The Future Turned Out Weird
Tim McDaniel
royalists, annouced and expect to be able to pass a gay marriage law.
Yesterday, to commemorate the 26th year of John Paul II's pontificate,
he listed to a performance in the Vatican audience hall by the Red
Army Chorus, still named that some 13 years after the Communist
government collapsed.
Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
heels and some jewelry.
The future turned out weird.
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
Karl Johanson
news:ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us...
> Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
> her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
> pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
> heels and some jewelry.
>
> The future turned out weird.
Dang right. Women look way better in runners.
Karl Johanson
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us:
> The minority government of Spain, the Socialists, who are staunch
> royalists, annouced and expect to be able to pass a gay marriage law.
>
> Yesterday, to commemorate the 26th year of John Paul II's pontificate,
> he listed to a performance in the Vatican audience hall by the Red Army
> Chorus, still named that some 13 years after the Communist government
> collapsed.
>
> Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband: her
> ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to pose for a
> charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch heels and some
> jewelry.
If she is observably without knickers in her photo, I am so going to buy
that book, even if the nudity is "tasteful" (unless the price is sky-high).
Then again, it's possible that she's slimmed down enough that I wouldn't
find her quite so interesting as I once did.
> The future turned out weird.
I felt we had a taste of that second one some years ago, when a video
reissue of "Alexander Nevsky," that great cinematic paean to Soviet
Communism fighting against the nasty evil Germans, had its music soundtrack
redone by the Saint Petersburg Philharmonic Orchestra, and was published by
Bertelsmann Musikgesellschaft.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Dan Goodman
Meanwhile, in the US: California's two Senators are Jewish women. In the
1950s, it might have been possible for California to have _one_ female
Senator; and a Jewish Senator would probably have been too ridiculous for
sf.
One of Minnesota's Senate seat has been occupied by three Jewish Senators
in a row.
One of the two openly-gay Congressmen is a conservative Republican from
Arizona.
--
Dan Goodman
Journal http://www.livejournal.com/users/dsgood
All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies.
John Arbuthnot (1667-1735), Scottish writer, physician.
Doug Wickstrom
<l6bxwz21d2xg$.1ouo6bc6u0e6p$.d...@40tude.net>
Dan Goodman <dsg...@iphouse.com> excited the ether to say:
>One of Minnesota's Senate seat has been occupied by three Jewish Senators
>in a row.
Three? OK. Boschwitz, who was defeated by Wellstone. Who's the
third?
--
Doug Wickstrom <nims...@comcast.net>
"The secret of success in showbusiness is honesty and sincerity. Once
you learn how to fake that, you've got it made." --Groucho Marx
Richard Eney
Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
>her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
>pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
>heels and some jewelry.
Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
-- Dick Eney
Dorothy J Heydt
Watch out, Dick, last time I expressed my opinion that fat bodies
ought to conceal themselves from the eyes of others, I got flamed
for three weeks.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
Karl Johanson
news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com...
Bigotry is unbecoming.
Karl Johanson
Nate Edel
> Richard Eney <dic...@radix.net> wrote:
> >Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
> >prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
> >Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>
> Watch out, Dick, last time I expressed my opinion that fat bodies
> ought to conceal themselves from the eyes of others, I got flamed
> for three weeks.
One might say we've got higher expectations from you.
Personally, I'll simply join whoeveritwas who said before that he was going
to buy the book when it comes out, assuming it's easily found here in the
states, and that I can't find scans to download first. Pay for pr0n? Not if
I can help it...
--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
"I do have a cause though. It is obscenity. I'm for it." - Tom Lehrer
Paul Ciszek
Yum. I might try to find that book myself.
--
Please reply to: | "When you are dealing with secretive regimes
pciszek at panix dot com | that want to deceive, you're never going to
Autoreply is disabled | be able to be positive." -Condoleezza Rice
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:%KFcd.746435$M95.504284@pd7tw1no:
Anna Nicole Smith is without charm or poise, and so I will object to her
specifically for that reason. She also seems to stray quite far from my
preferred type of woman, namely highly intelligent. Sarah, Duchess of
York, may not be the best-behaved of the British titled, but I find her
appealing in many ways.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com:
Last I heard, she had been spokesperson for Weight Watchers for a few
years, and was at a weight similar to that regarded as acceptable by the
media. When she was full-figured, I found her very attractive. Even thin,
she still has a very cute face and nice coloring (if one likes redheads).
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:epmb42x...@mail.sfchat.org:
> Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> Richard Eney <dic...@radix.net> wrote:
>> >Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
>> >prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>> >Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>>
>> Watch out, Dick, last time I expressed my opinion that fat bodies
>> ought to conceal themselves from the eyes of others, I got flamed
>> for three weeks.
>
> One might say we've got higher expectations from you.
>
> Personally, I'll simply join whoeveritwas who said before that he was
> going to buy the book when it comes out, assuming it's easily found here
> in the states, and that I can't find scans to download first. Pay for
> pr0n? Not if I can help it...
If it's for a good charitable cause, why not support it? You do what you
like, and I'll do what I like.
Alan Woodford
wrote:
You say that like it's a bad thing!
Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
Alan Woodford
The Greying Lensman
Dorothy J Heydt
Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
Kevin J. Maroney
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>
>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
pounds, what problem is that of yours?
And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | k...@panix.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:g3b7n0hbsaamfumuq...@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:
>>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>
>>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
> If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>
> And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
> disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
I wonder if _Women En Large_ could count as peripherally ObSF since there
is a co-owner of a well-known SF bookstore in it?
Matt Austern
> Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:g3b7n0hbsaamfumuq...@4ax.com:
>
> > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> > Heydt) wrote:
> >>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> >>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
> >>
> >>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> >>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
> >
> > If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> > pounds, what problem is that of yours?
> >
> > And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
> > disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
>
> I wonder if _Women En Large_ could count as peripherally ObSF since there
> is a co-owner of a well-known SF bookstore in it?
Former co-owner, actually. She sold her share a couple years ago.
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:m2u0ssf...@Matt-Austerns-Computer.local:
Didn't know that. Are Tom and Dave still co-owners?
Richard Eney
Oh, I don't think she's showing bigotry.
And there is a difference between not being ashamed of one's body, and
expecting people to pay to see pictures of it.
-- Dick Eney
Richard Eney
Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com:
>
>> In article <ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us>,
>> Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
>>>her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
>>>pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
>>>heels and some jewelry.
>>
>> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
>> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>
>Last I heard, she had been spokesperson for Weight Watchers for a few
>years, and was at a weight similar to that regarded as acceptable by the
>media. When she was full-figured, I found her very attractive. Even thin,
>she still has a very cute face and nice coloring (if one likes redheads).
I don't remember her ever being "thin". Still, we all have our own ideas
about the line of demarcation between thin, trim, curvaceous, deliciously
_zaftig_, plump, fat, obese, and morbidly obese. I wouldn't call her
"morbidly obese" even at her worst.
-- Dick Eney
Richard Eney
And so do I. I wouldn't pay for a book of photographs of Twiggy, either.
-- Dick Eney
does this count as a flame war?
Richard Eney
Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>Heydt) wrote:
>>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>
>>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
>If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
>pounds, what problem is that of yours?
People who suffer from morbid attractions are unlikely to limit themselves
only to the relatively harmless kind.
>And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
>disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
Nope. Not that I find her disgusting, just unattractive; however, people
who feel that they ought to readjust the general standards of pulchritude
are a social problem, not a private one. As I said to somebody else, I'd
object just as much if Twiggy started expecting to get paid for posing
nude.
-- Dick Eney
Matt Austern
> Matt Austern <aus...@well.com> appears to have caused the following letters
> to be typed in news:m2u0ssf...@Matt-Austerns-Computer.local:
>
> > "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> writes:
> >
> >> Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> appears to have caused the following
> >> letters to be typed in news:g3b7n0hbsaamfumuq...@4ax.com:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> >> > Heydt) wrote:
> >> >>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> >> >>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
> >> >>
> >> >>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> >> >>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
> >> >
> >> > If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> >> > pounds, what problem is that of yours?
> >> >
> >> > And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
> >> > disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
> >>
> >> I wonder if _Women En Large_ could count as peripherally ObSF since there
> >> is a co-owner of a well-known SF bookstore in it?
> >
> > Former co-owner, actually. She sold her share a couple years ago.
>
> Didn't know that. Are Tom and Dave still co-owners?
Yep, they still are. (And people who have been following this drama
might notice that TOCoH is still open, even though its closing was
announced some months ago.)
Chris Malme
@corp.supernews.com:
> Nope. Not that I find her disgusting, just unattractive; however, people
> who feel that they ought to readjust the general standards of pulchritude
> are a social problem, not a private one. As I said to somebody else, I'd
> object just as much if Twiggy started expecting to get paid for posing
> nude.
Bringing this back to reality, it should be noted that the Duchess of York
is not expecting to get paid for it either - she is doing it for charity.
Thought you may not have understood that, as there was a marked lack of
understanding of charity in your post.
--
Chris
Minstrel's Hall of Filk - http://www.filklore.com/
Filklore Music Store - http://www.filklore.co.uk/
To contact me, please use form at http://www.filklore.com/contact.phtml
Randolph Fritz
W. Bush.
Good grief.
Randolph
Del Cotter
Matthew B. Tepper <?@earthlink.net.invalid> said:
>"Karl Johanson" <karljo...@shaw.ca> appears
>>> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
>>> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>>> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>>
>> Bigotry is unbecoming.
>
>Anna Nicole Smith is without charm or poise, and so I will object to her
>specifically for that reason. She also seems to stray quite far from my
>preferred type of woman, namely highly intelligent. Sarah, Duchess of
>York, may not be the best-behaved of the British titled, but I find her
>appealing in many ways.
I saw something quite bizarre in the tabloids in the office canteen this
afternoon: front page teasers for Kate Winslet's stunning appearance at
a film premiere last night.
I don't mean she looked bizarre: she looked great, in a light blue dress
and the new comb-over hair style that's becoming fashionable for women.
What was bizarre was the fuss they all made over her new 'slim'
appearance, as they contrasted it with pictures of her in the dark green
dress at the 'Titanic' premiere.
I can't see what it is they think they're seeing. She doesn't look fat
in the older pictures, and she doesn't look any thinner in these, and
I'm forced to conclude that this is just one of those mass psychoses the
media gets itself into, where the narrative of "conventional wisdom"
overrides any mere visual evidence.
Clearly it was time for Winslet to have slimmed down, so the press has
decided she did.
--
Del Cotter http://del_c.livejournal.com/
Send email to del2 at branta dot demon dot co dot uk
Karl Johanson
> In article <%KFcd.746435$M95.504284@pd7tw1no>,
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >"Richard Eney" <dic...@radix.net> wrote in message
> >news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com...
> >> In article <ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us>,
> >> Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
> >> >her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
> >> >pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
> >> >heels and some jewelry.
> >>
> >> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
> >> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
> >> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
> >
> >Bigotry is unbecoming.
>
> Oh, I don't think she's showing bigotry.
Suggesting a Geneva Convention point about not allowing someone to pose nude
for photos based on their weight? .....
Not wanting to see fat people (or thin people, or anyone else) nude isn't
bigotry. Saying some people shouldn't be allowed to pose for nude photos
specifically because of their size is bigotry. Similar to suggesting people
of certain skin colours shouldn't be allowed to pose for nude photos, as
some people may not find that skin colour attractive.
> And there is a difference between not being ashamed of one's body, and
> expecting people to pay to see pictures of it.
Yes. And there's a difference between expecting someone to pay for
something, and inviting them to pay for something. The latter is just
participating in the market place. Customers (and retailers) can make the
decision to purchase or not.
Karl Johanson
Alan Woodford
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>
>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
>
Why not, surely it is the person that counts, more than their size?
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:10n7qmk...@corp.supernews.com:
More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss. I would
venture to guess that she has a severe eating disorder; and I find that sort
of ill-health to be exceedingly unattractive. For some reason, however, I
did see a rear nude photo of her and found it was okay for general use.
Matthew B. Tepper
I've found some women up to the low end of "obese" to be quite attractive,
although in my case a good contributing factor is an hourglass shape rather
than a pear shape (or what Midwestern fan Valli Hoski used to call "ovoid").
Mark Jones
> I saw something quite bizarre in the tabloids in the office canteen this
> afternoon: front page teasers for Kate Winslet's stunning appearance at
> a film premiere last night.
>
> I don't mean she looked bizarre: she looked great, in a light blue dress
> and the new comb-over hair style that's becoming fashionable for women.
> What was bizarre was the fuss they all made over her new 'slim'
> appearance, as they contrasted it with pictures of her in the dark green
> dress at the 'Titanic' premiere.
>
> I can't see what it is they think they're seeing. She doesn't look fat
> in the older pictures, and she doesn't look any thinner in these, and
> I'm forced to conclude that this is just one of those mass psychoses the
> media gets itself into, where the narrative of "conventional wisdom"
> overrides any mere visual evidence.
>
> Clearly it was time for Winslet to have slimmed down, so the press has
> decided she did.
The thing is, I remember that some people thought she _was_ fat in Titanic.
Morons. No, she just didn't look like a starved Hollywood starlet.
David Bilek
>dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:10n7qi0...@corp.supernews.com:
>
>> In article <Xns9585E660979...@207.217.125.201>,
>>>dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) appears to have caused the following
>>>letters to be typed in news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com:
>>>>
>>>> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>>>> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>>>
>>>Last I heard, she had been spokesperson for Weight Watchers for a few
>>>years, and was at a weight similar to that regarded as acceptable by the
>>>media. When she was full-figured, I found her very attractive. Even
>>>thin, she still has a very cute face and nice coloring (if one likes
>>>redheads).
>>
>> I don't remember her ever being "thin". Still, we all have our own
>> ideas about the line of demarcation between thin, trim, curvaceous,
>> deliciously _zaftig_, plump, fat, obese, and morbidly obese. I wouldn't
>> call her "morbidly obese" even at her worst.
>
>I've found some women up to the low end of "obese" to be quite attractive,
>although in my case a good contributing factor is an hourglass shape rather
>than a pear shape (or what Midwestern fan Valli Hoski used to call "ovoid").
On the other hand, I generally don't find anyone above "curvaceous"
to be physically attractive to me. "Zaftig" isn't a useful concept in
my head-space. Think Kate Winslet in _Titanic_ to bring in another
thread... very attractive, but that's about the high end of my comfort
range.
But I still think fat people should feel free to pose naked for
whatever they feel like posing naked for. No-one is going to be
forcing me to look at it, after all. Whatever floats your boat.
-David
Dave Weingart
>Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
>prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
Taste is a matter of taste.
If it bugs you, you're always free to not look, eh?
--
73 de Dave Weingart KA2ESK Loyalty oaths. Secret searches. No-fly
mailto:phyd...@liii.com lists. Detention without legal recourse.
http://www.weingart.net/ Who won the cold war, again?
ICQ 57055207 -- Politicklers
Dave Weingart
>expecting people to pay to see pictures of it.
You'd be amazed at what people pay for, clearly.
Dave Weingart
>>pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>
>People who suffer from morbid attractions are unlikely to limit themselves
>only to the relatively harmless kind.
Yeah. Next thing you know, they might start listening to bubblegum
pop, watching anime or even *shudder* voting for someone I Don't
Approve Of.
Oh, the humanity...
>Nope. Not that I find her disgusting, just unattractive; however, people
>who feel that they ought to readjust the general standards of pulchritude
>are a social problem, not a private one. As I said to somebody else, I'd
>object just as much if Twiggy started expecting to get paid for posing
>nude.
Noting that there are a great many models of all shapes, sized and
colors who do just that.
Dave Weingart
>More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss. I would
>venture to guess that she has a severe eating disorder; and I find that sort
>of ill-health to be exceedingly unattractive. For some reason, however, I
>did see a rear nude photo of her and found it was okay for general use.
Do I want to know what you used it for?
Tim McDaniel
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3754206.stm>
Vatican condemns EU 'inquisition'
... This word was echoed by Cardinal Martino, the head of the
Vatican's Council for Justice and Peace, in his interview with Reuters
on Monday.
"It looks like a new inquisition," he said.
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
Andre Lieven
Kevin J. Maroney (k...@panix.com) writes:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:
>>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>
>>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
> If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> pounds, what problem is that of yours?
If she can sell the pics, he can express his view that he doesn't
like them.
Both parts are free speech, after all.
> And if she wants to go about scantily clad and you find her
> disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
Well, people who believe that they can do anything, and never
face any consequences from it ( Including criticism ) are known
by one word: children.
Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.
Andre Lieven
For those familiar with the Fox animated comedy series " Family
Guy ", they had an episode where the son gets " discovered " as a
NYC artist, and gets dating rights with Kate Moss, as a part of
living the role.
At one point, Ms. Moss is depicted as standing near a window
as a breeze comes up, and she flies out of the window, much as
a piece of paper would...
Chris Malme
news:Xns95868690315...@207.217.125.201:
> More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss.
I always find it puzzling when I hear this still said of Moss - while it
was certainly true she was the typical waif model in the early 90's, you
have to remember she was in her mid-to-late teens back then.
She has never been big, but she certainly has a figure now - i.e a bust,
hips, and a waist in between. Definitely not a stick.
Karl Johanson
news:cl1fea$t4d$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>
> Kevin J. Maroney (k...@panix.com) writes:
> > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> > Heydt) wrote:
> >>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> >>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
> >>
> >>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> >>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
> >
> > If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> > pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>
> If she can sell the pics, he can express his view that he doesn't
> like them.
Yes, but expressing the view that people of certain weights shouldn't be
allowed to take such photos (as some have suggested on this forum) is
bigotry.
> Both parts are free speech, after all.
Karl Johanson
Andre Lieven
Or, an expression of personal taste.
>> Both parts are free speech, after all.
Andre
David Friedman
"Karl Johanson" <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "Richard Eney" <dic...@radix.net> wrote in message
> news:10n7q6q...@corp.supernews.com...
> > In article <%KFcd.746435$M95.504284@pd7tw1no>,
> > Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > >"Richard Eney" <dic...@radix.net> wrote in message
> > >news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com...
> > >> In article <ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us>,
> > >> Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
> > >> >her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
> > >> >pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
> > >> >heels and some jewelry.
> > >>
> > >> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
> > >> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
> > >> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
> > >
> > >Bigotry is unbecoming.
> >
> > Oh, I don't think she's showing bigotry.
>
> Suggesting a Geneva Convention point about not allowing someone to pose nude
> for photos based on their weight? .....
>
> Not wanting to see fat people (or thin people, or anyone else) nude isn't
> bigotry. Saying some people shouldn't be allowed to pose for nude photos
> specifically because of their size is bigotry.
I'm not sure if interpreting an obviously silly suggestion about
applying the Geneva Convention to nude photos as bigotry itself counts
as bigotry, but it classifies at least as terminal opacity.
--
Remove NOSPAM to email
Also remove .invalid
www.daviddfriedman.com
Nate Edel
> arch...@sfchat.org (Nate Edel) wrote:
> > Personally, I'll simply join whoeveritwas who said before that he was
> > going to buy the book when it comes out, assuming it's easily found here
> > in the states, and that I can't find scans to download first. Pay for
> > pr0n? Not if I can help it...
>
> If it's for a good charitable cause, why not support it? You do what you
> like, and I'll do what I like.
Granted; my post came out wrong.
If and when I run across it, I might well buy it to support the charity; I'd
forgotten the "for charity" part, and was focussing more on the question of
"why would you want to see her nude" and adding my point that just about
anything pr0n wise will eventually be posted on alt.binaries.* and/or some
short-lived free site.
--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
"I do have a cause though. It is obscenity. I'm for it." - Tom Lehrer
Nate Edel
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
> >> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
> >> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
> >
> >Bigotry is unbecoming.
>
> Oh, I don't think she's showing bigotry.
>
> expecting people to pay to see pictures of it.
Having seen a lot of pr0n in my time, I have to say that AFAICT, if someone
is female - in either biology or even just public gender - there are guys
out there who'll pay to see pictures of them naked.
I have no sense if the gay pr0n industry has higher standards.
Nate Edel
> Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
> >If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> >pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>
> People who suffer from morbid attractions are unlikely to limit themselves
> only to the relatively harmless kind.
Ah, the "slippery slope" argument against pr0n. Forgive me if I say I don't
buy it.
Nate Edel
> In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>
> But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
I thought it was "never eat anything bigger than your head"?
Perhaps Miss Piggy said both at different times.
That said, I can think of some very attractive women at the high end of my
taste-range who might well elicit that sort of description from you.
David Goldfarb
Matt Austern <aus...@well.com> wrote:
>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> Matt Austern <aus...@well.com> appears to have caused the following letters
>>
>> Didn't know that. Are Tom and Dave still co-owners?
>
>Yep, they still are. (And people who have been following this drama
>might notice that TOCoH is still open, even though its closing was
>announced some months ago.)
Right. First it was, "OCoH is closing." Then it was, "OCoH may be
staying open, but Tom will be leaving." I went in last Thursday and
they were still open and Tom was still there. This is just fine with me.
--
David Goldfarb |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Private .sig -- please do not read.
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |
Karl Johanson
>
> "Karl Johanson" (karljo...@shaw.ca) writes:
> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> > news:cl1fea$t4d$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >>
> >> Kevin J. Maroney (k...@panix.com) writes:
> >> > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> >> > Heydt) wrote:
> >> >>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> >> >>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
> >> >>
> >> >>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> >> >>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
> >> >
> >> > If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
> >> > pounds, what problem is that of yours?
> >>
> >> If she can sell the pics, he can express his view that he doesn't
> >> like them.
> >
> > Yes, but expressing the view that people of certain weights shouldn't be
> > allowed to take such photos (as some have suggested on this forum) is
> > bigotry.
>
> Or, an expression of personal taste.
No, an expression of person taste would be stating that one doesn't want to
look at such pictures. Stating people of certain weights (or colours or
whatever) shouldn't take them or shouldn't be allowed to take them, is
bigotry.
Similarly, stating one doesn't think Janet Jackson shouldn't have shown of
part of her breast at a football game is an expression of personal taste.
Had one stated that she shouldn't have done it (or shouldn't have been
allowed to do it) because of her skin colour, would have been an expression
of bigotry.
Karl Johanson
Dave Weingart
>> Yes, but expressing the view that people of certain weights shouldn't be
>> allowed to take such photos (as some have suggested on this forum) is
>> bigotry.
>
>Or, an expression of personal taste.
"I don't like..." is an expression of personal taste.
"... shouldn't be allowed." is not, without qualifiers such as body language.
Dorothy J Heydt
Nate Edel <arch...@sfchat.org> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>
>> But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>> advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
>I thought it was "never eat anything bigger than your head"?
No, that was B. Kliban's advice.
>That said, I can think of some very attractive women at the high end of my
>taste-range who might well elicit that sort of description from you.
God knows what you would think of me if you saw me. I think you
would think I'd ignored Piggy's advice. And so I have, but over
a period of years. An ounce at a time, over a lifetim, yields
the Venus of Willendorf.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
Michael Kube-McDowell
left the following thoughtprints where they could be seen:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>> Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>
>> But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>> advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
>I thought it was "never eat anything bigger than your head"?
>
>Perhaps Miss Piggy said both at different times.
>
>That said, I can think of some very attractive women at the high end of my
>taste-range who might well elicit that sort of description from you.
Nadine Jansen
Audra Mitchell
Chloe Vevrier
Milena Verba
Trinity Loren (especially after the baby)
Ines Cudna
Angi
subgirlie
Mariko Morikawa
Gina La Montana
Kerry Marie
to throw out just a few names at random.
Beautiful women all.
--
Michael P. Kube-McDowell, author and packrat
SF and other bad habits: http://k-mac.home.att.net
David Friedman
phyd...@liii.com (Dave Weingart) wrote:
> One day in Teletubbyland, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) said:
> >> Yes, but expressing the view that people of certain weights shouldn't be
> >> allowed to take such photos (as some have suggested on this forum) is
> >> bigotry.
> >
> >Or, an expression of personal taste.
>
> "I don't like..." is an expression of personal taste.
>
> "... shouldn't be allowed." is not, without qualifiers such as body language.
"Should be prevented by the Geneva Convention" is a qualifier analogous
to body language.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:cl1b0k$jrd$1...@eri0.s8.isp.nyc.eggn.net:
> One day in Teletubbyland, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> said:
>> More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss. I
>> would venture to guess that she has a severe eating disorder; and I find
>> that sort of ill-health to be exceedingly unattractive. For some
>> reason, however, I did see a rear nude photo of her and found it was
>> okay for general use.
>
> Do I want to know what you used it for?
I won't tell you, but Dr. Joycelyn Elders might.
Dorothy J Heydt
Michael Kube-McDowell <K-...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>Nadine Jansen
>Audra Mitchell
>Chloe Vevrier
>Milena Verba
>Trinity Loren (especially after the baby)
>Ines Cudna
>Angi
>subgirlie
>Mariko Morikawa
>Gina La Montana
>Kerry Marie
>
>to throw out just a few names at random.
>
>Beautiful women all.
>
Never heard of (let alone saw) any of 'em, so I can't comment.
Except to point out that when a man says a woman is beautiful he
doesn't mean the same thing as when he says a tree or a sunset is
beautiful.
Andre Lieven
This attempted linkage is a straw man. Heres why: What tends to be
the preferred and hard wired ranges of fertility/sexual attractiveness
is similar, across all human cultures. Colour only comes into it, on a
" this is what I am/am used to " basis. Two separate things.
> shouldn't take them or shouldn't be allowed to take them, is bigotry.
Or, a figurative expression. Not everyone who says " There oughta be a
law " is actually lobbying for said law.
> Similarly, stating one doesn't think Janet Jackson shouldn't have shown of
> part of her breast at a football game is an expression of personal taste.
> Had one stated that she shouldn't have done it (or shouldn't have been
> allowed to do it) because of her skin colour, would have been an
> expression of bigotry.
I don't think that staying within the *legal* limits of a public
medium is a matter of " bigotry ", unless one wants to overuse
" bigotry " so as to render it functionally meaningless and
Jello-like.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:aovd42x...@mail.sfchat.org:
> Matthew B. Tepper <o...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> arch...@sfchat.org (Nate Edel) wrote:
>> > Personally, I'll simply join whoeveritwas who said before that he was
>> > going to buy the book when it comes out, assuming it's easily found
>> > here in the states, and that I can't find scans to download first.
>> > Pay for pr0n? Not if I can help it...
>>
>> If it's for a good charitable cause, why not support it? You do what
>> you like, and I'll do what I like.
>
> Granted; my post came out wrong.
>
> If and when I run across it, I might well buy it to support the charity;
> I'd forgotten the "for charity" part, and was focussing more on the
> question of "why would you want to see her nude" and adding my point
> that just about anything pr0n wise will eventually be posted on
> alt.binaries.* and/or some short-lived free site.
Fair enough. I may well wish to "sample" the pictures electronically
before deciding whether to buy, after all. And if I feel that the charity
is worth supporting, and the price is not absurdly high, I of course
reserve the right to buy the book.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:Xns95871573...@130.133.1.4:
> "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:Xns95868690315...@207.217.125.201:
>
>> More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss.
>
> I always find it puzzling when I hear this still said of Moss - while it
> was certainly true she was the typical waif model in the early 90's, you
> have to remember she was in her mid-to-late teens back then.
>
> She has never been big, but she certainly has a figure now - i.e a bust,
> hips, and a waist in between. Definitely not a stick.
So she finally ate that piece of toast?
Andre Lieven
Dave Weingart (phyd...@liii.com) writes:
> One day in Teletubbyland, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) said:
>>> Yes, but expressing the view that people of certain weights shouldn't be
>>> allowed to take such photos (as some have suggested on this forum) is
>>> bigotry.
>>
>>Or, an expression of personal taste.
>
> "I don't like..." is an expression of personal taste.
>
> "... shouldn't be allowed." is not, without qualifiers such as body
> language.
I'd love to see how thats to be accomplished on Usenet... <g>
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:cl19vm$kqe$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us:
> More modern weirdness:
>
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3754206.stm>
>
> Vatican condemns EU 'inquisition'
>
> ... This word was echoed by Cardinal Martino, the head of the Vatican's
> Council for Justice and Peace, in his interview with Reuters on Monday.
>
> "It looks like a new inquisition," he said.
The usual buzzword would be "witchhunt," but evidently the Vatican still
feels some sense of historical bonding with this one.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:cl1m47$bf$1...@agate.berkeley.edu:
> In article <m27jpor...@Matt-Austerns-Computer.local>,
> Matt Austern <aus...@well.com> wrote:
>>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oyţ@earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>>> Matt Austern <aus...@well.com> appears to have caused the following
>>> letters
>>> > Former co-owner, actually. She sold her share a couple years ago.
>>>
>>> Didn't know that. Are Tom and Dave still co-owners?
>>
>>Yep, they still are. (And people who have been following this drama
>>might notice that TOCoH is still open, even though its closing was
>>announced some months ago.)
>
> Right. First it was, "OCoH is closing." Then it was, "OCoH may be
> staying open, but Tom will be leaving." I went in last Thursday and
> they were still open and Tom was still there. This is just fine with
> me.
And with me too.
Karl Johanson
Undemonstrated and irrelelvant. You can prefer fat or thin persons sexually
& that's your right & it isn't bigoted, regardless if that preference is a
result of your DNA. The point is it's bigoted to use your personal
preference to say someone of a certain weight shouldn't be allowed to pose
for nude photos.
> Colour only comes into it, on a
> " this is what I am/am used to " basis. Two separate things.
Colour preference also may or may not be genetic, or a result of
environment. So what? Preferring one colour or another sexually isn't
bigoted. Saying someone who's a certain colour shouldn't be allowed to pose
for nude photos is bigoted.
> > shouldn't take them or shouldn't be allowed to take them, is bigotry.
>
> Or, a figurative expression. Not everyone who says " There oughta be a
> law " is actually lobbying for said law.
Yes, some intend the comment humorously, rather than a specific call for a
law to ban fat people from having nude photos taken. Because a comment is
intended to be funny doesn't preclude it being bigoted. I'm sure you've come
across bigoted humour and know of what I speak, so examples aren't
necessary.
> > Similarly, stating one doesn't think Janet Jackson shouldn't have shown
of
> > part of her breast at a football game is an expression of personal
taste.
> > Had one stated that she shouldn't have done it (or shouldn't have been
> > allowed to do it) because of her skin colour, would have been an
> > expression of bigotry.
>
> I don't think that staying within the *legal* limits of a public
> medium is a matter of " bigotry ",
Read the whole paragraph. If there's objections to breasts exposed on TV
that's one thing. If there's objections specifically to women of a certain
colour exposing their breasts on TV, that's bigotry (and regardless if the
preference for certain skin colours is genetic, environmental, or a
combination).
>unless one wants to overuse
> " bigotry " so as to render it functionally meaningless and
> Jello-like.
Karl Johanson
Tim McDaniel
Matthew B. Tepper <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
>phyd...@liii.com (Dave Weingart) appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:cl1b0k$jrd$1...@eri0.s8.isp.nyc.eggn.net:
>
>> One day in Teletubbyland, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> said:
>>> More recently, the standard stick-figure waif has been Kate Moss. I
>>> would venture to guess that she has a severe eating disorder; and I find
>>> that sort of ill-health to be exceedingly unattractive. For some
>>> reason, however, I did see a rear nude photo of her and found it was
>>> okay for general use.
>>
>> Do I want to know what you used it for?
>
>I won't tell you, but Dr. Joycelyn Elders might.
Roughing the reader. Five book penalty.
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tm...@panix.com
Nate Edel
If you're curious, I'm sure Google would find photos of many of them.
> Except to point out that when a man says a woman is beautiful he
> doesn't mean the same thing as when he says a tree or a sunset is
> beautiful.
Well, granted, most of the time. I've seen a few women who I found
extremely pretty but not particularly sexually attractive, and in the former
case I'm not sure it is terribly different from finding a piece of
machinery, or a sunset or whatever beautiful.
I don't think I've ever found a tree, in and of itself, beautiful. In
context, yes, but in and of itself it's just a plant.
Nate Edel
> > my taste-range who might well elicit that sort of description from you.
>
> Nadine Jansen
> Trinity Loren (especially after the baby)
Other than perhaps Trinity Loren, all of those fall under the heading of
soft/somewhat chubby but much closer to the low end of plus sizes and not
remotely at the high end of the range I was thinking of.
While I've seen pictures of models at the high end of my taste range posted
to the net, I can't recall any names and indeed most of them I think have
been amateur.
> Audra Mitchell
I recognize the name, but can't place the picture.
> Milena Verba
> Ines Cudna
> Angi
> subgirlie
> Mariko Morikawa
> Gina La Montana
Can't place the names. Given the other women you've mentioned, it would be
worth some googling.
> to throw out just a few names at random.
> Beautiful women all.
I certainly agree in the case of the ones I recognize.
David G. Bell
arch...@sfchat.org "Nate Edel" wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
> > In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
> > Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > >Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
> >
> > But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
> > advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>
> I thought it was "never eat anything bigger than your head"?
>
> Perhaps Miss Piggy said both at different times.
>
> That said, I can think of some very attractive women at the high end of my
> taste-range who might well elicit that sort of description from you.
You might call some of this a camera effect.
Get a camera between you and the reality, and a lot of elements can
vanish. I can think of one or two British fans, well-known in the
Eighties, whose looks didn't give them any trouble in the field of
convention friskiness. I doubt that a photographer could have caught
what their appeal was based on.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."
Lee Ratner
> The minority government of Spain, the Socialists, who are staunch
> royalists, annouced and expect to be able to pass a gay marriage law.
>
It makes sense for Socialists to be staunch royalists,
monarchies, constitutional or otherwise, are less likely to be
penny-pinching than republics.
Lee Ratner
> >letters to be typed in news:10n7qi0...@corp.supernews.com:
> >
> >> In article <Xns9585E660979...@207.217.125.201>,> >>>dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) appears to have caused the following
> >>>letters to be typed in news:10n6505...@corp.supernews.com:
> >>>>
> >>>> Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
> >>>> prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
> >>>> Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
> >>>
> >>>years, and was at a weight similar to that regarded as acceptable by the
> >>>media. When she was full-figured, I found her very attractive. Even
> >>>thin, she still has a very cute face and nice coloring (if one likes
> >>>redheads).
> >>
> >> I don't remember her ever being "thin". Still, we all have our own
> >> ideas about the line of demarcation between thin, trim, curvaceous,
> >> deliciously _zaftig_, plump, fat, obese, and morbidly obese. I wouldn't
> >> call her "morbidly obese" even at her worst.
> >
> >I've found some women up to the low end of "obese" to be quite attractive,
> >although in my case a good contributing factor is an hourglass shape rather
> >than a pear shape (or what Midwestern fan Valli Hoski used to call "ovoid").
>
> On the other hand, I generally don't find anyone above "curvaceous"
> to be physically attractive to me. "Zaftig" isn't a useful concept in
> my head-space. Think Kate Winslet in _Titanic_ to bring in another
> thread... very attractive, but that's about the high end of my comfort
> range.
>
I'm not a big fan of the very slender look, it always looked so unhealthy to me.
Nancy Lebovitz
Richard Eney <dic...@radix.net> wrote:
>In article <g3b7n0hbsaamfumuq...@4ax.com>,
>>>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>>>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>>
>>>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>>>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>>
>>pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>
>only to the relatively harmless kind.
Aside from the difficulty of identifying which attractions are morbid,
what evidence do you have for that claim?
--
--
Nancy Lebovitz http://www.nancybuttons.com
"We've tamed the lightning and taught sand to give error messages."
http://livejournal.com/users/nancylebov
Nancy Lebovitz
Matthew B. Tepper <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:g3b7n0hbsaamfumuq...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:05:22 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>> Heydt) wrote:
>>>In article <0ul6n0du7f6mh8j27...@4ax.com>,
>>>Alan Woodford <al...@bortas.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Some of us prefer ladies who look as if they have eaten recently.
>>>
>>>But ladies who look as if they have ignored Miss Piggy's classic
>>>advice: "Never eat anything you can't lift"?
>>
>> If someone wants to buy naked pictures of a woman who weighs 600
>> pounds, what problem is that of yours?
>>
>> disgusting, well, I'm sorry, but that's your problem, not hers.
>
>I wonder if _Women En Large_ could count as peripherally ObSF since there
>is a co-owner of a well-known SF bookstore in it?
The SF isn't OB around here, but _Women En Large_ has more fannish
connection than that......a number of the subjects of the photographs
are fans, and Laurie Edison has been selling her jewelry at conventions
for a lot of years.
Philip Chee
> Yeah. Next thing you know, they might start listening to bubblegum
> pop, watching anime or even *shudder* voting for someone I Don't
> Approve Of.
Wait a minute there. Let's see.
I listen to Tommy February6 [check].
I watch Full Metal Panic [check].
I once voted for The Official Raving Loony Monster Party [check].
Oh gosh! I'm doomed! doomed!
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
* TagZilla 0.052
Philip Chee
> More modern weirdness:
>
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3754206.stm>
>
> Vatican condemns EU 'inquisition'
>
> .... This word was echoed by Cardinal Martino, the head of the
> Vatican's Council for Justice and Peace, in his interview with Reuters
> on Monday.
>
> "It looks like a new inquisition," he said.
My local Catholic weekly newsletter is full of articles like this. To
hear it tell there is a vast conspiracy by secular forces and that the
Catholic faith is under sustained and unrelenting attack [I think the
word progrom was mentioned - good grief] by the godless gay loving pro
death anti family minions of \H\e\l\l the EU.
This is interspersed with articles about the horrors of cloning and stem
cell research complete with LARGE SCARE QUOTES.
I sometimes wonder what sort of illegal substances some of my
co-relegionists are smoking.
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]Nothing is 100% certain, bug free or IBM compatible.
* TagZilla 0.052
Dave Weingart
>> Yeah. Next thing you know, they might start listening to bubblegum
>> pop, watching anime or even *shudder* voting for someone I Don't
>> Approve Of.
>
>Wait a minute there. Let's see.
>I listen to Tommy February6 [check].
>I watch Full Metal Panic [check].
>I once voted for The Official Raving Loony Monster Party [check].
>
>Oh gosh! I'm doomed! doomed!
No, you fail the third test, so you're safe for now.
But we'll have our eyes on you, Citizen.
Dave Weingart
>"Should be prevented by the Geneva Convention" is a qualifier analogous
>to body language.
Not necessarily. When I say that the highland pipes should be banned
under the Geneva Convention, I am utterly serious.
Especially when they're played where I can hear them.
Andre Lieven
So, the saying " its just an expression " is without any contextual
meaning to you ?
>> Colour only comes into it, on a
>> " this is what I am/am used to " basis. Two separate things.
>
> Colour preference also may or may not be genetic, or a result of
> environment. So what? Preferring one colour or another sexually isn't
> bigoted. Saying someone who's a certain colour shouldn't be allowed to
> pose for nude photos is bigoted.
Yet, its not the same kind of preference...
>> > shouldn't take them or shouldn't be allowed to take them, is bigotry.
>>
>> Or, a figurative expression. Not everyone who says " There oughta be a
>> law " is actually lobbying for said law.
>
> Yes, some intend the comment humorously, rather than a specific call for a
> law to ban fat people from having nude photos taken. Because a comment is
> intended to be funny doesn't preclude it being bigoted. I'm sure you've
> come across bigoted humour and know of what I speak, so examples aren't
> necessary.
Zero tolernace policies tend to equate to zero thinking policies...
>> > Similarly, stating one doesn't think Janet Jackson shouldn't have shown
>> > of part of her breast at a football game is an expression of personal
> taste.
>> > Had one stated that she shouldn't have done it (or shouldn't have been
>> > allowed to do it) because of her skin colour, would have been an
>> > expression of bigotry.
>>
>> I don't think that staying within the *legal* limits of a public
>> medium is a matter of " bigotry ",
>
> Read the whole paragraph. If there's objections to breasts exposed on TV
> that's one thing. If there's objections specifically to women of a certain
> colour exposing their breasts on TV, that's bigotry (and regardless if the
> preference for certain skin colours is genetic, environmental, or a
> combination).
Well, since no one but you said that, and since I've already explained
how it's a straw man, it's wholly irrelevent.
Not every preference is prejudice. And, even prejudice has a useful
place, in that we use prejudices that we call " experience/judgements "
in our lives. Like " thats a crappy brand, I'll not buy it again. "
>>unless one wants to overuse
>> " bigotry " so as to render it functionally meaningless and
>> Jello-like.
Indeed.
Karl Johanson
Non-sequitre.
> >> Colour only comes into it, on a
> >> " this is what I am/am used to " basis. Two separate things.
> >
> > Colour preference also may or may not be genetic, or a result of
> > environment. So what? Preferring one colour or another sexually isn't
> > bigoted. Saying someone who's a certain colour shouldn't be allowed to
> > pose for nude photos is bigoted.
>
> Yet, its not the same kind of preference...
One is a personal preference, one is an example of bigotry. That bigotry
often can have roots in personal preference doesn't change that they aren't
the same thing.
No, your relation of whether staying within legal limits was the strawman. A
valid tangent if that's where you want the conversation to go, as long as
it's presented a such.
Please note my use of the term 'if' showing a hypothetical situation, to use
as a comparison. I didn't attribute the attitude to anyone specifically.
> Not every preference is prejudice.
I already agreed with that point.
Karl Johanson
Bill Higgins
> One day in Teletubbyland, David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nospam.com> said:
> >"Should be prevented by the Geneva Convention" is a qualifier analogous
> >to body language.
>
> Not necessarily. When I say that the highland pipes should be banned
> under the Geneva Convention, I am utterly serious.
>
> Especially when they're played where I can hear them.
Avoid Batesville, Arkansas.
At Lyon College, they study and preserve Scottish culture, and many students
play the bagpipes. The main building has a charming weathervane that's a
silhouette of a piper. Barry Gehm teaches there.
My sister went to visit Barry and Jo, and brought me home a T-shirt that
reads:
LYON COLLEGE
Where the bagpipes never stop playing...
[in teeny print, lower down on the shirt:]
...ever.
--
Bill Higgins | "Get the dinosaurs in, Martha,
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory | they're predicting comets."
Internet: hig...@fnal.gov | --Dr. Barry D. Gehm
Dave Weingart
>My sister went to visit Barry and Jo, and brought me home a T-shirt that
>reads:
>
> LYON COLLEGE
> Where the bagpipes never stop playing...
>
>
>
>[in teeny print, lower down on the shirt:]
>
>
> ...ever.
I think my favorite comment on the pipes was in an old Nynex Yellow
Pages ad on the radio, talking to a supposed advertiser who ran
a bagpipe school.
"How long does it take a typical student to master the bagpipes?"
"You never really master them. The most you can hope for is a sort
of uneasy truce."
Tim McDaniel
Lee Ratner <czar...@aol.com> wrote:
>tm...@panix.com (Tim McDaniel) wrote in message news:<ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us>...
>> The minority government of Spain, the Socialists, who are staunch
>> royalists, annouced and expect to be able to pass a gay marriage
>> law.
>
> It makes sense for Socialists to be staunch royalists,
You missed the irony of *Spanish* Socialists being royalist.
The Socialists deposed the king of Spain in the 1930s, I believe,
helping to spark Franco's Fascist revolt. Franco was a hard
conservative and he specified a royal state to succeed him.
Though, in recent reading, I gather that a lot of Spaniards are not
royalists per se but Juan Carlosists, since it was his strict
British-style monarchy approach and his intervention against the
attempted military coup in 1979 (?) that fostered modern democratic
Spain.
Tim McDaniel
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my> wrote:
>On 18 Oct 2004 15:44:38 -0500, Tim McDaniel wrote:
>
>> More modern weirdness:
>>
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3754206.stm>
>>
>> Vatican condemns EU 'inquisition'
>
>To hear it tell there is a vast conspiracy by secular forces and that
>the Catholic faith is under sustained and unrelenting attack
Did you perhaps miss my point that the Catholic Church was condemning
it by calling it an "Inquisition", a term that the CC proudly bore for
many years?
Though apparently the Inquisition has gotten a bit too *bad* a rap.
<http://www.cog.org/witch_hunt.html>, "Recent Developments in the Study
of The Great European Witch Hunt", by Jenny Gibbons, says that the
Inquisition was often a moderating force, because witch crazes tended
to be local frenzies. I found the full article to be fascinating.
David Bilek
The not-slender look has the same connotations for me. Maybe its all
about health? In my mind fatness is inextricably linked with poor
health.
-David
Karl Johanson
news:cl34p3$9jm$1...@eri0.s8.isp.nyc.eggn.net...
> One day in Teletubbyland, David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nospam.com>
said:
> >"Should be prevented by the Geneva Convention" is a qualifier analogous
> >to body language.
>
> Not necessarily. When I say that the highland pipes should be banned
> under the Geneva Convention, I am utterly serious.
>
> Especially when they're played where I can hear them.
It's especially cruel to the poor cat screaming inside. I say, let the cat
out of the bag!
Karl Johanson
Matthew B. Tepper
to be typed in news:cl3k8g$qdp$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us:
> You missed the irony of *Spanish* Socialists being royalist. The
> Socialists deposed the king of Spain in the 1930s, I believe, helping to
> spark Franco's Fascist revolt. Franco was a hard conservative and he
> specified a royal state to succeed him.
>
> Though, in recent reading, I gather that a lot of Spaniards are not
> royalists per se but Juan Carlosists, since it was his strict British-style
> monarchy approach and his intervention against the attempted military coup
> in 1979 (?) that fostered modern democratic Spain.
It was precisely that event that caused me to realize that maybe there *is*
some use for monarchies, under certain conditions, and with appropriate
limitations.
Matthew B. Tepper
> Did you perhaps miss my point that the Catholic Church was condemning
> it by calling it an "Inquisition", a term that the CC proudly bore for
> many years?
I think I sort of figured it out.
Robert Sneddon
Matthew B. Tepper <?@earthlink.net.invalid> writes
>
>It was precisely that event that caused me to realize that maybe there *is*
>some use for monarchies, under certain conditions, and with appropriate
>limitations.
They're called constitutional monarchies. In the UK this is somewhat
contrarian as we don't have a written constitution, just a large number
of very old habits flying in close formation.
--
Email me via nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
This address no longer accepts HTML posts.
Robert Sneddon
Seth Breidbart
Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>Read the whole paragraph. If there's objections to breasts exposed on TV
>that's one thing. If there's objections specifically to women of a certain
>colour exposing their breasts on TV, that's bigotry (and regardless if the
>preference for certain skin colours is genetic, environmental, or a
>combination).
What if the objection is to women of a certain size exposing their
breasts on TV?
Seth
Seth Breidbart
Andre Lieven <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>Dave Weingart (phyd...@liii.com) writes:
>> "I don't like..." is an expression of personal taste.
>>
>> "... shouldn't be allowed." is not, without qualifiers such as body
>> language.
>
>I'd love to see how thats to be accomplished on Usenet... <g>
^^^
Close enough?
Seth
Ghod
news:I5r9D...@kithrup.com...
: In article <10n6505...@corp.supernews.com>,
: Richard Eney <dic...@radix.net> wrote:
: >In article <ckrls2$aq1$1...@tmcd.austin.tx.us>,
: >Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
: >>
: >>Sarah, Duchess of York, lives with a man who is not her husband:
: >>her ex-husband, whom she has no plans to re-wed. She is going to
: >>pose for a charity book of photographs, nude except for four-inch
: >>heels and some jewelry.
: >
: >Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used
to
: >prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna
Nicole
: >Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
: Watch out, Dick, last time I expressed my opinion that fat bodies
: ought to conceal themselves from the eyes of others, I got flamed
: for three weeks.
As well you should.
Ghod
"Lee Ratner" <czar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:59117524.04101...@posting.google.com...
: I'm not a big fan of the very slender look, it always looked so
unhealthy to me.
That's probably because it IS unhealthy.
Seth Breidbart
Dave Weingart <phyd...@liii.com> wrote:
>One day in Teletubbyland, dic...@radix.net (Richard Eney) said:
>>Isn't there something in the Geneva Convention that could be used to
>>prevent this? Last shots I saw of Fergie, she looked like Anna Nicole
>>Smith at a high point in her weight cycle.
>
>
>If it bugs you, you're always free to not look, eh?
And on top of that, it's about something being published in a book.
It's really easy not to buy a book. (Well, for some people. Those
who have seen my apartment might differ.)
Seth
Mark Jones
> I think my favorite comment on the pipes was in an old Nynex Yellow
> Pages ad on the radio, talking to a supposed advertiser who ran
> a bagpipe school.
>
> "How long does it take a typical student to master the bagpipes?"
> "You never really master them. The most you can hope for is a sort
> of uneasy truce."
My favorite comment on the pipes (and I no longer remember where I first
heard it) was "The bagpipes are the only musical instrument that looks
and sounds like you're holding a cat under your arm and biting its tail."
Ghod
news:cl1fea$t4d$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
: face any consequences from it ( Including criticism )
Straw man
are known
: by one word: children.
Ad Hominem
Joy, oh joy.......
Tim McDaniel
Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In the UK this is somewhat contrarian as we don't have a written
>constitution, just a large number of very old habits flying in close
>formation.
Sister Bertrille got the rest of Convent San Tanco to lose some weight?
(I love that summary of the British constitution, by the way.)
Ghod
:...meaningless and Jello-like.
Hey, don't put down Jello, he's far from meaningless!
Ghod
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nospam.com> said:
: >"Should be prevented by the Geneva Convention" is a qualifier
analogous
: >to body language.
:
: Not necessarily. When I say that the highland pipes should be
banned
: under the Geneva Convention, I am utterly serious.
:
: Especially when they're played where I can hear them.
I feel sorry for you, and all the other poor, sad, freaks who hate
good music.
David Tomlin
> Not wanting to see fat people (or thin people, or anyone else) nude isn't
> bigotry.
Yes, it is.
As a nudist, I am deeply offended.
A.C.
Maybe they just like the flourishes you can get with a monarchy. Not
so long ago I was in a Spanish airport and heard over the loudspeaker,
"By Royal Decree, smoking is not allowed."
Dave Weingart
>I feel sorry for you, and all the other poor, sad, freaks who hate
>good music.
I dub thee troll.
But de gustibus and all that; you're more than welcome to enjoy the
loud, whining annoying sounds that the pipes produce.
I have two kids for that.
Dorothy J Heydt
Dave Weingart <phyd...@liii.com> wrote:
>One day in Teletubbyland, "Ghod" <gh...@ameritech.net> said:
>>I feel sorry for you, and all the other poor, sad, freaks who hate
>>good music.
>
>I dub thee troll.
>
>But de gustibus and all that; you're more than welcome to enjoy the
>loud, whining annoying sounds that the pipes produce.
I like bagpipes fine, except first thing in the morning. One
morning at an SCA camping event someone fired up his pipes even
before the herald had gone off (that's 8 AM in the West Kingdom)
and I stuck my head out of my tent and told him what I thought in
such detail that a bystander said to Hal (whose head by now had
also been extruded from the tent) "She's pregnant, right?" Wrong.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com