I got it right in the subject line.
MC
Dena Jo <TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Typo. You'll note I got it right in the subject line.
You must be a fluoroscopist.
Dena Jo
Typos suck dead bunnies.
--
Blanche
Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email.
Charles Riggs
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 23 Dec 2003, Charles Riggs posted thus:
>
>> I recall they didn't even though they are. Might have scared the
>> public if they did. By the way, Dena, the spelling for the device is
>> "fluoroscope", thus "fluoroscopic", unimportant as the correction is.
>
>Typo. You'll note I got it right in the subject line.
Thread titles don't count and are often ignored, as has been observed
many times here. As I said, your error was a minor one. If that was
the worst thing you did this week, you can count yourself lucky. Never
mind, though: all errors, no matter how small, are subject to
examination here, and if a confession of error seems justified by
majority vote -- a vote that must be imagined rather than experienced,
99 times out of 100 -- it should be freely given. Tony, too, often has
trouble in this area.
Charles Riggs
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 23 Dec 2003, Charles Riggs posted thus:
>
>> I recall they didn't even though they are. Might have scared the
>> public if they did. By the way, Dena, the spelling for the device is
>> "fluoroscope", thus "fluoroscopic", unimportant as the correction is.
>
>Typo. You'll note I got it right in the subject line.
Thread titles don't count and are often ignored, as has been observed
many times here. As I said, your error was a minor one. If that was
the worst thing you did this week, you can count yourself lucky. Never
mind, though: all errors, no matter how small, are subject to
examination here, and if a confession of error seems justified by
majority vote -- a vote that must be imagined rather than experienced,
99 times out of 100 -- it should be freely given. Tony, too, often has
trouble in this area.
That said, I'm away to greener pastures.
It is a pity that the several of us who tried were unsuccessful in our
attempts to coax Tony Cooper out of the group. The influence the wind
bag has had on the group cannot be overestimated. Almost
single-handedly, by subjecting us to a volume of posts that staggers
the imagination, he helped transform alt.usage.english from a
relatively scholarly discussion group into nothing much more than a
chat room, ripe to be joined by chatty teenagers having nothing else
to do and, more significantly, subtly altering, over many months, the
nature of many of the posts by regular members. No-one is immune to
the prevailing wind in a group of people, myself included. The day
Cooper joined us, he sounded the group's death knell; that is my
belief, dramatic as I stated it. That this trend could possibly change
is also my belief. I wish much luck to anyone able to convince Tony
this isn't the place for him, for AUE was at one time a wonderful
thing to be associated with, a few faults not withstanding. That or
the man may have the decency to step aside of his own accord, to find
a newsgroup more suitable for his several talents -- a hope I don't
place much faith in.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon filted:
>> Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>>>
>>> Now, what in the world does "filted" mean?
>>
>> ISTR that "filted" was in some thread a while back, but I don't
>> remember
>> what it's supposed to mean. I'm curious, too.
>[...]
R h's explanation and references snipped; you may look them up and
become enlightened, as I did, if you are curious.
I now understand the whole thing. Basically, he (r h) is a rather filty
guy, and in this filting world, all of us will filt eventually if not
during the teen-aged years. So: no one should feel libeled or even
insulted if named as a person who filted. Filting is nothing.
Really.
R F
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Charles Riggs wrote:
> It is a pity that the several of us who tried were unsuccessful in our
> attempts to coax Tony Cooper out of the group. The influence the wind
> bag has had on the group cannot be overestimated. Almost
> single-handedly, by subjecting us to a volume of posts that staggers
> the imagination, he helped transform alt.usage.english from a
> relatively scholarly discussion group into nothing much more than a
> chat room, ripe to be joined by chatty teenagers having nothing else
> to do and, more significantly, subtly altering, over many months, the
> nature of many of the posts by regular members. No-one is immune to
> the prevailing wind in a group of people, myself included. The day
> Cooper joined us, he sounded the group's death knell; that is my
> belief, dramatic as I stated it.
This is indeed a serious accusation. But is what you say true? Has the
arrival and flourishing of Tony Cooper in AUE had a substantial effect on
the character of the newsgroup, the content of the postings, and even the
styles of regular posters? When I first read what you wrote, I was first
inclined to dismiss it, and then to say, well, sure, Coop has affected
people here, but no more or less than any other person who posts regularly
to AUE (not including me [= GenAm "myself"], as I do not think I have had
any real effect at all on AUE other than contributing a few silly acronyms
and initialisms -- I think AUE is pretty much the same place it was back
in late 1998 or so, except Truly Donovan and a1a only post a few times a
year, people claiming to be Bun Mui only post a few times a quarter, and
Brian J. Goggin and Perchprism and some other people are gone). (Oh, and
a few valued new people are here, like Dena Jo.) (Oh, and Joe Manfre
arrived and left.)
But is AUE the same place it was since Tony Cooper first arrived? I
poiceonally don't agree with Mr. Riggs that Tony Cooper has had a
deleterious effect on AUE -- I see no particular evidence of that, though
if *some*one wants to produce such evidence I'd be happy to consider it.
But have we, us, ourselves, have we all been subtly influenced by Tony
Cooper, as Mr. Riggs has alleged -- more so than by any other frequent
poster, which is I think what Mr. Riggs is saying?
When the definitive itstory of AUE is written, will the arrival of Tony
Cooper be considered an inflection point, so to say? Can one person, a
Tony Cooper, really have that much of an impact on a newsgroup? *Has*
this one person, this Tony Cooper, had that impact? Were we really so
"scholarly" before Tony Cooper arrived, and have we become so "chatty" as
a result of his arrival? And is that chatty bad, or just chatty chattier?
Dena Jo
> *Has*
> this one person, this Tony Cooper, had that impact? Were we
> really so "scholarly" before Tony Cooper arrived, and have we
> become so "chatty" as a result of his arrival?
Well, if the archives are any indication, the answer to both those
questions is "No."
The only newsgroups and mailing lists I know of that stick strictly to
their topics are moderated ones, but they also tend to be rather on the
dull side. As a group, AUE comprises the smartest, wittiest bunch I've
encountered anywhere in Cyberspace, and I'm quite happy that I've found
my way here.
So. That being said, does anyone now how to remove red wine stains
from an enamel pot? And Merry Christmas to all the goyim.
CyberCypher
2003:
Oys! Not all of us goys celebrate Xmas. I'll just translate that into
"Happy Holidays!", though, and it'll see as if that was exactly what
you had said. I do that for my students all the time --- translate from
chinese English into native-speaker English, I mean -- and sometimes I
never notice that they're not fluent and almost perfect speakers.
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
Spehro Pefhany
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 25 Dec 2003, R F posted thus:
>
>> *Has*
>> this one person, this Tony Cooper, had that impact? Were we
>> really so "scholarly" before Tony Cooper arrived, and have we
>> become so "chatty" as a result of his arrival?
>
>Well, if the archives are any indication, the answer to both those
>questions is "No."
>
>The only newsgroups and mailing lists I know of that stick strictly to
>their topics are moderated ones, but they also tend to be rather on the
>dull side. As a group, AUE comprises the smartest, wittiest bunch I've
>encountered anywhere in Cyberspace, and I'm quite happy that I've found
>my way here.
>
>So. That being said, does anyone now how to remove red wine stains
>from an enamel pot?
"To remove stains from enamel pots, mix bleach with water and boil in
the pot until the stain is gone."
I have no idea how to remove that nasty bleach taste from your pot.
> And Merry Christmas to all the goyim.
Thank you DJ, but *all* the goyim?
Dena Jo
>> And Merry Christmas to all the goyim.
>
> Thank you DJ, but *all* the goyim?
Well, in light of Franke's objection, Merry Christmas to all the goyim
who celebrate it.
david56
We Europeans do not necessarily associate "Happy Christmas" with
religion, so I am pleased to accept DJ's wishes. "Happy Holidays"
sounds American and strange.
--
David
=====
CyberCypher
Europeans have in general been spared the plague of BAC locusts. The
USA has been being hammered by these religionists for three
centuries. During the 20th, for example, Americans had to put up with
the "Put Christ back in Christmas" campaign. That hasn't stopped Xmas
from being a secular holiday in the USA and in most of the world
influenced by Western culture --- Japan and Taiwan come to mind
immediately.
> so I am pleased to accept DJ's wishes. "Happy Holidays"
> sounds American and strange.
Well, "Happy Holidays" and "Season's Greetings" are American and
strange. We separate church and state and we recognize that during
the six weeks before and after the winter solstice there are a
variety of cultural and religious holidays (holy days) that are not
included when wishing the world in general "Merry Christmas".
I was also pleased to accept DJ's wishes after I translated them into
language that meant something less specific and more accurate for me.
Perhaps you missed that. Had I been offended, I would have been
offensive. I don't think I was. Was I, DJ?
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor, and someone who is often called
"Santa Claus" in English, Taiwanese, and Chinese here in Taiwan.
Dena Jo
> Perhaps you missed that. Had I been offended, I would have been
> offensive. I don't think I was. Was I, DJ?
Not at all.
Dena Jo
> Perhaps you missed that. Had I been offended, I would have been
> offensive. I don't think I was. Was I, DJ?
ObAUE: I think you should have paragraphed "Was I, DJ?"
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>
>On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Charles Riggs wrote:
>
>> It is a pity that the several of us who tried were unsuccessful in our
>> attempts to coax Tony Cooper out of the group. The influence the wind
>> bag has had on the group cannot be overestimated. Almost
>> single-handedly, by subjecting us to a volume of posts that staggers
>> the imagination, he helped transform alt.usage.english from a
>> relatively scholarly discussion group into nothing much more than a
>> chat room, ripe to be joined by chatty teenagers having nothing else
>> to do and, more significantly, subtly altering, over many months, the
>> nature of many of the posts by regular members. No-one is immune to
>> the prevailing wind in a group of people, myself included. The day
>> Cooper joined us, he sounded the group's death knell; that is my
>> belief, dramatic as I stated it.
>This is indeed a serious accusation.
I don't know that it's all that serious an accusation. It's rather
like a small child that screams "I hate you!" at his mother because
the child has been deprived of an extra hour of playtime before bed.
The words are serious, but you have to consider the state of the
speaker.
Charles is obviously beset by demons at present, but his demons seem
to be like unwelcome in-laws that come and stay for a while and then
go away.
He and I have been exchanging emails recently (only a few) about a
package that I sent him. They were just ordinary, innocuous
exchanges. There was a gap of about a week, and then I received one in
a similar vein to the above. I have no idea what triggered it.
In one of my emails I mentioned that I did not want to be compensated
for the items I sent him, and would prefer the sending to be
considered "just a nice gesture". He took great umbrage at that, and
called that statement "asinine" and indicative of great ego. That
took me a bit aback, but I dismissed it as the demons speaking.
I had offered him a payback of sorts by saying that there was a
certain subject in Ireland that I would like a picture of for my
daughter, and if he felt obligated to return the favor the picture
would be much appreciated. I understand that we all like to
reciprocate gestures, but I don't feel they need to be in kind or
judged by monetary value.
> But is what you say true? Has the
>arrival and flourishing of Tony Cooper in AUE had a substantial effect on
>the character of the newsgroup, the content of the postings, and even the
>styles of regular posters?
It would be supremely egotistical of me to make the claim of
influencing the group in any way. It would also, in my opinion, be a
fallacy of the greatest order. I seem to be a lightning rod for some
posters, but they'd find a lightning rod without me. Those that do
send their bolts in this lightning rod's direction seem to look for
other targets as well. I cannot think of a single poster that gets
into unpleasant tangles with me that does not get into equally
unpleasant tangles with other posters.
I do claim some minor influence: I think I was the first to call
Fontana "Areff" and the first to call Valentine "Arjay". "Areff"
seems to have caught on, but not "Arjay". I don't think I'll make
the aue history book for either of these.
I am not aware of any movement that tried to coax me out of the group.
I do not consider "fuck off" to be indicative of a movement. If
there is such a movement, the leaders are being far too subtle. I
suggest they step up the rhetoric by saying "Fuck off, now" and work
up from there. (Straight line presented. Go for it. You know who
you are.)
In actuality, this is not the type of group to foster such a movement.
For the most part, the people that do not appreciate my contributions
just ignore me. They just skip over my posts and read something that
does interest them. Just as - I suspect - they skip over the equally
unscholarly posts that Charles contributes.
(OK, I do claim another minor influence in that I have made "people
that" a construction of some note. That influence, though, is about
as significant as "teh" or "sans" in the greater scheme of things.)
Neither is this a group to express appreciation for well-received
posts. Rarely does one see a "Well done!", "I enjoyed that", or "I
look forward to your posts" in response to even the most esteemed
posters. The lack of critical comment is usually the mark of
acceptance.
>But is AUE the same place it was since Tony Cooper first arrived? I
>poiceonally don't agree with Mr. Riggs that Tony Cooper has had a
>deleterious effect on AUE -- I see no particular evidence of that, though
>if *some*one wants to produce such evidence I'd be happy to consider it.
I know you would. If there's a spark, you can be counted on to act as
a bellows. Charles damns outright. You go the route of faint praise.
Wood Avens
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>So. That being said, does anyone now how to remove red wine stains
>from an enamel pot?
Bleach. Swill it around for a minute or so, tip it out and rinse
well. Should be no after-effects.
>And Merry Christmas to all the goyim.
Reciprocations from a neo-Pagan.
--
Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove number to reply
MC
anyone thinks the group has gone downhill because of certain posters,
they have options.
The simplest is what Tony Cooper <tony_co...@mungedyahoo.com> wrote
in article <m75muvc129nhkaevl...@4ax.com>,
> In actuality, this is not the type of group to foster such a movement.
> For the most part, the people that do not appreciate my contributions
> just ignore me. They just skip over my posts and read something that
> does interest them. Just as - I suspect - they skip over the equally
> unscholarly posts that Charles contributes.
Most newsreading software lets you kill threads and posters that are of
no interest -- I never see anything posted by Rey, for example -- so
this is even easier. (It reminds me of something a gay friend of mine
said to me before he died of AIDS: "I don't know why some people hate
gays so much. God knows, we're easy to avoid.")
The other option for anyone who laments that fings ain't wot they used
to be is to start a moderated newsgroup, invite their chosen posters to
participate and bar the rest.
MC
MC <cop...@AMZAPca.inter.net> wrote:
> I have no idea what this is all about but it does seem to me that if
> anyone thinks the group has gone downhill because of certain posters,
> they have options.
>
I'll OY myself for the "they" to save you the bother.
Dena Jo
> Reciprocations from a neo-Pagan.
I don't know how to phrase this question correctly, but any particular
subgroup?
Dena Jo
> I'll OY myself for the "they" to save you the bother.
Are you kidding? Half the group will applaud you.
(It's Christmas. What's a nice Goy like you doing in a place like
this?)
Skitt
> Spehro Pefhany posted thus:
>>> And Merry Christmas to all the goyim.
>>
>> Thank you DJ, but *all* the goyim?
>
> Well, in light of Franke's objection, Merry Christmas to all the goyim
> who celebrate it.
OK, here's my greeting, and I'll translate it directly from Latvian:
Happy Winterfest!
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Wood Avens
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 25 Dec 2003, Wood Avens posted thus:
>
>> Reciprocations from a neo-Pagan.
>
>I don't know how to phrase this question correctly, but any particular
>subgroup?
Well, you probably know that the number of "sub-groups" =
approximately the number of neo-Pagans X 1.5. My best précis is
"solitary eclectic Wiccan".
bb
Wood Avens
"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."
david56
At least two Americans reacted immediately against Dena's "Merry
Christmas to all the goyim". It wouldn't have raised any comment
here, amongst Christians, Atheists, Jews, Moslems, Hindus or Sikhs,
at least those of my acquaintance; it would be taken as a general
greeting of the time of year, not one relating only to Christianity.
In this regard, it's parallel to "christian name" of which we have
spoken this year. My company is almost deserted from now to 5th
January as nearly everybody is on holiday (=US leave), including the
non-Christians.
--
David
=====
MC
Dena Jo <TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I'll OY myself for the "they" to save you the bother.
>
> Are you kidding? Half the group will applaud you.
>
> (It's Christmas. What's a nice Goy like you doing in a place like
> this?)
It was a typo. I meant: "I'll GOY myself."
R F
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003, Tony Cooper wrote:
> I do claim some minor influence: I think I was the first to call
> Fontana "Areff" and the first to call Valentine "Arjay".
I think I may have been the first to use "Arjay" (not counting an
occasional AUE poster named "arjay" from pre-21st-century days), in a
posting dated 13 Jan 2001:
For example, in the sentence "Arjay is a _West Wing_ junkie", what is
being communicated is that Arjay has an 'addiction' to the TV show _The
West Wing_.
This was meant to be a side-reference to poster R.J. Valentine. At that
time he occasionally, maybe in one or two postings, revealed an interest
in that TV show. I used to like it too, but it jumped the shark at some
point. You'll note in AUE that the British are still really into _The
West Wing_, I think because they're a season or three behind. Freck, some
of them still watch _Dallas_ and _Kojak_.
> >But is AUE the same place it was since Tony Cooper first arrived? I
> >poiceonally don't agree with Mr. Riggs that Tony Cooper has had a
> >deleterious effect on AUE -- I see no particular evidence of that, though
> >if *some*one wants to produce such evidence I'd be happy to consider it.
>
> I know you would. If there's a spark, you can be counted on to act as
> a bellows. Charles damns outright. You go the route of faint praise.
Once again, Coop, you misunderstand what I wrote, or maybe what's behind
or beneath or whatever the words. I am not damning. I think it is
possible, Coop, that you *have* had this influence on AUE, more of an
influence than any other poster, maybe more than every other poster
combined; and I also think that this influence may not be the bad thing
that Charles has made it out to be. Perhaps even Charles knows this. I
knew it from the start, Coop, and I said it: you're a GUP, even if you
are imperceptive at times.
I think Charles is right to suggest that other posters' styles have been
influenced by yours, or by you in some other way. I see it in my own
writing style here, anyway. I think you may be the poster who's (= TCE
"that's") influenced my writing here the most (after R.J. Valentine
and Joe Manfre, NNITO, of course). You've changed us, Coop. Is it for
the better? I don't know, but maybe. Let's hope so.
Dena Jo
> Well, you probably know that the number of "sub-groups" =
> approximately the number of neo-Pagans X 1.5.
Heh heh.
> My best précis is "solitary eclectic Wiccan".
I've often wondered.
Wood Avens
<bass.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>At least two Americans reacted immediately against Dena's "Merry
>Christmas to all the goyim". It wouldn't have raised any comment
>here, amongst Christians, Atheists, Jews, Moslems, Hindus or Sikhs,
>at least those of my acquaintance; it would be taken as a general
>greeting of the time of year, not one relating only to Christianity.
I've often felt that as long as Christians remain happy to call the
days of the week after Pagan deities, it would be churlish of me to
object to the midwinter festival being named after the Christian
deity.
--
Katy Jennison
Wood Avens
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> My best précis is "solitary eclectic Wiccan".
>
>I've often wondered.
Oh? (About me personally, or in general, I mean?)
--
Katy Jennison
Dena Jo
> Oh? (About me personally, or in general, I mean?)
About you personally. I once tried emailing you, but it bounced.
Wood Avens
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 25 Dec 2003, Wood Avens posted thus:
>
>> Oh? (About me personally, or in general, I mean?)
>
>About you personally. I once tried emailing you, but it bounced.
Ah. Prolly you missed the spam-trap. Or possibly our over-eager
filters gobbled up your message. Anything I can expand on now?
Tony Cooper
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 25 Dec 2003, MC posted thus:
>
>> I'll OY myself for the "they" to save you the bother.
>
>Are you kidding? Half the group will applaud you.
>
>(It's Christmas. What's a nice Goy like you doing in a place like
>this?)
It's not Christmas. At least for this Goy. Due to other commitments,
my daughter and SIL won't be with us today. We've rescheduled
Christmas to Saturday so the whole family can get together.
My wife is coughing, aching (claims even her teeth hurt) and scarfing
down pills by the dozen. (Not the flu; she went to the doctor
yesterday) She can't see young Nik today, and is most definitely in a
Bah! mood.
obAUE: Should "goy" be capitalized? Are we a proper noun?
Dena Jo
> Ah. Prolly you missed the spam-trap. Or possibly our over-eager
> filters gobbled up your message. Anything I can expand on now?
If you don't mind, I'll try emailing you again, but probably not until
tomorrow. Would that be okay?
Wood Avens
<TPUBGTH.delete...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you don't mind, I'll try emailing you again, but probably not until
>tomorrow. Would that be okay?
Sure - I've just emailed you with my alternative address. (I hope
I've circumvented your own spam-trap.)
Dena Jo
> Sure - I've just emailed you with my alternative address. (I hope
> I've circumvented your own spam-trap.)
It did. Thanks. I'll email you tomorrow.
Dena Jo
> AUE was at one time a wonderful thing to be associated with
Reasonable people disagree. I think it still is. I enjoy the time I
spend here and the friends and acquaintances I've made.
> That or
> the man may have the decency to step aside of his own accord, to find
> a newsgroup more suitable for his several talents -- a hope I don't
> place much faith in.
I would hate to see that happen. I, for one, would miss him, just as
I'll miss you. I hope you find your greener pastures are just that.
Simon R. Hughes
> and sometimes I
> never notice that they're not fluent and almost perfect speakers.
Sometimes, they never notice you're fluent but almost a
non-native speaker.
--
Simon R. Hughes
Simon R. Hughes
> The lack of critical comment is usually the mark of
> acceptance.
I always take it as embarrassed silence.
--
Simon R. Hughes
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>> obAUE: Should "goy" be capitalized? Are we a proper noun?
>>
>
>Maybe. How do you feel about being called "a Goy" rather than "Goyish"?
I don't like that "ish" thing. If I'm going to be a Goy, I want to be
a full-out Goy.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>Your opinion of "Goyish" is clearly based on your well-honed instincts.
>The proper reference should be "Goyisheh." How does that fit?
It seems too large by an "h" to me. So, you'll tailor for bilik?
CyberCypher
> On 25 Dec 2003, CyberCypher posted thus:
>
>> Perhaps you missed that. Had I been offended, I would have been
>> offensive. I don't think I was. Was I, DJ?
>
> ObAUE: I think you should have paragraphed "Was I, DJ?"
>
That, I think, is a matter of stylistic choice. I have no problem with
doing it either way. With only two lines of text, though, I wasn't
moved to press that enter button an extra two times.
I shall remember to do it in future, though.
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
CyberCypher
> CyberCypher <cybercypher2...@NOSPAM.net> wrote:
>>
>> ... Not all of us goys celebrate Xmas.
>>
>
> The plural is "goyim."
>
I know, Murray, but I wrote "Oys!" After that, I thought maybe I should
have said "Oyim! Not all of us goyim . . ."
Which do you prefer?
Robert Bannister
> At least two Americans reacted immediately against Dena's "Merry
> Christmas to all the goyim". It wouldn't have raised any comment
> here, amongst Christians, Atheists, Jews, Moslems, Hindus or Sikhs,
> at least those of my acquaintance; it would be taken as a general
> greeting of the time of year, not one relating only to Christianity.
> In this regard, it's parallel to "christian name" of which we have
> spoken this year. My company is almost deserted from now to 5th
> January as nearly everybody is on holiday (=US leave), including the
> non-Christians.
There was a wonderful story in my paper (The West Australian) a few days
ago. Apparently, in the small country town of Katanning, the annual
Christmas decoration competition is has been run for some years by the
local Muslim association. A Muslim family won first prize and the local
mosque got third.
--
Rob Bannister
CyberCypher
[...]
> At least two Americans reacted immediately against Dena's "Merry
> Christmas to all the goyim". It wouldn't have raised any comment
> here, amongst Christians, Atheists, Jews, Moslems, Hindus or
> Sikhs, at least those of my acquaintance; it would be taken as a
> general greeting of the time of year, not one relating only to
> Christianity. In this regard, it's parallel to "christian name"
> of which we have spoken this year. My company is almost deserted
> from now to 5th January as nearly everybody is on holiday (=US
> leave), including the non-Christians.
>
I suppose that since I was splashed as an infant in the local Italian
Roman Catholic church, I must have a "Christian name", but I don't
know what it might be. I have a surname and a given name.
If you follow the news from the USA at all, you know that religion is
a huge sticking point in American society. There are tens of millions
of religionists out there in the tall grass and the alleyways that
practice the obnoxious art of religious mugging, not only the
celebrated but presumptuous former chief justice of the Alabama
supreme court, Roy Moore and his insistence on forcing his personal
religious beliefs on the state of Alabama by plopping that
monstrosity of sculpture of the 10 commandments in whatever state
building he plopped it into.
I think the Europeans in general have had enough of religion and its
ills and are much more inclined to accept what has historically been
shoved down their cultural throats for so many centuries, but the USA
still touts its piety by announcing how free its citizens are to
practice the religion of their choice --- but they conveniently
forget that "freedom of religion" implies a right to "freedom from
religion".
When the holiday is offically changed from Christmas to Winter
Solstice, I will be pleased and probably sufficiently shocked to
suffer a stroke for no better reason than the rule of reason itself.
There is something sad and barrel-makerish about accepting the status
quo. If someone went around wishing everyone a happy Hanukah, most
Americans would protest that they were not Jewish, I suspect.