what the phrase" your mother wears army boots" means?

[sude...@gmail.com]

hi, everyone, could you tell me the meaning of the following prase
"your mother wears army boots" ? When I read a novel, I meet it.As you
know, i am not a native english speaker.
thank you.

[Ray O'Hara]

<sude...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1167599083.0...@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

Its a taunt about how poor one was. Army boots were cheap and in good supply
after WWII. Nobody uses it anymore except for comedic purposes.

[Oleg Lego]

The sude...@gmail.com entity posted thusly:

It's an insult. I always took it as shorthand for "Your mother puts
out (supplies sexual favours) for the troops, and in return receives
gifts, army boots being, effectively, a very low price."

[Mike Lyle]

On the same tack, I thought it implied that the mother needed solid
footwear because she walked the streets so much.

"I've been up and down those stairs twenty times today!"
"Ooh, Flossie! Your poor feet!"

--
Mike.

[tinwhistler]

Ray O'Hara wrote:

> Its a taunt about how poor one was. Army boots were cheap and in good supply
> after WWII. Nobody uses it anymore except for comedic purposes.

Sam Clements says there is a 1956 usage of record ("shoes" instead of
"boots"), and that the phrase probably got started during WWII:

http://p211.ezboard.com/mother-wears-army-boots/fwordoriginsorgfrm2.showMessage?topicID=288.topic
[excerpt:]

samclem
(3/6/02 6:10 am)

your mother "Your mother" was a not-uncommon phrase starting about
1900 and used as an insult, especially by kids.

The addition of boots of various descriptions can be cited from 1956,
specifically "your mother wears army shoes."

Probably originated during WWII. [end excerpt]

Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego

[Pat Durkin]

"Oleg Lego" <rat@atatatat..com> wrote in message
news:ms9gp21ofib6kei51...@4ax.com...

I've always, it seems, associated the term with "camp-follower". Of
course the meaning of sexual favors is inherent. In other words "Your
mother was a whore, and you are and SOB."

As for the boots being payment. . .well, maybe. More likely she picked
up thrown-aways and other trash around the army camp, did some cooking
and put out for all comers, if only to feed her body, and her kids.

I am trying to remember if the "hooch girls" and "hooch mamas" were from
the Korean era or Vietnam (for US usage).
>

[Robert Bannister]

Pat Durkin wrote:

> "Oleg Lego" <rat@atatatat..com> wrote in message
> news:ms9gp21ofib6kei51...@4ax.com...
>

>>

>>It's an insult. I always took it as shorthand for "Your mother puts
>>out (supplies sexual favours) for the troops, and in return receives
>>gifts, army boots being, effectively, a very low price."
>
>
> I've always, it seems, associated the term with "camp-follower". Of
> course the meaning of sexual favors is inherent. In other words "Your
> mother was a whore, and you are and SOB."

Strange that "Your mother wears silk/nylon stockings" never became an
insult in England. (It was known that the only possessors of silk or
nylon stockings had obtained them from American servicemen).
--
Rob Bannister

[Karl Reinhardt]

Apparently I am the only commenter who always assumed that this expression
meant "your mother is a bull dyke".
(For non-English speakers, a bull dyke is a masculine lesbian.)

Karl, who was a kid in WWII.

"Mike Lyle" <mike_l...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1167600503....@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[Pat Durkin]

"Robert Bannister" <rob...@it.net.au> wrote in message
news:4vquc1F...@mid.individual.net...

Maybe. I think both nylon and silk were rationed during the WWII, or so
expensive that no one could afford them. But I have heard the
"camp-follower" applied to wars and armies that existed long before
WWII. I suspect the "army boots" is a bit older than WWII, as well.

Maybe, just maybe, enough respectable women associated with US
servicemen that gifts from the soldiers merited little more than a
shrug. There are so many goings-on in a society under stress that they
don't sweat the small stuff.

[bayskater]

"Karl Reinhardt" <KarlR...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:pQXlh.8327$yC5....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...

> Apparently I am the only commenter who always assumed that this expression
> meant "your mother is a bull dyke".
> (For non-English speakers, a bull dyke is a masculine lesbian.)
>

For that meaning I've heard "Your mother wears jockey shorts".

Fred''

[Sara Lorimer]

Oleg Lego <rat@atatatat..com> wrote:

I am naive. I always thought it meant "Your mother, a mannish person, is
in the army." Your version makes more sense.

--
SML

[R J Valentine]

On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 19:12:41 GMT Murray Arnow <ar...@iname.com> wrote:

} Sara Lorimer wrote:
}>Oleg Lego wrote:
}>
}>> The sudechao posted thusly:

}>>
}>> > hi, everyone, could you tell me the meaning of the following prase
}>> >"your mother wears army boots" ? When I read a novel, I meet it.As you
}>> >know, i am not a native english speaker.
}>> > thank you.
}>>
}>> It's an insult. I always took it as shorthand for "Your mother puts
}>> out (supplies sexual favours) for the troops, and in return receives
}>> gifts, army boots being, effectively, a very low price."
}>
}>I am naive. I always thought it meant "Your mother, a mannish person, is
}>in the army." Your version makes more sense.
}>
}

} It does make sense, and it's as good an urban legend as any other, but it
} doesn't mesh with the colloquial usage I recall.
...

Same here. Plus which, the idiom where I was was "Your mother wears
combat boots." Plus which, my godmother (who was plenty feminine and in
the Army) _did_ wear combat boots when the occasion warranted. When I was
in basic I missed mail call once, and the company commander, the first
sergeant, and the mail clerk kindly delivered a letter from her to me in
the barracks that night. Turns out they were wondering why I was getting
mail from someone who outranked them all.

--
rjv

[BW]

Now THAT'S the army I remember! We had some kid who they suspected
was connected to some Congressman so they gave him the red carpet
treatment.

I tend to agree with Murray and you, and I also remember it as "Your
mother wears combat boots." It always seemed to be a non-joke that
was a kid's introduction to cliches.

BW

[Mike Lyle]

BW wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 02:48:23 +0000 (UTC), R J Valentine
> <r...@TheWorld.com> wrote:

[...]

> >Same here. Plus which, the idiom where I was was "Your mother wears
> >combat boots." Plus which, my godmother (who was plenty feminine and in
> >the Army) _did_ wear combat boots when the occasion warranted. When I was
> >in basic I missed mail call once, and the company commander, the first
> >sergeant, and the mail clerk kindly delivered a letter from her to me in
> >the barracks that night. Turns out they were wondering why I was getting
> >mail from someone who outranked them all.
>
> Now THAT'S the army I remember! We had some kid who they suspected
> was connected to some Congressman so they gave him the red carpet
> treatment.

[...]

Whereas, in Otherpondian units such an unfortunate, if noticed at all,
would generally be shat on from no negligible altitude in the interests
of fair and equal treatment.

--
Mike.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"tinwhistler" <ozzie...@post.harvard.edu> writes:

"Boots" appears to date only to the late 1970s. Google Books turns up
two hits before 1980 (Arthur Roth's 1976_The Secret Lover of Elmtree_
and Ted Tally's 1978 _Hooters_). It first shows up in the _New York
Times_ in August, 1978 and in the _Los Angeles Times_ in March, 1975.

With "shoes" I can get it back to 1967:

The New Left turned out to picket George Wallace when he arrived
for a rally at the American Legion Hall here the other day, and
one of the handpainted placards declared: "Wallace's mother wears
Army shoes." [_NY Times_, 12/12/1967]

Interestingly, there's a 1961 episode of _Dobie Gillis_ entitled "Aah
Yer Fadder Wears Army Shoes" in which "Dobie tries to impress a WAC by
telling her his father is a war hero." [_LA Times_, 5/28/1961]

I'm almost positive that the line (as "army shoes", "army boots", or
perhaps "combat boots") was popularized by Bugs Bunny cartoons, but I
can't find a reference to a specific cartoon.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Your claim might have more
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |credibility if you hadn't mispelled
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"inteligent"

kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[gera...@earthlink.net]

Like Kirshembaum, I too remember (although I can't recall the specific cartoons) that Warner Brothers used this insult multiple times (including at least once by Bugs Bunny). I have no doubt about that recollection, because as a youth it struck me as a very strange and hard-to-explain insult. As an adult it seems obvious to me that if this was a popular expression during WW2 it must have in at least some cases been to call someone's mom a prostitute. However, I can't imagine that Warner Brothers would have dared used it in such a sense, or even more that the censors of the day would have let it slip throw. NO WAY! So my guess is that it had 2 meanings, one more innocent (that she was so poor that she had to buy army surplus) and the other that she was a prostitute. It may be that the stronger insult was the original, but the public picked it up and treated it as a more innocent and lighter insult. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

[David Kleinecke]

On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 2:39:23 PM UTC-7, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
> Like Kirshembaum, I too remember (although I can't recall the specific cartoons) that Warner Brothers used this insult multiple times (including at least once by Bugs Bunny). I have no doubt about that recollection, because as a youth it struck me as a very strange and hard-to-explain insult. As an adult it seems obvious to me that if this was a popular expression during WW2 it must have in at least some cases been to call someone's mom a prostitute. However, I can't imagine that Warner Brothers would have dared used it in such a sense, or even more that the censors of the day would have let it slip throw. NO WAY! So my guess is that it had 2 meanings, one more innocent (that she was so poor that she had to buy army surplus) and the other that she was a prostitute. It may be that the stronger insult was the original, but the public picked it up and treated it as a more innocent and lighter insult. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

Welcome back, old thread.

I always thought it was a conscious parody of the "yo mama"
class of insults.

[Lewis]

In message <8b6e8fc2-44f6-4728...@googlegroups.com> gera...@earthlink.net <gera...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Like Kirshembaum, I too remember (although I can't recall the specific
> cartoons) that Warner Brothers used this insult multiple times
> (including at least once by Bugs Bunny). I have no doubt about that
> recollection, because as a youth it struck me as a very strange and
> hard-to-explain insult.

Really? "Your mother is not feminine and is so unfeminine she wears the
most masculine item anyone can possibly think of" is a hard-to-explain
insult in the 1930s and/or 40s?

> As an adult it seems obvious to me that if
> this was a popular expression during WW2 it must have in at least some
> cases been to call someone's mom a prostitute.

Where do you get that idea from?

> However, I can't
> imagine that Warner Brothers would have dared used it in such a sense,
> or even more that the censors of the day would have let it slip throw.
> NO WAY! So my guess is that it had 2 meanings, one more innocent
> (that she was so poor that she had to buy army surplus)

There was no army surplus, all those items were being used actively by
the army.

> and the other that she was a prostitute.

You'd need to back that up with a shred of evidence.

--
E is for ERNEST who choked on a peach
F is for FANNY sucked dry by a leech

[Peter Moylan]

On 03/07/18 10:02, Lewis wrote:
> In message <8b6e8fc2-44f6-4728...@googlegroups.com>
> gera...@earthlink.net <gera...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>> Like Kirshembaum, I too remember (although I can't recall the
>> specific cartoons) that Warner Brothers used this insult multiple
>> times (including at least once by Bugs Bunny). I have no doubt
>> about that recollection, because as a youth it struck me as a very
>> strange and hard-to-explain insult.

Welcome back, Evan, by the way. It's been years.

> Really? "Your mother is not feminine and is so unfeminine she wears
> the most masculine item anyone can possibly think of" is a
> hard-to-explain insult in the 1930s and/or 40s?
>
>> As an adult it seems obvious to me that if this was a popular
>> expression during WW2 it must have in at least some cases been to
>> call someone's mom a prostitute.
>
> Where do you get that idea from?

The same place I got it, apparently. Where did she get the boots from?

What other interpretation is possible? In those days there were no army
surplus stores. The only way to get army boots was to know a soldier.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Tony Cooper]

I don't think that "knowing a soldier" suggests prostitution. During
WWII, when husbands and boyfriends were overseas or in other theaters,
women did have relationships with soldiers stationed where the woman
was. Not paid relationships; just relationships.

Besides, I don't think the saying suggests that army boots are
involved at all. It's just a metaphor for insulting the woman because
she's crude and/or manly.

The more current version of this form of insult is the "Yo mama"
jokes.

https://bestlifeonline.com/yo-mama-jokes/

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 00:35:31 +1000, Peter Moylan
<pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 03/07/18 10:02, Lewis wrote:
>> In message <8b6e8fc2-44f6-4728...@googlegroups.com>
>> gera...@earthlink.net <gera...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> Like Kirshembaum, I too remember (although I can't recall the
>>> specific cartoons) that Warner Brothers used this insult multiple
>>> times (including at least once by Bugs Bunny). I have no doubt
>>> about that recollection, because as a youth it struck me as a very
>>> strange and hard-to-explain insult.
>
>Welcome back, Evan, by the way. It's been years.

This is a revived thread. It was revived by gera...@earthlink.net who
replied to a message Evan posted on 04/01/2007:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.usage.english/QlfBGTowPzo/FL1KhjP-hVMJ

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[CDB]

On 7/3/2018 11:35 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> Lewis wrote:

[army boots as badge of shame]

>>> Really? "Your mother is not feminine and is so unfeminine she
>>> wears the most masculine item anyone can possibly think of" is a
>>> hard-to-explain insult in the 1930s and/or 40s?

>>>> As an adult it seems obvious to me that if this was a popular
>>>> expression during WW2 it must have in at least some cases been
>>>> to call someone's mom a prostitute.

>>> Where do you get that idea from?

>> The same place I got it, apparently. Where did she get the boots
>> from?

>> What other interpretation is possible? In those days there were no
>> army surplus stores. The only way to get army boots was to know a
>> soldier.

> I don't think that "knowing a soldier" suggests prostitution.
> During WWII, when husbands and boyfriends were overseas or in other
> theaters, women did have relationships with soldiers stationed where
> the woman was. Not paid relationships; just relationships.

Even in my lifetime, it would have been an insult to a woman to
say she was having even friendly sex with a soldier she wasn't married
to. The act was common enough, of course, but it was offensive
to say it of a woman in public.

> Besides, I don't think the saying suggests that army boots are
> involved at all. It's just a metaphor for insulting the woman
> because she's crude and/or manly.

I'm sure that was how it was explained to the innocent. "It means a man
who does another man an injury behind his back, Ma'am."

I hold with those who favour "camp-follower".

> The more current version of this form of insult is the "Yo mama"
> jokes.

> https://bestlifeonline.com/yo-mama-jokes/

Yo mama so old, she got antique dealers searching through her wrinkles.

I don't think the jokes go back as far as the boots, though.

[Tony Cooper]

I agree, but there was quite a difference between suggesting a woman
was having sex with a soldier not her husband, and suggesting that she
was a prostitute.

There are stories about British, French, and German women who took up
with American GIs during WWII and post-War for nylons and PX items.
Not quite prostitution, but sex-for-benefits.

[Peter Moylan]

On 04/07/18 01:35, Tony Cooper wrote:

> The more current version of this form of insult is the "Yo mama"
> jokes.

Don't try to tell any to Yo Yo Ma.

[musika]

On 04/07/2018 06:30, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/07/18 01:35, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> The more current version of this form of insult is the "Yo mama"
>> jokes.
>
> Don't try to tell any to Yo Yo Ma.
>

He said in an interview something like, "If I'd have been born in
Brooklyn I would have been named Yo Ma Ma."

--
Ray
UK

[CDB]

On 7/3/2018 3:00 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

I agree. I meant to say that the notion of payment wasn't necessary to
make it an effective insult.

> There are stories about British, French, and German women who took up
> with American GIs during WWII and post-War for nylons and PX items.
> Not quite prostitution, but sex-for-benefits.

Maybe, on a case-for-case basis. The role of provider is traditional
for male humans, and courting-gifts are an old custom. In a desperate
hour, practical arrangements could be seen in that light.

[gera...@earthlink.net]

Of course accepting gifts from a boyfriend doesn't mean that a female is a prostitute. If a man is fond of a female, it's perfectly natural to want to give her little gifts. It's more than politeness or a social custom, it's just a natural expression of wanting to show one's affection in a tangible way. That's assuming she genuinely likes you and enjoys your company. If she doesn't like you or enjoy your company (even if you like HER and enjoy HER company) and she goes out with you anyway, that's crossing the line into prostitution. Even if they aren't having sex. (I once heard 2 women talking and one asked the other why she casually dates a man whose company she doesn't enjoy at all. The other replied: "It's a free meal." Isn't that a species of prostitution?)

But back to the point I made and which none of the responders seem to have appreciated, I'll repeat it more clearly. The censors were very strict in those days. If this phrase had clear sexual connotations to everyone, there isn't a chance in hell the censors would have let those references pass. Therefore it must have had a meaning at WB and to the censors that was perfectly innocent and not sexual at all.

That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that there must have been different meanings in different circles: one innocent and one a strong insult.

P.S. I contributed to this very old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture, those 2 words are fighting words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.

[CDB]

On 7/4/2018 10:04 AM, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:

> Of course accepting gifts from a boyfriend doesn't mean that a female
> is a prostitute. If a man is fond of a female, it's perfectly
> natural to want to give her little gifts. It's more than politeness
> or a social custom, it's just a natural expression of wanting to show
> one's affection in a tangible way. That's assuming she genuinely
> likes you and enjoys your company. If she doesn't like you or enjoy
> your company (even if you like HER and enjoy HER company) and she
> goes out with you anyway, that's crossing the line into prostitution.
> Even if they aren't having sex. (I once heard 2 women talking and
> one asked the other why she casually dates a man whose company she
> doesn't enjoy at all. The other replied: "It's a free meal." Isn't
> that a species of prostitution?)

> But back to the point I made and which none of the responders seem to
> have appreciated, I'll repeat it more clearly. The censors were very
> strict in those days. If this phrase had clear sexual connotations
> to everyone, there isn't a chance in hell the censors would have let
> those references pass. Therefore it must have had a meaning at WB
> and to the censors that was perfectly innocent and not sexual at
> all.

I think I touched on it, with a reference to the old story about Queen
Victoria. The point was to have a "clean" alternative explanation
ready, like the one you started with.

> That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far
> stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that
> there must have been different meanings in different circles: one
> innocent and one a strong insult. P.S. I contributed to this very
> old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu
> madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture, those 2 words are fighting
> words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.

Y tus hermanas.

[Jerry Friedman]

Skitt once quoted a song in "GI German", to the tune of "Sentimental
Journey":

Du nix wollen meine grosse Liebe,
Du nur wollen Kaugummi.

Maybe I could roughly translate that as "You no wanting my big love, you
just wanting chewing gum."

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

...

And women knew soldiers as their husbands, brothers, sons, boyfriends,
and friends. I don't see any reason to think the only source of army
boots was an illicit relationship. I always took it the way Lewis
did--wearing army boots was unfeminine.

(I don't think WAC boots were involved.

http://www.stewartsmilitaryantiques.com/us-wwii-wac-ankle-boots-7-12.26493.archive.htm

)

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/4/18 8:04 AM, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
> Of course accepting gifts from a boyfriend doesn't mean that a female is a prostitute. If a man is fond of a female, it's perfectly natural to want to give her little gifts.

But they're unlikely to be army boots. I guess if she's so poor she
doesn't have adequate shoes and the only shoes her boyfriend can spare
are his old army boots, maybe.

> It's more than politeness or a social custom, it's just a natural expression of wanting to show one's affection in a tangible way. That's assuming she genuinely likes you and enjoys your company. If she doesn't like you or enjoy your company (even if you like HER and enjoy HER company) and she goes out with you anyway, that's crossing the line into prostitution. Even if they aren't having sex. (I once heard 2 women talking and one asked the other why she casually dates a man whose company she doesn't enjoy at all. The other replied: "It's a free meal." Isn't that a species of prostitution?)

I think it's officially known as /Prostitutio golddiggera/.

> But back to the point I made and which none of the responders seem to have appreciated, I'll repeat it more clearly. The censors were very strict in those days. If this phrase had clear sexual connotations to everyone, there isn't a chance in hell the censors would have let those references pass. Therefore it must have had a meaning at WB and to the censors that was perfectly innocent and not sexual at all.
>
> That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that there must have been different meanings in different circles: one innocent and one a strong insult.

Or just the innocent one. I agree that Bugs couldn't have gotten away
with "lady of the evening". (Somebody who knows the cartoons better may
be about to come up with a counterexample.)

"This little /dresske?/ It's nothing; I just use it for streetwalking."
From /The Joys of Yiddish/, not Bugs Bunny.

> P.S. I contributed to this very old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture, those 2 words are fighting words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.

There's more than one Hispanic culture, and not every Hispanic person
even has a knife suitable as a weapon or a gun, much less would use it
over an insult. Here in northern New Mexico, I've been assured by
Hispanic people that in the local culture, it's not what you say, it's
how you say it--as if that were different from other cultures. If I
were in the habit of insulting people's mothers, I'd still be careful
about "tu madre", "hijo de puta", and "hijo de la chingada", though.

--
Jerry Friedman
It was trouble for Coyote when he had no visible means of support.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2018-07-04 14:41:24 +0000, CDB said:

> On 7/4/2018 10:04 AM, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>>

>> [ … ]

>>
>> That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far
>> stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that
>> there must have been different meanings in different circles: one
>> innocent and one a strong insult. P.S. I contributed to this very
>> old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu
>> madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture,

Rather too precise a definition of "that culture". In Mexico or
Guatemala, yes, but further south less so.

>> those 2 words are fighting
>> words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.
>
> Y tus hermanas.

--
athel

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> P.S. I contributed to this very old thread the other day because
> I had just had a discussion of "tu madre" with an Hispanic. In that
> culture, those 2 words are fighting words -- answered by knives and
> guns. There is no stronger insult.
>

Oh, come on. There are far stronger insults.

_Tu madre_ is just the short version of the common _。hinga tu madre!_

--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, July 4, 2018 at 10:04:39 AM UTC-4, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:

> Of course accepting gifts from a boyfriend doesn't mean that a female is
> a prostitute. If a man is fond of a female,

Hmm. Why man ... female and not man ... woman or male ... female ?

[Lewis]

In WWII *everyone* knew a soldier, and most mothers were married to one.

--
Sam, I thought I told you never to play--

[Quinn C]

* Athel Cornish-Bowden:

> On 2018-07-04 14:41:24 +0000, CDB said:
>
>> On 7/4/2018 10:04 AM, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> [ … ]
>>>
>>> That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far
>>> stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that
>>> there must have been different meanings in different circles: one
>>> innocent and one a strong insult. P.S. I contributed to this very
>>> old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu
>>> madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture,
>
> Rather too precise a definition of "that culture". In Mexico or
> Guatemala, yes, but further south less so.

So it was too imprecise.

>>> those 2 words are fighting
>>> words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.

On the other hand, it works in a number of other cultures, too
(Russian, Arab ...)

--
Manche Dinge sind vorgeschrieben, weil man sie braucht, andere
braucht man nur, weil sie vorgeschrieben sind.
-- Helmut Richter in de.etc.sprache.deutsch

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2018-07-04 21:37:15 +0000, Quinn C said:

> * Athel Cornish-Bowden:
>
>> On 2018-07-04 14:41:24 +0000, CDB said:
>>
>>> On 7/4/2018 10:04 AM, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [ … ]
>>>>
>>>> That is not to deny that for other people it may have been a far
>>>> stronger insult about your mother's morals. What I'm saying is that
>>>> there must have been different meanings in different circles: one
>>>> innocent and one a strong insult. P.S. I contributed to this very
>>>> old thread the other day because I had just had a discussion of "tu
>>>> madre" with an Hispanic. In that culture,
>>
>> Rather too precise a definition of "that culture". In Mexico or
>> Guatemala, yes, but further south less so.
>
> So it was too imprecise.

Question of point of view, innit?

>
>>>> those 2 words are fighting
>>>> words -- answered by knives and guns. There is no stronger insult.
>
> On the other hand, it works in a number of other cultures, too
> (Russian, Arab ...)


--

athel

[bens...@mail.com]

On Sunday, December 31, 2006 at 1:04:43 PM UTC-8, sude...@gmail.com wrote:
> hi, everyone, could you tell me the meaning of the following prase
> "your mother wears army boots" ? When I read a novel, I meet it.As you
> know, i am not a native english speaker.
> thank you.

Don't know if you're still around, but here is my answer -
In the 1950’s it was a way to combat a difference of opinion – people (kids) would use that phrase if they couldn’t justify a reason for a specific behavior, usually bad, and came back with arguments that somebody else is worse, (yeah, well, your mamma wears combat boots) even if it’s untrue.
I occasionally use it now days on people when they make the argument that something, or someone else are just as bad or have done worse in order to justify their own bad behavior.

[jill9...@gmail.com]

This is how I remember the phrase being used, as well--something to say when you are on the losing end of a juvenile argument. At that time, there were Army items everywhere, in both public and private hands. I lived in a coastal state with several military installations. All of our building materials, camp gear, outdoor clothing and many local goverment buildings, etc. in the 1950's and 60's were leftovers from WWII and the Korean War. Parents never scolded kids for using the phrase, so I suspect that it wasn't insinuating loose morals, but more a comment on Mom's lack of femininity and refinement.

[gera...@earthlink.net]

Hi, thanks for your contribution to this thread. I agree that in the '50s and '60s the phrase must've been regarded as innocent. (Warner Brothers cartoons would hardly have used a phrase that had sexual connotations.) By then I don't think anyone knew exactly what it did mean, it was just something to get the last word in an argument when you couldn't think of anything convincing or witty to say. But I think some of the folks on this thread have made some good suggestions that it may not have always been so innocuous. Maybe it started out as a very strong insult in the '30s or '40s and after the war its original meaning was forgotten. Very interesting that it's very badly documented as to how far it goes back. Hmm, I just subscribed to a newspaper database, maybe I should have a look for the phrase in 1930s newspapers?"

[gera...@earthlink.net]

[Bozo_D...@37.com]

On Sunday, December 31, 2006 at 1:04:43 PM UTC-8, sude...@gmail.com wrote:
> hi, everyone, could you tell me the meaning of the following prase
> "your mother wears army boots" ? When I read a novel, I meet it.As you
> know, i am not a native english speaker.
> thank you.

It just means your mother wears army boots —— and the rest is history and Prada.

[bill van]

No, the one thing it doesn't mean is that your mother wears army boots.

It was a jovial insult that was popular among boys -- girls were more
polite -- when I was about 11 years old.
Nobody took it seriously because nobody's mother actually wore army
boots, so everyone knew
it was meant to be funny, not point to anything real.

bill

[Peter Moylan]

On 10/02/19 05:41, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:

> Hi, thanks for your contribution to this thread.

But no thanks for top-posting. It is customary in this newsgroup to
present text in the order that it is to be read. It is annoying to have
to go to the end of the article to find the context, and then go back to
the beginning to find the new contribution.

[Ken Blake]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:22:49 +1100, Peter Moylan
<pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 10/02/19 05:41, gera...@earthlink.net wrote:
>
>> Hi, thanks for your contribution to this thread.
>
>But no thanks for top-posting. It is customary in this newsgroup to
>present text in the order that it is to be read. It is annoying to have
>to go to the end of the article to find the context, and then go back to
>the beginning to find the new contribution.

Not just in this newsgroup, but in any newsgroup. It's the wrong way
to post.

Not everyone agrees with me, but I feel exactly the same way about
e-mail. Top-posting is terrible.

See https://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

[Peter Moylan]

I will (reluctantly) top-post in some business e-mail, where there seems
to be a legal need to retain the entire past history of an exchange. But
I would never be so rude as to do it to a friend.