Evidence of truth of Richard Gere/gerbil UL
Jimmycat
the alt.folklore.urban web site and noticed that the UL about Richard
Gere being caught with a gerbil in a private part of his anatomy was
being treated as if it weren't true. I know for a fact that it *is*
true.
I know that nobody here knows me and so why should anyone believe me,
but maybe my story will sound just plausible enough. Around 1990 or
1991, I went to dinner with my Mom, who gave me an interesting bit of
news. She used to work at a hospital, Torrance Memorial, in Torrance,
one of the many suburbs in the L.A. area. My Mom had worked in the
laboratory of this hospital for many years, on the graveyard shift,
analyzing bodily fluids and helping with their blood bank.
On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
Richard Gere had been recently admitted. Celebrity patients were not
that rare at Torrance Memorial (Tom Selleck was there once). I
questioned her about why he had been admitted, and she acted kind of
embarassed. Finally her boyfriend blurted out that he had a gerbil up
his butt! I experienced a sense of shock and unreality at hearing
this, being somewhat young and inexperienced in the ways of the world
(or parts of the world, anyway). But I believed her -- why wouldn't
I? My mom is the picture of responsibility and soberness.
I was astounded a few years later when, as I was telling a roommate
about this story, she responded, "Oh, that's just an urban myth." I
tried to tell her that my Mom knew it to be a true story, but she
acted like it was so bizarre that it couldn't possibly be true. Huh?
Movie stars don't engage in unusual sexual practices? Ordinary
people, for that matter, don't engage in unusual sexual practices?
Have you looked at a mail-order sex toys catalog recently?
I was also kind of surprised that there wasn't some code of
confidentiality that would have prevented the employees from talking
about it, but I guess people will talk . . . you always hear about
"doctor/patient confidentiality," but you never think about all the
other workers in the hospital who are working on your case.
But besides its being true, this UL is an interesting one -- again the
theme of someone being punished for flouting society's conventions
(you can tell I've read the FAQ recently). Gere certainly was
punished with pain and a hospital visit for going outside the sexual
norm and possibly hurting a small furry creature. But it looks as if
he wasn't published with public humilitation because, in a strange
twist of fate, his story got out but wasn't believed. His career did
seem to slump around that point though . . . wonder if there's any
connection.
Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
--Carol
Ian A. York
Jimmycat <jimm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
>well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
>Richard Gere had been recently admitted. Celebrity patients were not
The point about your Mom being the picture of honesty and sobriety is
unnecessary;nobody believes that she is lying. However, look closely at
her information: she didn't see this herself, it came from her co-workers.
There are two problems here. First, her co-workers may not be as reliable
as she is; second, there is a very real and very strong part of the human
psyche that makes memory in this case unreliable. That is, it is
extremely common for people to present stories, exactly as you have done,
that happened to reliable friends-or-friends; but in almost every case (I
recommend Jan Harold Brunvand's book for instances; people on AFU have
found exactly the same phenomenon) when tracked back, the episode truns
out to have happened, not to the freind-of-a-friend, but to *her* friend.
And when asked carefully, *her* friend didn't have it happen to *her*, but
heard about it as happening to a friend of *her* friend ... and so on,
infinitum.
Each link in the chain may be honest and reliable, but all it takes it
that in each re-telling the chain gets mis-stated by one link, either by
the teller (and let's face it, it's a lot more dramatic to have something
happen to a friend of a friend than to a friend of a friend of a friend,
if you see what I mean). It hardly means that some one is dishonest if
they make that small change; and they may not even know they've made
it--human memory (this is one of the great recurring themes of urban
legend study) is *unreliable*, and humans minds automatically convert
FOAFOAF into FOAF.
Given that we have a long, long experience with FOAF stories, and that we
(and professional UL hunters) almost invariably find that the "FOAF chain"
does expand when checked; and given the other oddities that you yourself
mention about this purported case; and given that other people have
written in with almost exactly the same story, heard from almost equally
reliable tellers, but about different celebrities (or about Gere, but in
different locations--you'd think he'd have learned after the first time,
wouldn't you?) the AFU FAQ will not be changed based on your story;
though, of course, you are welcome to your opinion.
What we'd find very interesting here, though, would be if you can try to
trace back the story a little bit. Your mother should remember which of
her friends actually saw the case, or at least which of them knew the
person who saw the case. Can she trace back to a *first-hand, eyewitness*
account? Or will she run into the usual, ever-expanding chain of "No, not
me, but it happened to Harold's friend Bob"?
If you do get your mother to do this, we'd be delighted if you could post
the results. I'll bet that no anonymizing is necessary, but if you prefer
to keep it private, e-mail me; I promise I'll keep any details quiet.
Ian
--
Ian York (iay...@panix.com) <http://www.panix.com/~iayork/>
"Bring back the Vicki Robinson .sig virus!" - Cindy Kandolf
GrapeApe
a mole removed from his bum? (A blemish from the skin of his tush)?
Grape"and whats that thing on Cindy Crawfords face?"Ape
Richard Brandt
>
> I'm not a regular reader of this newsgroup
No! Really?
> On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
> Richard Gere had been recently admitted.
Friend of a mom, eh?
A reporter once told me that a detective told her that a body
removed from the YMCA had a vibrator up the butt which was
determined to be the cause of death. That doesn't mean it
happened.
> I was astounded a few years later when, as I was telling a roommate
> about this story, she responded, "Oh, that's just an urban myth." I
> tried to tell her that my Mom knew it to be a true story, but she
> acted like it was so bizarre that it couldn't possibly be true.
"But...but...this is my MOM we're talking about!"
> Huh?
> Movie stars don't engage in unusual sexual practices? Ordinary
> people, for that matter, don't engage in unusual sexual practices?
> Have you looked at a mail-order sex toys catalog recently?
"One gross of Gerbils? Certainly, sir, will that be VISA or
Master Charge?"
> I was also kind of surprised that there wasn't some code of
> confidentiality that would have prevented the employees from talking
> about it
Were ye now.
> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
Leave me be ye heretic, the soft tissue of me cheek is
smarting me for some reason.
Richard "She may have made a Very Close Study of the FAQ. our
Carol" Brandt
--
== Richard Brandt is at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8720/ ==
"Spammers are the weeds in the flower garden that must be rooted
out if we're ever going to make effective use of the medium and
reduce the use of paper for legitimate communications."
-- Charlie Oriez, Webmaster, Colorado Sierra Club
Andy Walton
jimm...@earthlink.net (Jimmycat) wrote:
:My mom is the picture of responsibility and soberness.
[...]
:Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
Hasn't the m*tt* contest been closed?
--
"Life is pain, highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something."
-- Wesley, The Princess Bride
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/
nancy g.
> :Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
> Hasn't the m*tt* contest been closed?
Someone's trying to enter the contest up in that "PG-13 legend" thread too.
And I quote:
"this is a true story, i say these people on some talk show, i think it was Sally"
nancy "I say ..." g.
KAR
What has always bothered about this UL (which indeed the initial post
supports
rather than negates) that no one speaks to (including Brunvand who
reports it
preceding the crisis) is that IMO its currency at the time of it's being
attached to and taking off because of Gere had a lot to do with
AIDS-phobia.
The thinking was as follows:
Persistance of legend: The supposed actual occurance with Gere, was less
about
the "gerbling" than about the outing of a professed heterosexual actor
(of
whom there were always rumors of secret homosexuality, perhaps because of
his
multiple nude performances, his leading man status [which always provokes
rumors], the specific performances [American Gigolo] which were
homo-erotic in
content, and one supposes as with anyone, the possible first-hand
knowledge of
someone [though this is usually specious] The legend gained currency
BECAUSE
of the Gere name.
Fear of the practice/fear of homosexuality: The very notion of putting
live
things inside one's body for a sexual thrill, particularly through rectal
insertion, had a disgusting component to it, particularly in the context
of
this story: the patient could not remove the gerbil... it could have died
or
decomposed. What kind of person would put a live animal in their body?
(By
the way, the entire process of "gerbling" was graphically debunked in a
recent
Savage Love column, syndicated nationally through the local Reader).
The UL's real meaning in terms of its currency and Socratic reasoning at
the
time (I first heard it around 88-89 and work in the entertainment
industry so
I suspect it was starting to make the rounds about then). 1) AIDS,
inescapable and fatal, is the logical result of homosexuality, a
practices so
unnatural that people will risk letting dead animals decompose in their
bodies
for a cheap thrill. 3) Celebrities will be outed by the necessary
inescapable
result of bizarre practices which result in infection. The result being
that
the sad spectre of AIDS will have a face even if it drags its victims out
of
the closet with their humiliating and deadly secret.
Jimmycat wrote:
> I'm not a regular reader of this newsgroup, but I was just looking at
> the alt.folklore.urban web site and noticed that the UL about Richard
> Gere being caught with a gerbil in a private part of his anatomy was
> being treated as if it weren't true. I know for a fact that it *is*
> true.
>
> I know that nobody here knows me and so why should anyone believe me,
> but maybe my story will sound just plausible enough. Around 1990 or
> 1991, I went to dinner with my Mom, who gave me an interesting bit of
> news. She used to work at a hospital, Torrance Memorial, in Torrance,
> one of the many suburbs in the L.A. area. My Mom had worked in the
> laboratory of this hospital for many years, on the graveyard shift,
> analyzing bodily fluids and helping with their blood bank.
>
> On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
> Richard Gere had been recently admitted. Celebrity patients were not
> that rare at Torrance Memorial (Tom Selleck was there once). I
> questioned her about why he had been admitted, and she acted kind of
> embarassed. Finally her boyfriend blurted out that he had a gerbil up
> his butt! I experienced a sense of shock and unreality at hearing
> this, being somewhat young and inexperienced in the ways of the world
> (or parts of the world, anyway). But I believed her -- why wouldn't
> I? My mom is the picture of responsibility and soberness.
>
> I was astounded a few years later when, as I was telling a roommate
> about this story, she responded, "Oh, that's just an urban myth." I
> tried to tell her that my Mom knew it to be a true story, but she
> acted like it was so bizarre that it couldn't possibly be true. Huh?
> Movie stars don't engage in unusual sexual practices? Ordinary
> people, for that matter, don't engage in unusual sexual practices?
> Have you looked at a mail-order sex toys catalog recently?
>
> I was also kind of surprised that there wasn't some code of
> confidentiality that would have prevented the employees from talking
> about it, but I guess people will talk . . . you always hear about
> "doctor/patient confidentiality," but you never think about all the
> other workers in the hospital who are working on your case.
>
> But besides its being true, this UL is an interesting one -- again the
> theme of someone being punished for flouting society's conventions
> (you can tell I've read the FAQ recently). Gere certainly was
> punished with pain and a hospital visit for going outside the sexual
> norm and possibly hurting a small furry creature. But it looks as if
> he wasn't published with public humilitation because, in a strange
> twist of fate, his story got out but wasn't believed. His career did
> seem to slump around that point though . . . wonder if there's any
> connection.
>
> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
>
> --Carol
Simon Slavin
> she said she had heard from several of her
> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
> Richard Gere had been recently admitted
Possible. Says nothing about what he was suffering from.
> her boyfriend blurted out that he had a gerbil up
> his butt
So she heard it from one person. I note that you don't say that /he/
was well-trusted.
Simon.
--
Simon Slavin. No junk email please. | The most common [] dialects in
<http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk> | [Milton Keynes] are C, C++ and COBOL.
-------------------------------------+ -- Mike Holmans
Most people aren't most people. -- bra...@panix.com (Bo Bradham)
Richard Brandt
> 1) AIDS,
> inescapable and fatal, is the logical result of homosexuality, a
> practices so
> unnatural that people will risk letting dead animals decompose in their
> bodies
> for a cheap thrill. 3) Celebrities will be outed by the necessary
I was afraid to ask what happened to number 2.
Richard "Not a Number" Brandt
Mark Summerfield
(http://www.thestranger.com), "Savage Love" by Dan Savage. The URL was
posted some time ago, can't remember who by, and I took Mr. Savage's advice,
and clipped and saved it in case they don'r archive back-issues. (Original
source http://www.thestranger.com/COLUMNS/col.savage.html on 24/8/98.
[Not sure what issue of the mag. this actually corresponds to -- whichever
was current at the time, I guess.])
Without permission (unless you count Mr Savage's recommendation as
"permission") -- bring on the copyright lawyers...
THE GERBIL ISSUE
Hey, Faggot:
We were having a little office debate about "gerbiling." How does
it work? Do all gay men do this? Does Richard Gere? Does the
animal get shoved up the anus with a toilet paper roll only to
suffocate seconds later? Is it the scratching or the act of killing
an animal that gets people off? Why? Can't this cause serious
damage? What gives?
Curious Co-Workers
Hey, CCW:
Every day my mail contains at least three questions about
"gerbiling." In the eight years I've been writing this column, I have
never addressed the gerbil issue, but now, this week and this
week only, I am breaking my silence; clip and save this column,
for I will never discuss gerbils again. Ahem. To begin, I would like
to make a controversial statement:
I have never had a gerbil in my ass.
This statement is not controversial for the reasons one would
hope: it isn't controversial in the "Hey! That's uncalled for!"
sense, like, say, a woman at a dinner party announcing she
doesn't have a hedgehog in her vagina. That would be uncalled
for because no one would have suspected her of so concealing a
hedgehog. But being a gay man or Richard Gere in America
means always having to reassure people that you don't have a
gerbil in your ass - at dinner parties, during family reunions, at
funerals, on CNN, passport control, wherever! For while gay men
and, I assume, Richard Gere don't put gerbils in our asses, not a
day goes by that someone - usually a straight 13-year-old boy -
doesn't try to shove one in, figuratively speaking.
Yet hundreds of thousands of men and women in this country,
my fellow Americans, leave high school convinced that gay men
put gerbils in our asses on a semi-regular basis. Unlike our
hypothetical dinner party guest - the vaginal hedgehog stuffer -
my denial of stuffing gerbils is necessitated by the accusation. If
it were widely believed that women stuffed hedgehogs in their
vaginas, then women - like with gay men and gerbiling - would
have to deny hedgehogging.
Some background:
Gerbil stuffing is a sexual practice that straight teenage boys in
general, and Howard Stern in particular, suspect gay men in
general, and Richard Gere (who is not gay) in particular, of
engaging in. It works like this: Hold a gerbil in your left hand.
Using pliers with your right hand, rip off its lower jaw. With the
blunt side of the pliers, knock out the teeth in the gerbil's upper
jaw. Pull all four of its legs off. Leave the tail. Set aside. Take a
cardboard paper towel roll, grease it up, and insert into your
rectum. Tie a string to the gerbil's tail. Nudge the gerbil into the
outside end of the cardboard paper towel roll. If for no other
reason than to get away from the person who knocked its teeth
out, the gerbil leglessly scampers up the wet paper towel roll.
When the gerbil drops into the anal cavity, remove the wet paper
towel roll, leaving the string you've tied to the gerbil's tail hanging
out of your ass. The gerbil, now trapped inside your anal cavity,
thrashes around, desperate for air. It is this thrashing that
provides pleasurable sensations. Once the gerbil is dead,
remove it by pulling on the string. Repeat.
Okay, three things:
1. The type of straight person who believes that gay men "gerbil"
is likely to believe other gay stereotypes: that we're all prissy
little swishes, for instance, with clean apartments and extensive
collections of original Broadway cast recordings. Yet the same
person who believes gay men are prim sissies also believes
we're capable of holding a struggling rodent in one hand while
ripping its lower jaw off with the other, then tearing its legs off
(think of the mess!), and stuffing it up our butts - hardly a "prim"
pastime. This is known as cognitive dissonance: the holding of
mutually exclusive beliefs.
2. There is nothing intrinsically "gay" about gerbil stuffing. You
don't need two penises - you don't actually need penises at all -
or an original Broadway cast recording. All you need is one
doomed gerbil and one willing butthole (and pliers, lubes, tubes,
and string). Some straight people have a peculiar need to believe
certain sex acts, usually disgusting ones, are practiced only by
gay men, despite evidence to the contrary. Fisting, for instance.
Straight people can and do fist. I have a file of heterosexual
fisting photos, anal and vaginal, that I've pulled off the Web; I
keep them on my desktop to prove to family and friends that,
yes indeed, straight people fist. This curious impulse to credit
gay men with sex acts that anyone can perform extends to sex
acts straight people themselves are the primary practitioners of.
Child rape, for instance.
3. Inserting a wet cardboard paper towel roll into your ass is
simply not possible, as anyone who's ever put anything in their
ass can tell you.
Now, I feel I can write with some authority that no one has ever
actually stuffed a gerbil up their butt, perhaps with more authority
than I can write that God and angels do not exist. I've had
conversations with hundreds of outrageously kinky people, gay
and straight, who've told me the craziest shit: I once chatted for
an hour with a guy who married his horse (he was deeply
offended when I asked his horse was a he horse or a she horse,
"I am not a homosexual," the hetero horse fucker informed me).
Both in my professional and personal life, thousands of guys
have freely admitted to doing the most out-there, dangerous,
risky, stupid, kinky stuff. But not once in all these years has
anyone ever told me that he, or anyone he knows, or anyone
anyone he knows knows, has ever put a gerbil in his ass. Like
the doomed gerbils themselves, this story has no legs. It is an
urban legend.
But you don't have to take my word for it: I have proof. If gay men
and Richard Gere stuffed gerbils in our butts, well, then the pet
stores that serve the gay and Richard Gere communities would
stock gerbils, right? I mean, everything else that a perverse gay
man needs is available in your average gay neighborhood, from
poppers to buttplugs to bullwhips to sofa sectionals. So, if we
stuff gerbils up our butts, then pet stores in, say, California must
do a bang-up gerbil business.
But guess what? In San Francisco's Castro neighborhood, gay
ground zero, the gayly named pet store Petpourri, "where
professionals answer your every question," only sells pet
supplies, no gerbils, and they don't stock cardboard paper towel
tubes or pliers either. Animal Farm in West Hollywood,
California, also a very gay place, only sells dogs and cats (which
wouldn't fit up anyone's butt, not even Richard Gere's). And
guess what I learned looking into this? Not only don't pet stores
in California sell gerbils, but it's actually illegal for them to do so.
According to Marshall Meyers, an attorney at the Pet Industry
Joint Advisory Council in Washington D.C., "California law
prohibits the sale of gerbils because of desert conditions in that
state. Gerbils were once a desert mammal, and the state was
concerned that gerbils could escape and establish themselves in
the wild. It is a form of animal control." It's not because gay men
stick them in their asses? "No, it's strictly an ecosystem issue."
Mark "it's an exosystem issue in Austria, too" Summerfield
XOshidorix
>I'm not a regular reader of this newsgroup, but I was just looking at
>the alt.folklore.urban web site and noticed that the UL about Richard
>Gere being caught with a gerbil in a private part of his anatomy was
>being treated as if it weren't true. I know for a fact that it *is*
>true.
>
>I know that nobody here knows me and so why should anyone believe me,
>but maybe my story will sound just plausible enough. Around 1990 or
>1991, I went to dinner with my Mom, who gave me an interesting bit of
>news. She used to work at a hospital, Torrance Memorial, in Torrance,
>one of the many suburbs in the L.A. area. My Mom had worked in the
>laboratory of this hospital for many years, on the graveyard shift,
>analyzing bodily fluids and helping with their blood bank.
>
>well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
Charles A. Lieberman
> maybe my story will sound just plausible enough
"Just plausible enough" doesn't cut it; we have rigorous standards of proof
here at AFU, plausibility really doesn't enter into it
> On this particular night, she said she had heard from several of her
> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
> Richard Gere had been recently admitted.
Sorry, it doesn't. Unless you personally checked him in or examined him, I
don't want to hear it.
--
Charles A. Lieberman | "I hadn't planned to kill [the cop], but when he
Brooklyn, New York, USA | stopped to pick up his brass I just figured he
| was too stupid to live." -- Anonymous
http://members.tripod.com/~calieber/index.html
Helge Moulding
> Sorry, it doesn't. Unless you personally checked him in or examined
> him, I don't want to hear it.
And if you did, your name better be Peter Plantec.
--
Helge "Whatever to the stars" Moulding
mailto:hmou...@mailexcite.com Just another guy
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1401 with a weird name
Charles A. Lieberman
> I once chatted for
> an hour with a guy who married his horse
Don't be silly...
Fangz
questioning whether or not the act in question would even be possible.
Last time I checked, Gerbils are rather large and a persons sphincter
is generally much smaller. It would take a moderate degree of force to
get a gerbil in there in the first place which would surely kill the
animal in question long before the act in question was complete. Since
the orifice in question is in a part of the body that requires one's
hands reach way around back, you wouldn't have the greatest deal of
co-ordination while attempting this either. While large objects CAN be
inserted in the rectum, they are generally much more rigid than a
soft-bodied rodent. Not to mention, a gerbil being squished to death
as it's forced toward the orifice in question would undoubtedly do a
great deal of biting and clawing which would make even the most
hardened masochist think twice about completing the act. Assuming that
no one would resort to having a second party go back there with a
sedated gerbil and various gynecological instruments to get the job
done, I think you'd merely end up with a bloody, mutilated mass of
former gerbil in your hand, numerous bite and claw rounds on your
butt, and sore hands all without ever completing the act.
On Sat, 17 Oct 1998 23:50:56 -0600, Richard Brandt
<af...@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>Jimmycat wrote:
>>
>> I'm not a regular reader of this newsgroup
>
>No! Really?
>
>> On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
>> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
>> Richard Gere had been recently admitted.
>
>Friend of a mom, eh?
>
>A reporter once told me that a detective told her that a body
>removed from the YMCA had a vibrator up the butt which was
>determined to be the cause of death. That doesn't mean it
>happened.
>
>> I was astounded a few years later when, as I was telling a roommate
>> about this story, she responded, "Oh, that's just an urban myth." I
>> tried to tell her that my Mom knew it to be a true story, but she
>> acted like it was so bizarre that it couldn't possibly be true.
>
>"But...but...this is my MOM we're talking about!"
>
>> Huh?
>> Movie stars don't engage in unusual sexual practices? Ordinary
>> people, for that matter, don't engage in unusual sexual practices?
>> Have you looked at a mail-order sex toys catalog recently?
>
>"One gross of Gerbils? Certainly, sir, will that be VISA or
>Master Charge?"
>
>> I was also kind of surprised that there wasn't some code of
>> confidentiality that would have prevented the employees from talking
>> about it
>
>Were ye now.
>
>> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
>
Helge Moulding
> One thing I haven't seen yet in regards to this story is anyone
> questioning whether or not the act in question would even be possible.
> Last time I checked, Gerbils are rather large and a persons sphincter
> is generally much smaller.
Hang around for a while, and you may get an inkling how some folks
could probably manage a lunchbox, not just a small formerly furry
critter.
--
Helge "Pictures at 11." Moulding
Joseph Michael Bay
>I was afraid to ask what happened to number 2.
Presumably it's what the gerbil is covered with.
Joe "must . . . ruin . . . joke" Bay
--
Joseph Bay Department of Comparative Forensics
Maw! Paw done shot up the Lee-layand dawt Stayandferd dawt ee dee yew agayan!
"We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us --BLEARGH-- excuse me, some of
us are looking at the stars." --Oscar Wilde
alice faber
Avenger) writes (in support of the rather dubious contention that
Shirley someone, somewhere, has tried gerbiling, never mind the fact
that there's a huge difference between a gerbil and a candy bar):
>Give a teenager a wine cooler and
>a Hershey's bar and they'll do about anything.
Can we consider this an early entry in the 1999 m*tt* competition?
Alice "Snickers" Faber
Charles A. Lieberman
> > Sorry, it doesn't. Unless you personally checked him in or examined
> > him, I don't want to hear it.
>
> And if you did, your name better be Peter Plantec.
Isn't he Lon Stowell?
Come to think of it, if Richard Gere were to post to AFU attesting to the
voracity of this, that might constitute proof too.
The Avocado Avenger
I truly and wholeheartedly believe that gerbling started out as a myth.
But really, wouldn't these same 13 year olds who come up with the idea
also possibly maybe by chance *try* it? Give a teenager a wine cooler and
a Hershey's bar and they'll do about anything.
that I'm sure people have tried it to varying degrees of success. Not
everyone reads AFU so some poor souls might not know you can't gerbil.
Stacia * The Avocado Avenger * Life is a tale told by an idiot;
http://www.io.com/~stacia/ * Full of sound and fury,
Remove the guacamole to reply! * Signifying nothing.
Bob Church
cali...@bu.ed.u (Charles A. Lieberman) wrote:
>Come to think of it, if Richard Gere were to post to AFU attesting to the
>voracity of this, that might constitute proof too.
>
>--
>Charles A. Lieberman | "I hadn't planned to kill [the cop], but when he
Nope, didn't work for Douglas Adams either.
Bob Church
GrapeApe
blemish removed from his backside, because he thought his backside might be on
Americas movie screens? (a mole removed from his bottom?)
Alina Holgate
>
> I truly and wholeheartedly believe that gerbling started out as a myth.
> But really, wouldn't these same 13 year olds who come up with the idea
> also possibly maybe by chance *try* it? Give a teenager a wine cooler and
> a Hershey's bar and they'll do about anything.
> Seriously, though, this rumor about gerbling has been around so long
> that I'm sure people have tried it to varying degrees of success. Not
> everyone reads AFU so some poor souls might not know you can't gerbil.
An account of two gay guys ending up in hospital due to gerbiling (with
variations such as rectal gases being inadvertently ignited causing gerbil
to shoot across hospital room at speed of car fitted with plane engine)
has been repeatedly published in the U.K. Private Eye magazine as a clipped
newspaper item. Private Eye even published a "best of" which featured a
cartoon of the alleged gerbilling incident on the cover. Despite the
numerous times gerbilling has been referred to in Private Eye I have never
seen the story linked to Richard Gere so it would seem that while the
principle of gerbiling is alive in the UK as a hoary old story the link to
Richard Gere is a merkin variation.
David Darrow
----------
In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.98102...@idiom.com>, brazen hussy
<bpi...@idiom.com> wrote:
>
>1. an eight-ball [2]
>2. a ten-pound fishing weight
>3. a can of Ensure [3]
>
Never seen a 10 lb fishing weight and I've been deep sea fishing since I was
a kid.
d3 `-{>
Fangz
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>Fangz wrote:
>> One thing I haven't seen yet in regards to this story is anyone
>> questioning whether or not the act in question would even be possible.
>> Last time I checked, Gerbils are rather large and a persons sphincter
>> is generally much smaller.
>
>Hang around for a while, and you may get an inkling how some folks
>could probably manage a lunchbox, not just a small formerly furry
>critter.
I already know a lunch box might be possible (if it were a smaller
one). Everything from bicycle handle covers to a small toolbox have
been removed from there. My friend (A doctor at Johns Hopkins) once
told me that for a short time, stuffing a small pineapple up there was
all the rage. But these things are all relatively rigid objects.
Meanwhile, a gerbil isn't merely large, it's also soft bodied and, I
assume, would resist entering his new home in the nether regions. It
seems to me that you'd have a handful of Gerbil Mush long before you'd
need to worry about installing mousetraps in your rectum to take care
of the rodent problems.
JoAnne Schmitz
wrote:
>The following is from a regular column in _The Stranger_
>(http://www.thestranger.com), "Savage Love" by Dan Savage.
...in which he purports to "debunk" the gerbil-stuffing myth.
I really hate to do this, but a bad debunking is just as painful to watch as a
bad defense of a bullshit story. While I don't believe that gerbilling has
occurred, it's not for these pitiful logic-free reasons:
> 1. The type of straight person who believes that gay men "gerbil"
> is likely to believe other gay stereotypes: that we're all prissy
> little swishes, for instance, with clean apartments and extensive
> collections of original Broadway cast recordings. Yet the same
> person who believes gay men are prim sissies also believes
> we're capable of holding a struggling rodent in one hand while
> ripping its lower jaw off with the other, then tearing its legs off
> (think of the mess!), and stuffing it up our butts - hardly a "prim"
> pastime. This is known as cognitive dissonance: the holding of
> mutually exclusive beliefs.
But, this only indicates that there can be he-man gays -- the mutually exclusive
beliefs are bullshit and therefore have no bearing on the facts. That means
that it could happen, not that it couldn't.
I never heard the ripping the jaw off part before; it was "shaved and declawed"
in most versions. Once I heard about having the teeth removed but that's not a
constant. Certainly never heard that the legs were pulled off. Man, the guy
who vectored this is one cruel sonofabitch.
> 2. There is nothing intrinsically "gay" about gerbil stuffing. You
> don't need two penises - you don't actually need penises at all -
> or an original Broadway cast recording. All you need is one
> doomed gerbil and one willing butthole (and pliers, lubes, tubes,
> and string). Some straight people have a peculiar need to believe
> certain sex acts, usually disgusting ones, are practiced only by
> gay men, despite evidence to the contrary. Fisting, for instance.
> Straight people can and do fist. I have a file of heterosexual
> fisting photos, anal and vaginal, that I've pulled off the Web; I
> keep them on my desktop to prove to family and friends that,
> yes indeed, straight people fist. This curious impulse to credit
> gay men with sex acts that anyone can perform extends to sex
> acts straight people themselves are the primary practitioners of.
> Child rape, for instance.
So, it wouldn't have to be done by a gay man. Doesn't mean it couldn't have
been. Logic failure again.
> 3. Inserting a wet cardboard paper towel roll into your ass is
> simply not possible, as anyone who's ever put anything in their
> ass can tell you.
Wow. So I guess no one thought of using a dry paper towel roll?
For what it's worth I never, ever heard this detail before. I think once I
heard it was a part of one of those Habitat tubefests. Certainly PVC tubing
would work quite well.
> Now, I feel I can write with some authority that no one has ever
> actually stuffed a gerbil up their butt, perhaps with more authority
> than I can write that God and angels do not exist.
Because...?
> I've had
> conversations with hundreds of outrageously kinky people, gay
> and straight, who've told me the craziest shit: I once chatted for
> an hour with a guy who married his horse (he was deeply
> offended when I asked his horse was a he horse or a she horse,
> "I am not a homosexual," the hetero horse fucker informed me).
> Both in my professional and personal life, thousands of guys
> have freely admitted to doing the most out-there, dangerous,
> risky, stupid, kinky stuff. But not once in all these years has
> anyone ever told me that he, or anyone he knows, or anyone
> anyone he knows knows, has ever put a gerbil in his ass. Like
> the doomed gerbils themselves, this story has no legs. It is an
> urban legend.
The closest to actual debunking he gets. I'll give him some credit here.
> But you don't have to take my word for it: I have proof.
Oh shit. Proving a possible negative: the semantic equivalent of a round room
with a penny in the corner.
> If gay men
> and Richard Gere stuffed gerbils in our butts, well, then the pet
> stores that serve the gay and Richard Gere communities would
> stock gerbils, right?
Oh, wrong.
> I mean, everything else that a perverse gay
> man needs is available in your average gay neighborhood, from
> poppers to buttplugs to bullwhips to sofa sectionals. So, if we
> stuff gerbils up our butts, then pet stores in, say, California must
> do a bang-up gerbil business.
>
> But guess what? In San Francisco's Castro neighborhood, gay
> ground zero, the gayly named pet store Petpourri, "where
> professionals answer your every question," only sells pet
> supplies, no gerbils, and they don't stock cardboard paper towel
> tubes or pliers either. Animal Farm in West Hollywood,
> California, also a very gay place, only sells dogs and cats (which
> wouldn't fit up anyone's butt, not even Richard Gere's). And
> guess what I learned looking into this? Not only don't pet stores
> in California sell gerbils, but it's actually illegal for them to do so.
If gerbils are not legally available in California then they must never have
been inserted in anyone's ass? Give me a break. Argument by sarcastic
suggestion never did win over anyone but the choir.
The reason you don't see gerbils in the stores is because they're illegal;
Savage as much as admits this. But that wouldn't prove no one could use them.
Heck, cocaine and heroin are not legally available in California and I'll bet
there's cocaine and heroin in California right now.
JoAnne "there's probably some in someone's ass" Schmitz
----- some favorite web sites -----
general search: http://www.altavista.com (web) or http://www.dejanews.com (newsgroups)
UL search: http://www.urbanlengends.com or http://www.snopes.com
Paul Sweeney
David Darrow <d...@ddii.com> wrote in article
<70ihqu$o4g$1...@news1.fast.net>...
> Never seen a 10 lb fishing weight and I've been deep sea fishing since I
was
> a kid.
I thought the m*tt* competition was closed.
>
> d3 `-{>
Your modem appears to be spawning spurious characters.
Paul "nomonym?" Sweeney
David Darrow
----------
In article <01bdfce2$6f56a640$ab03...@Sweeney.compuserve.com>, "Paul
Sweeney" <pl...@twattie.com> wrote:
>
>
>David Darrow <d...@ddii.com> wrote in article
><70ihqu$o4g$1...@news1.fast.net>...
>> Never seen a 10 lb fishing weight and I've been deep sea fishing since I
>was
>> a kid.
>
>I thought the m*tt* competition was closed.
Find me a 10 pounder then, smartass:
http://dir.yahoo.com/Business_and_Economy/Companies/Outdoors/Fishing/Tackle_
and_Equipment/
>> d3 `-{>
>
>Your modem appears to be spawning spurious characters.
>
That is my sig (an abstract self portrait) and you are the only one in 8
years to question it.
d3 `-{>
Paul Sweeney
David Darrow <d...@ddii.com> wrote in article <70kumf$mbi$1...@news1.fast.net>...
> Find me a 10 pounder then, smartass:
> http://dir.yahoo.com/Business_and_Economy/Companies/Outdoors/Fishing/Tackle_
> and_Equipment/
Try the web page section it always has a better trawl than the yahoo stored
stuff.
Will this do? http://www.fish307.com/fishing.htm
> That is my sig (an abstract self portrait) and you are the only one in 8
> years to question it.
>
> d3 `-{>
Apologies I thought it was a twattie emoticon.
Paul "hey it looked like one to me" Sweeney
Chris W
> That is my sig (an abstract self portrait) and you are the only one in 8
> years to question it.
>
> d3 `-{>
Please allow me to be the second, since I've been wondering. Which way
is up?
Chris "such a handsome fellow" Webb
Glenn Thompson
To whoever started this thread. When I read "Evidence of truth" the first
line that I should read would go like one of these three...
A)I Richard Gere...
B)I hereby proclaim to be Richard Gere's gerbil stuffer...
C)Having worked at the hospital (on Mr. Gere), I now present all of the
following x-rays, documentation and hand signed test results, complaint
forms etc. etc.
Not whether or not a gerbil would or should fit in a human rectum. I can
assure you that it would and therefore am convinced that it has been done.
For all that I have seen done I am a firm believer of; Whatever you can
possibly conceive of someone has or would try it. A visit to the Body
Modification home page will convince you too. www.BMEfreaq.com or the sort.
All other combinations will not support your claim.
Jimmycat
all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
Please note the statement below:
I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I wasn't believed -- that's
your perogative and I realize there's no proof.
I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders, Richard
Brandt in particular. There are many ways of telling a person you
don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
the listener has feelings, and some aren't. Your response, Richard,
was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
something over on people. Why the harsh sarcasm and cynicism?
Please note again that I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I
wasn't believed. *I* still believe the story is true, but it's not so
important to me if no one else does, and admittedly there is no proof.
I am referring here to simple politeness and the *way* I was responded
to (the tone, not the content).
Not that this newsgroup is unique in being harsh and unkind. It
happens Internet-wide. When a simple, gentle, polite response would
do, writers always choose the harshest way to say it. I KNOW I am not
the only one with feelings in this universe (or maybe that's a UL?) I
think it has to do with the fact that we can't see each others' faces;
either seeing each other would lead us to identify more with each
other and have more compassion, or seeing each other would make us
afraid to speak our real thoughts. If the latter is true, what a
scary social world we live in (the only reason we aren't at each
other's throats in the "real world" is because we're too afraid of the
reaction?)
--Carol
Richard Brandt <af...@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>Were ye now.
David Martin
>
> Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
> all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
> this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
Next you will be telling us you have a PhD and this is a research
study. There are already several "you are all meanyheads" threads
going. I don't see how your particular version adds anything.
Either you'll learn to accept the group or you'll move on. You
ain't going to change us.
David "never metathread I liked" Martin
--
For the alt.folklore.urban FAQ see: http://www.urbanlegends.com/afu.faq/
Those with limited web access can obtain a older version via email.
Email: mail-...@rtfm.mit.edu with "send
usenet/news.answers/folklore-faq/*"
in the body of your message.
Helge Moulding
> Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
> all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
> this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
We don't. Folks who display cluefulness on their first posting are
greeted with open arms, nay embraced. Even those from AOL! Or WebTV!
(We? Well, many of us.)
> I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders, Richard
> Brandt in particular.
Your feelings are hurt. That when you wrote yourself,
> >> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
You didn't mean it, did you. You really meant to write, "Pleeeze don't
flame my poor post! I have a very fragile ego, and I just want to make
myself heard all over the world. If you write that I am cute, darling,
and utterly lovable, then I'll be happy! Maybe."
> Not that this newsgroup is unique in being harsh and unkind. It
> happens Internet-wide.
Not that you are unique in being highly clue resistant and curiously
vulnerable to having that pointed out to you. That happens across the
entire spectrum of humanity.
--
Helge "Byeeee!" Moulding
mitcho
>
> Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
> all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
> this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
This group gets plenty of delightful new members, all the time. What
does this tell us?
> I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders, Richard
> Brandt in particular. There are many ways of telling a person you
> don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
> the listener has feelings, and some aren't. Your response, Richard,
> was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
> here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
> something over on people. Why the harsh sarcasm and cynicism?
Why don't you take that up with Richard, privately? Why are you
whingeing about the response you got from the "group?" Or didn't you
see the polite, measured responses to your post from Ian York, Simon
Slavin and KAR, or the more terse but no less straightforward reply from
Charles Lieberman?
> I am referring here to simple politeness and the *way* I was responded
> to (the tone, not the content).
Take it up with Richard, privately.
> Not that this newsgroup is unique in being harsh and unkind. It
> happens Internet-wide. When a simple, gentle, polite response would
> do, writers always choose the harshest way to say it.
Take it up with Richard, privately.
> afraid to speak our real thoughts. If the latter is true, what a
> scary social world we live in (the only reason we aren't at each
> other's throats in the "real world" is because we're too afraid of the
> reaction?)
Take it up with Richard, privately.
Is there an echo in here?
Mitcho
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mit...@netcom.com Urban Redneck of Goat Hill, California TR15 2BU
http://www.employees.org/~ozyman o http://www.urbanlegends.com
Ian A. York
Jimmycat <jimm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Not that this newsgroup is unique in being harsh and unkind. It
>happens Internet-wide. When a simple, gentle, polite response would
Carol, this may just be me, but if everywhere I went people were mean to
me, I'd look at the common factor involved.
Ian
--
Ian York (iay...@panix.com) <http://www.panix.com/~iayork/>
"Bring back the Vicki Robinson .sig virus!" - Cindy Kandolf
H Gilmer
: I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I wasn't believed -- that's
: your perogative and I realize there's no proof.
Good. That's a start.
: I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders, Richard
: Brandt in particular. There are many ways of telling a person you
: don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
: the listener has feelings, and some aren't. Your response, Richard,
Oh, come the fuck on. There was absolutly nothing nasty about his
post. Sure, it was sarcastic--fairly gentle sarcasm at that. Guess
what? This whole fucking group is sarcastic. If you take sarcasm as
abuse, you clearly don't belong here. I hope you come around, as you
do in fact seem to have a functioning brane, but you need to
understand sarcasm is normal here. Hell, it's normal in everyday
life. Sarcasm is not social deviance, nor is it verbal abuse. Live
with it.
Freebie hint: "But this is my MOTHER we're talking about" is a popular
saying on this group.
Oh, and some of us cuss, too. I hope you don't take that as abuse as
well.
: was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
: here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
: something over on people. Why the harsh sarcasm and cynicism?
No one thinks you're trying to pull something over on people. (Okay,
in one of the responses to the post I'm now responding to, someone
compares you to a puller-overer on another thread, but that's the next
level of defensiveness. I'm still addressing the first stage.) I
doubt anyone thinks you're an idiot. They might think you're somewhat
naive, and you are. One hopes that now you are somewhat less naive.
You got some really good responses about FOAF chains & how folklore
manages to spread as truth without any lies actually being told.
Really good, gentle, polite responses. Stop whining.
While we're on the subject of flames, though, the guy who posted the
Dan Savage column (Mike Somethingorother) got slammed here to Sunday.
I'd like to thank him for not (at least as of 6:28 pm EST Wednesday)
whining. It's hard to tell if the slams were aimed at Savage or at
Mike. Yes, really they were aimed at the content of the post and not
the poster, but still, a little buffering might have been in order.
Or not. Probably doesn't matter.
That post, for those who don't remember, was an attempt at logical
argument against the gerbil story, based mostly on consistency of
viewpoint of vectors, physical plausibility, and lack of positive
evidence.
This was all dimissed rather vehemently.
Let me point out that plausibility arguments have been made elsewhere,
without so harsh a response. And lack of positive evidence is the
main argument against the existence of sn*ff f*lms. And the
consistency-of-viewpoint arguments were not meant (as far as I can
tell) to show that gerbil-stuffing per se doesn't happen (it was
pointed out that those arguments in fact show that the physical act of
gerbil-stuffing might be possible), but that the whole scenario as
presented, with all the details and the associated associations and
whatever, doesn't make sense. It was an argument against the whole
schmeer, not the core activity. At least that's what I think.
If that last paragraph was really stupid, just stick with the second
sentence.
Anyway it looks like the influx of whining newbies is making everyone
just a mite bit crankier. That's too bad.
Hg
cze...@nospam.us.oracle.com
> There are many ways of telling a person you
> don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
> the listener has feelings, and some aren't.
One of the characteristics of AFU is that posters
(generally speaking - second-stage newbies aside) receive
the same respect that they offer. For example, if somebody
came along and said "I've lurked long enough to understand
what passes for reasonable evidence around here, and so I
have something substantial to offer that might change your
opinion on this old chestnut", that tends to get a certain
kind of response. That response might be questioning, and
is rarely going to be credulous, but it will usually be
respectful. On the other hand, somebody who pitches in and
tells us to change the FAQ on a hoary old tale on the basis
of a FOAF (even if it is their mother they're talking about)
is likely to be treated with the same respect that they have
shown us.
Or to put it in your terms, did your post - which, bottom
line, says that we have been WRONG!!! for all these years
because your mother's boyfriend said so - show much care
for OUR feelings? I for one was deeply hurt. And I know
that I'm not alone. Several people have emailed me to say
that they were so scarred by your insensitivity to our
feelings that they couldn't bring themselves to post a
response. We were all deeply, deeply hurt. Some ways of
telling us that you disagree with the FAQ are are actually
cognizant of the fact that the listener has feelings, and
some aren't.
>Your response, Richard,
> was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
> here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
> something over on people.
And your point is what, exactly?
--
Narrative has a mind of its own, and bends memory to
its own purposes without the teller necessarily being
aware of it. -- Tobias Wolff
Lon Stowell
>Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
>all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
>this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
Actually it does get new members. Those quick on the uptake.
Those with thicker skins than egos. Welcomed with open arms
are those smart enough to operate a newsreader and able to
trim extraneous material.
However, there are already a couple of "you are just a bunch
of old meanyhead" threads going on the group at the moment, so
it may be that your whining will need to be postponed until
a bit later.
Richard Brandt
>
> Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
> all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
> this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
>
>
> your perogative and I realize there's no proof.
>
> don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
> was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
> here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
I was responding to the tone of your post, which had all the
hallmarks of someone who has not followed a.f.u. long enough
to know that (a) we have encountered this story in just such
a presentation before, and (b) that you are giving away all
the hallmarks of a "friend-of-a-friend" story; you are ready
to give instant credence to a story because someone you trusted
relayed it to you, even though at best the teller had to be
several removes from anyone who could have had direct
knowledge of the alleged incident.
I am now ready to believe that you were not in fact trolling
the newsgroup; as my response might have indicated, your
post was such a Textbook Example of a "FOAF" story it was
almost hard to take seriously. Therefore, if it seemed I
was ignoring the evidence of your feelings, I am truly sorry.
On the other hand, if you think my genial skepticism was
"harsh and unkind," you may be in for some rough times ahead.
Richard "No one here but us meanyheads" Brandt
--
== Richard Brandt is at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8720/ ==
"Groveling also helps."--Judy Johnson's advice to the newbie
David Darrow
----------
"Paul Sweeney" wrote:
>
>Try the web page section it always has a better trawl than the yahoo stored
>stuff.
Nice pun!
>
>Will this do? http://www.fish307.com/fishing.htm
>
Yep, thats a big, stinkin' weight alright. I don't think anyone had one of
those up thier "exit ramp" along with the other two items mentioned, though.
>> That is my sig (an abstract self portrait) and you are the only one in 8
>> years to question it.
>>
>> d3 `-{>
>
>Apologies I thought it was a twattie emoticon.
>
>Paul "hey it looked like one to me" Sweeney
>
Oh, I fell out of my chair when I read that. Thanx for the laugh.
----------
"Chris Webb" wrote:
>Please allow me to be the second, since I've been wondering. Which way
>is up?
Tilt head left. Think I need to shave? `-{P>
d3 `-{>
Barbara Mikkelson
> *I* still believe the story is true
Then let me take my shot at convincing you otherwise.
http://www.snopes.com/sex/homosex/gerbil.htm
Barbara "a gerbil is a terrible thing to waste" Mikkelson
--
Barbara Mikkelson | Just remember, the next time she shouts
hbeng010@ | "harder, harder" reply "tighter, tighter".
email.csun.edu | - Colin Rosenthal
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Urban legends and more --> http://www.snopes.com
Curtis Cameron
>>> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
and later wrote:
>I'm left with feeling as if everyone
>here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
>something over on people.
and added:
> *I* still believe the story is true
If, in light of all that has been pointed out to you, you *still*
believe the story, then what you feel everyone thinks about you is
correct.
--
Curtis Cameron
James
>I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I wasn't believed -- that's
>your perogative and I realize there's no proof.
It takes a big man to admit that [1].
>I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders.
<sputter,spit> "sarcastic tone"
SARCASTIC TONE?
You bring up g*rb*l*ng? And then you're surprised at the
sarcastic responses you get? hseehs.
>When a simple, gentle, polite response would
>do, writers always choose the harshest way to say it.
Sometimes, a gentle, polite response won't do.
I think the g*rb*l thread is one of these cases.
--James "Why not a hampster?" McGill
--
James
http://www.conservatory.com
Charles A. Lieberman
> I'm left with feeling as if everyone
> here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
> something over on people.
Yeah, that about sums it up.
--
Charles A. Lieberman | "I hadn't planned to kill [the cop], but when he
Brooklyn, New York, USA | stopped to pick up his brass I just figured he
| was too stupid to live." -- Anonymous
http://members.tripod.com/~calieber/index.html
Richard Gere
> To whoever started this thread. When I read "Evidence of truth" the first
> line that I should read would go like one of these three...
> B)I hereby proclaim to be Richard Gere's gerbil stuffer...
Not really. I could say that. I'd be lying, though.
I could also claim to be Gere, but that's more easily disproven, although I
can't think of how offhand.
Charles "awaiting a post from the gerbil" Lieberman
Ben Walsh
>Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
>all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
>this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
You come in here spreading vicious, unfounded rumours about Richard Gere and
you're complaining that *your* feelings are all hurt? Now that's
breathtaking hypocrisy.
And you go on to maintain that you *still* believe this story, and will
continue to do no matter what happens despite the fact you heard it
twelfth-hand from your mother's sister's sewing-circle convenor's veterinary
cardiologist's assistant's friend's daughter-in-law and that's your sole
evidence for it. I guess that's how faith works. If I had that degree of
faith in the patently untrue I'd use it on something interesting, like
believing that Claire Danes is about to show up on my doorstep with the
first installment of my lottery winnings and an apology for straying. But
hey, that's just me. If you get off on obsessing about the denizens of
Richard Gere's arse then go ahead.
ben "knock yourself out" w.
--
========================
I treat horses good
And I'm friendly to strangers
Joseph Michael Bay
>hey, that's just me. If you get off on obsessing about the denizens of
>Richard Gere's arse then go ahead.
Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
--
Joseph Bay Mmmm . . . antigenic.
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed". "Dog's don't know it's not Bacon".
Hi! I'm a replicative .signature transposon! Copy me into your .signature!
mitcho
>
> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
Bunnies.
Mitcho
mitcho
>
> You come in here spreading vicious, unfounded rumours about Richard Gere and
> you're complaining that *your* feelings are all hurt? Now that's
> breathtaking hypocrisy.
Oh for heaven's sake, Richard Gere is hardly a human being; he's a
moovie star. Not worthy of basic human consideration, in other words.
Ulo Melton
>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>Bunnies.
Jackalopes.
Andrew Welsh
: Meanwhile, a gerbil isn't merely large, it's also soft bodied and, I
: assume, would resist entering his new home in the nether regions.
Why make that assumption? Small animals love warm, dark spaces. Our kitten,
Baby, likes to hide in the hole in the back of our clothes dryer, and is
also fond of crawling through a slight gap beneath our kitchen cabinets. And
many[1]'s the weekend morning when I've awoken to find Baby nestling under
the blankets on my upper thighs and buttocks.[2]
Do any other afuista have animal-related confessions, or know someone who
has?
andrew
[1] My girlfriend then proceeds to cry, in her best Dick van Dyke accent,
"there's a cat up yer bum"
[2] This whole post is exempt from any [jrh] posting restrictions
--
Andrew Welsh (and...@panix.com|and...@nufc.com|http://www.panix.com/~andreww)
Opinions expressed above are not necessarily endorsed by my employers.
"I'm quite bored. You see, it's been four months. It's beyond my control"
- Dangerous Liasons
Crash
No, those are Benny's Babies
--
Crash "dead for lo these many years" Johnson
Nathan F Miller
>mitcho wrote:
>
>>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
>>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>
>>Bunnies.
>
>Jackalopes.
>
Sewergators. Decadent denizens of Newy Ork City are catching and placing
sewergators of varying ages and sizes into their posteriors because those
animals are quite happy with netherworldish aromas, and crawling through
dark, narrow places, so it's easy to do. Yeah, that's it. And they
already have those "stimulation nubs" on them.
Nathan "Jackalopes? That's just silly." Miller
Meredith Robbins
> mitcho wrote:
>
> >> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
> >> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>
> >Bunnies.
>
> Jackalopes.
Ouch.
Jeremy W. Burgeson
>mitcho wrote:
>>Bunnies.
>Jackalopes.
Between you and Mitcho, I'd expect some sort of hare-braned idea
that sewergators could back up in the toilet just like rats and
end up in someone's butt.
Jeremy
RRS
>
> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
Well, rabbits *do* live in warrens, don't they?
Robin "hippity-hop" Storesund
Glenn Thompson
Richard Gere wrote in message ...
>Glenn Thompson
>> To whoever started this thread. When I read "Evidence of truth" the
first
>> line that I should read would go like one of these three...
>[snip]
>> B)I hereby proclaim to be Richard Gere's gerbil stuffer...
>
>Not really. I could say that. I'd be lying, though.
>I could also claim to be Gere, but that's more easily disproven, although I
>can't think of how offhand.
>
Indeed.
This is why I wrote that "the first line" would start with... It would then
finish with the supporting documentation, private photos, video tapes and
all such pharapenalia that would be "Evidence of truth of Richard
Gere/gerbil. I do in fact agree that you could claim such things but you
know how stringently that would be scrutinized here. I have faith in these
fine lurkers to weed out the MRI lawyers in the crowd.
Glenn...I don't dare post the URL for the glass tube / white mouse / vagina
photo [1] ...Thompson
[1] email me for the URL and a full disclaimer of responsibility. [2] The
URL would only be for me to convey that there is a picture depicting such
acts, not that it should be visited. The mere fact that I would present you
with the URL at all should be proof enough of its existence.
[2] being that age verification is not possible with the lurkers in this
froup, I will only provide the URL to those who claim to be of legal age [3]
first with the URL of the Homepage of this site so that visitors then fall
under the local law of the Elbonians. When in Elbonia...
[3] unless you come over to my place with lots of grog
Viv
Ulo Melton wrote in message <70q833$7...@chronicle.concentric.net>...
>mitcho wrote:
>
>>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
>>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>
>
>Jackalopes.
Bunyips.
Vivienne "lagomorphs plus" Smythe
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't pretend to know why, but I'm sure it has something to do with
physics and gravity and chunky guys with big pants.
Mikey "It always does" Sphar in afu
Cotongrmr
>>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
>>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>>Bunnies.
>Jackalopes.
Actually they are cabbits. I know its true because a friend of my sister's
boyfriend's hairdresser volunteers in a wild life shelter and she has seen one.
Believe it or not, the guy who brought it in didn't even know what it was; he
tried to tell her it was some kind of munchkin cat, what an idiot. Every knows
that when cats and rabbits breed, they make cabbits.
Robyn "eminent zoologist" R.G.
*********************************
Honesty is the best policy,
but insanity is a better defense.
~~ Steve Landesberg
*********************************
Sean Willard
> Glenn...I don't dare post the URL for the glass tube / white mouse / vagina
> photo [1] ...Thompson
No, that would be *rotten*.
> [1] email me for the URL and a full disclaimer of responsibility. [2] The
> URL would only be for me to convey that there is a picture depicting such
> acts, not that it should be visited. The mere fact that I would present you
> with the URL at all should be proof enough of its existence.
It was, as PvdL feared, only a matter of time before this little gem
came up in the froup.
By the same token, it was only a matter of time before someone with a
willing female friend, plastic tube, small rodent (looks ratlike to me;
Mitcho, what's your opinion?) and camera decided to reënact the legend.
I think this photo should be dubbed, I dunno, Fake Of The Month, what do
you think, Glenn?
Sean
--
Blame Sean Willard for http://www.urbanlegends.com/afu.faq/
Fangz
>fa...@fangz.com wrote:
>
>: Meanwhile, a gerbil isn't merely large, it's also soft bodied and, I
>: assume, would resist entering his new home in the nether regions.
>
>Why make that assumption? Small animals love warm, dark spaces. Our kitten,
>Baby, likes to hide in the hole in the back of our clothes dryer, and is
>also fond of crawling through a slight gap beneath our kitchen cabinets. And
>many[1]'s the weekend morning when I've awoken to find Baby nestling under
>the blankets on my upper thighs and buttocks.[2]
>
Oh great, Andrew. Now we're going to see a new Urban Legend about
kitten-stuffing. Meanwhile, even rodents have enough sense to detect
if an opening is WAY too small for their own comfort and would
certainly make it's displeasure known upon being smashed and
suffocated.
As long as we're on the topic though, I was browsing through a book
and found an interesting variation on the gerbil thing I hadn't read
before. The book "Stupid Sex: The MOST Idiotic and Embarrassing
Intimate Encounters of All Time" by Kathhryn and Ross Petras purports
to be a book of REAL stories around the world and contains the
following story. By the way, my own opinions are noted throughout.
"It all started when Ericson and his partner, "Ray" Selwyn, decided to
have a little fun with their gerbil, Baggot." <My opinion: Cute the
way this version even names the rodent, eh? For 5 points, what word
rhymes with Baggot?>
"Ericson pushed a cardboard tube up Selwyn's anus and slipped the
gerbil into the tube. A few seconds later Selwyn yelled out,
"Armageddon!" - their "safe" word to let Ericson know he'd had enough.
But apparently Baggot, the gerbil, hadn't. He wouldn't climb back down
the tube."
"Ericson tread looking into the tube, but it was too dark to see
anything. Finally he had a bright idea: He lit a match, thinking the
light might attract the gerbil." <My opinion: Sure, because we all
know rodents are attracted to fire.>
"But the match ignited a pocket of intestinal gas. The flame shot up
the tube, ignited Ericson's moustache, and burned his face. As for
Baggot, his fur was set on fire - which ignited an even LARGER pocket
of gas farther up in the intestine. It set up such a charge that the
gerbil became a furry, flaming cannonball - propelled out with
incredible force." <My opinion: The gas ignited from a match at the
other end of the tube..a good 8 or 9 inches away from the anus? Then
more gas had enough force to project a rodent across the room? Selwyn
must be a VERY gassy kind of dude.>
"The upshot? Selwyn wound up with first and second degree burns to his
anus and lower intestinal tract; Ericson with second degree burns to
his face...plus a broken nose from the impact of the gerbil." <My
opinion: Amazing an explosion of that force didn't lacerate the
rectum...plus rather remarkable aim on the part of the gerbil to
strike Ericson. One would think he would be off tending to his burnt
face rather than still having it poised in front of the tube.>
By the way, anyone thinking of getting this book should be warned that
at least half of the "true" stories are amazing similar to popular
urban legends, others are VERY suspicious (see below), and even the
few verifiable and genuine stories in the book seem to contain extra
"facts" that weren't carried in any of the press reports of the
original stories.
Here is an example of a suspicious story from that book:
"A certain worker in the Maryland Health Department is dispatched each
day to the local sewage plant."
"Apparently the Maryland Health Department wants to estimate how many
people are practicing safe sex."
"So the worker's job is to fish out and count used condoms in the
sewage."
Anyone else fins this "true" story to be suspect? How likely are you
to be able to find small condoms amidst the rest of the crap flushed
through the sewers? How would it give them an "estimate" of how many
people are practicing safe sex? Their condom count wouldn't tell them
how many people put them there. One person could have used 5, or 5
people could have used one. It wouldn't take into account the majority
of discarded condoms which are thrown in the trash or discarded
elsewhere. (Most people don't flush things that are likely to cause
clogs in their plumbing.) And lastly, wouldn't it have occurred to
anyone that a simple survey would be more accurate, effective, less
costly, and easier?
The book is full of "true" stories like this. Even though almost all
of them are undoubtedly hoaxes, it's a nice place to find a hundred or
so interesting sex-related urban legends.
Meek606
>one of the many suburbs in the L.A. area.
However, my friends mom is a nurse at St. John's hospital in Santa Monica, and
swore it happened there. So we still haven't proven anything...
-Mieke
H.W.M.
Sean Willard wrote:
> By the same token, it was only a matter of time before someone with a
> willing female friend, plastic tube, small rodent (looks ratlike to me;
> Mitcho, what's your opinion?) and camera decided to reënact the legend.
> I think this photo should be dubbed, I dunno, Fake Of The Month, what do
> you think, Glenn?
I got enough proof that some people do anything for money when I saw a picture of
a woman having a snake in her anus.
Well, I am not a herpetologist but it looked like snake... a woman's butt I could
figure out.
Henry Wilhelm >>> henry.w @ gnwmail.com <<<
*********************************************
* I could be bounded in a nut-shell, *
* and count myself a king of infinite space,*
* were it not that I have bad dreams *
*********************************************
Richard Brandt
>
> Wow! Certainly a lot of criticisms of my intellect and my character,
> based on such a huge database of information about me. I just think
> it's interesting how many heated responses my post got. Must have
> bothered people at some level, eh?
Who's generating the heat here, Carol? You're the one who responded
to our rather justified skepticism about your story by hurling
accusations of rudeness and vindictiveness at us:
> >Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
> >all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
> >this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
When we suggested that
your faith in the provenance of this story by virtue of who related
it to you bespoke an unfamiliarity with the well-studied mechanisms
by which urban legends are disseminated, you apparently felt we
were trying to hold you up to ridicule as naive and foolish.
> >I'm left with feeling as if everyone
> >here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
> >something over on people.
If the shoe fits, wear it, but your stubborn refusal to admit the
possibility of error in the face of overwhelming evidence that
you fell for a tall tale is not going to win you any admirers for
your qualities of critical discernment. Has the possibility ever
occurred to you that we were trying to persuade you to accept
the possibility of the story's mythical nature, rather than
trying to make you look bad? However your emotional attachment
to this story is too strong; no one's suggesting that your mother
is a bad person or intentionally lying to you, just because she
relayed a dubious anecdote. The moment we cast doubts on its
voracity--no matter in how snide a fashion, in my case--rather
than reconsidering the truth of your story, you took the defensive,
as if to assail the story's foundations was to attack *you*.
Step back and try viewing such a situation from an
emotional distance next time. (This is in fact one
reason urban mythology is so tenacious and persuading vectors
to see the light is so difficult: No one wants to admit the
possibility that people they trust are steering them wrong.)
Let us not forget your initial comment:
> >>> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
If you didn't expect to get flamed for telling this story, then why
have you been reacting this way? Frankly, if you had spent time
reading this group, or read a little more about what the FAQ has
to say about the spreading of folktales (and the gerbil incident
in particular), you'd not only expect counterclaims from doubters,
you'd feel you deserved them. How, after all, can you *know*
this story is true? You have no first-hand knowledge or evidence
of the events described, and neither does the person who related
the story to you.
You may now recall my first response, in which I had a faint
suspicion that you were in fact just trolling for hot-button
responses. Your behavior since has not exactly been reassuring;
you come off as if you have no real interest in discussing
the gerbil story as an example of its urban legend and its
transmission. but just want to either (a) blandly assert its
reality or (b) use it as a pretext to attack us for our
overbearing hostility.
Actually this conversation has two possible useful outcomes for
you: It can persuade you of the essentially UL'ish nature of
they way you heard the gerbil story related, and lead you to
an interest in UL's and their vectoring in general. If neither
transpires then there really doesn't seem much point to hanging
around this particular newsgroup other than stirring up
acrimony. Hopefully this is not your desire nor your intent.
Hope That Helps.
Richard "More Light Than Heat" Brandt
--
== Richard Brandt is at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8720/ ==
"Lapham's real skill lies in endlessly delivering the one message
Americans never tire of hearing: that we're all a bunch of
ignorant morons." -- The Sucksters
Jimmycat
based on such a huge database of information about me. I just think
it's interesting how many heated responses my post got. Must have
bothered people at some level, eh?
--Carol
jimm...@earthlink.net (Jimmycat) wrote:
>Argh! I wish so many newsgroups weren't so cliqueish. If you treat
>all new posters with the same attitude you treated me, I'm surprised
>this newsgroup ever gets any new members!
>Please note the statement below:
>I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I wasn't believed -- that's
>your perogative and I realize there's no proof.
>I AM referring to the sarcastic tone of several responders, Richard
>Brandt in particular. There are many ways of telling a person you
>don't believe them; some ways are actually cognizant of the fact that
>the listener has feelings, and some aren't. Your response, Richard,
>was an example of the latter. I'm left with feeling as if everyone
>here thinks I'm either an idiot, incredibly naive, or trying to pull
>something over on people. Why the harsh sarcasm and cynicism?
>Please note again that I am NOT having trouble with the fact that I
>wasn't believed. *I* still believe the story is true, but it's not so
>important to me if no one else does, and admittedly there is no proof.
>I am referring here to simple politeness and the *way* I was responded
>to (the tone, not the content).
>Not that this newsgroup is unique in being harsh and unkind. It
>happens Internet-wide. When a simple, gentle, polite response would
>do, writers always choose the harshest way to say it. I KNOW I am not
>the only one with feelings in this universe (or maybe that's a UL?) I
>think it has to do with the fact that we can't see each others' faces;
>either seeing each other would lead us to identify more with each
>other and have more compassion, or seeing each other would make us
>afraid to speak our real thoughts. If the latter is true, what a
>scary social world we live in (the only reason we aren't at each
>other's throats in the "real world" is because we're too afraid of the
>reaction?)
>--Carol
>Richard Brandt <af...@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>>Jimmycat wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not a regular reader of this newsgroup
>>No! Really?
>>
>>> On this particularl night, she said she had heard from several of her
>>> well-trusted and well-known co-workers at Torrance Memorial that
>>> Richard Gere had been recently admitted.
>>Friend of a mom, eh?
>>A reporter once told me that a detective told her that a body
>>removed from the YMCA had a vibrator up the butt which was
>>determined to be the cause of death. That doesn't mean it
>>happened.
>>
>>> I was astounded a few years later when, as I was telling a roommate
>>> about this story, she responded, "Oh, that's just an urban myth." I
>>> tried to tell her that my Mom knew it to be a true story, but she
>>> acted like it was so bizarre that it couldn't possibly be true.
>>"But...but...this is my MOM we're talking about!"
>>> Huh?
>>> Movie stars don't engage in unusual sexual practices? Ordinary
>>> people, for that matter, don't engage in unusual sexual practices?
>>> Have you looked at a mail-order sex toys catalog recently?
>>"One gross of Gerbils? Certainly, sir, will that be VISA or
>>Master Charge?"
>>> I was also kind of surprised that there wasn't some code of
>>> confidentiality that would have prevented the employees from talking
>>> about it
>>Were ye now.
>>> Anyway, flame me if you will, but I *know* this one is true.
>>Leave me be ye heretic, the soft tissue of me cheek is
>>smarting me for some reason.
>>Richard "She may have made a Very Close Study of the FAQ. our
>>Carol" Brandt
>>--
>>== Richard Brandt is at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8720/ ==
>>"Spammers are the weeds in the flower garden that must be rooted
>>out if we're ever going to make effective use of the medium and
>>reduce the use of paper for legitimate communications."
>> -- Charlie Oriez, Webmaster, Colorado Sierra Club
Fangz
wrote:
>Wow! Certainly a lot of criticisms of my intellect and my character,
>based on such a huge database of information about me.
You only need to smell a bad egg once to know it's rotten.
> I just think
>it's interesting how many heated responses my post got. Must have
>bothered people at some level, eh?
>
Here's a crazy thought; Perhaps the way you presented yourself and
your opinion was simply rude and/or ignorant. Those qualities tend to
draw a negative reaction among most social circles.
mitcho
>
> By the same token, it was only a matter of time before someone with a
> willing female friend, plastic tube, small rodent (looks ratlike to me;
> Mitcho, what's your opinion?) and camera decided to reënact the legend.
I refuse to even look at the photo, but in general rats are much more
amenable to doing with them whatever it is you want to do than their
much cranker cousins mice, gerbils and especially hamsters. Without
actually seeing the movie, I can reveal, for example, that the rodent
featured in several scenes trailered for the recent film _Mouse Hunt_
was in fact no mouse at all, but a rat (though it is certainly a mouse
which appears in the poster at
http://online.prevezanos.com/skf/poster/poster.pl?dat02,mausjagt ).
Charles A. Lieberman
> However, my friends mom is a nurse at St. John's hospital in Santa Monica, and
> swore it happened there. So we still haven't proven anything...
Really? My friend is a nurse at St. Monica Hospital in Newfoundland and
swore up and down that it *never* happened there.
Charles A. Lieberman
> Frankly, if you had spent time
> reading this group, or read a little more about what the FAQ has
> to say about the spreading of folktales
And to ward off further flamage:
http://www.urbanlegends.com/afu.faq/index.html
Charles A. Lieberman
> > I just think
> >it's interesting how many heated responses my post got. Must have
> >bothered people at some level, eh?
> >
>
> Here's a crazy thought; Perhaps the way you presented yourself and
> your opinion was simply rude and/or ignorant.
No no, it's nothing inherent in her post, its just that her mentioning her
mother reminded me of how my family neglected me, and made me feel bad, and
I responded by flaming her.
Tb. People who lash out at non-lurking, non-FAQ-reading clueless newbies
who post something off-topic we've all heard before are motivated purely by
a testosterone rush.
Mike Holmans
decided to opine:
>mitcho wrote:
>
>>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty has
>>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
>
>>Bunnies.
>
>Jackalopes.
>
Disgraceful slur. Jackalopes are claustrophobes and therefore unable
to inhabit enclosed pipes full of fecal matter. That's sewergators.
Mike "see the giant jackalope on Camp Bowie Blvd, Fort Worth, TX!"
Holmans
El Sig has heard a rumour that Warren Beatty lives in a buffalo's butt
--
"Yorkshire is a state of mind" - Dave Budd
The exciting AFU FAQ, and many other things, can be found at
http://www.urbanlegends.com
noone atall
> >mitcho wrote:
> >
> >>> Besides, I heard the much more interesting rumor that Warren Beatty
has
> >>> a whole family of rabbits living in his butt.
noone (rabbits live in a 'warren', no really, they do) atall
JoAnne Schmitz
>While we're on the subject of flames, though, the guy who posted the
>Dan Savage column (Mike Somethingorother) got slammed here to Sunday.
>I'd like to thank him for not (at least as of 6:28 pm EST Wednesday)
>whining. It's hard to tell if the slams were aimed at Savage or at
>Mike. Yes, really they were aimed at the content of the post and not
>the poster, but still, a little buffering might have been in order.
>Or not. Probably doesn't matter.
Was that me? Since I was replying to Savage's words, that's who I was replying
to. Yes, really they were aimed at the content of the post.
I thought the argument was weak, except for the "no evidence" part which I said
was the best part though it does not disprove that someone, somewhere has put a
gerbil up his (or her) ass. "I haven't heard of it" is not disproof; I guess I
think of Savage as less of an authority than the collective research
capabilities of AFU.
Savage debunked a particular version of the story which was implausible to begin
with, addressed the philosophical irrationality of the storyteller as part of
the "argument," and did not address the much more plausible plastic tube and no
mutilation of the gerbil version of the story.
I still don't think gerbils have visited Gere's anus, but it was a poor debunk
of the practice and I'm sticking by my criticisms of it. I think it's
physically possible, generally speaking; it just seems pointless and unlikely to
have happened to Gere.
JoAnne "nothing personal" Schmitz
----- some favorite web sites -----
general search: http://www.altavista.com (web) or http://www.dejanews.com (newsgroups)
UL search: http://www.urbanlengends.com or http://www.snopes.com
RRS
of issue #456 (Oct. 30, 1998) of Entertainment Weekly, in the "Pumpkins
of the Stars," the Richard Gere jack-o-lantern has a gerbil climbing out
of it! Since EW *must* have all the inside scoop of what's happenin' in
Hollywood, it's gotta be true, right? After all, it was published in a
magazine!
Robin "I'm joking, I'm *joking*!" Storesund
Pntbtrclr
Even if the story about Ericson & his partner isn't true its funny
Helge Moulding
> Even if the story about Ericson & his partner isn't true its funny
Even if the story about Pntbtrclr and his partner isn't true, it's
funny.
--
Helge "Hm. Does it work like that?" Moulding
mailto:hmou...@mailexcite.com Just another guy
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1401 with a weird name
Alex Elliott
: Even if the story about Ericson & his partner isn't true its funny
Why?
As to the Richard Gere story, most references seem to date it in
the early 90's. I can report that I heard this story told about a
Philadelphia-area local newsanchor back in 1983 (I even heard the
story revectored this year from another displaced Greater Philadelphian
who *swore* it was true because his friend's ex-boyfriend knew a guy
who had been dating the newsanchor).
This UL has been around a lot longer than it has been attached to Gere.
Alex.
>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<
Alex Elliott
Yale University Physics Department
New Haven, CT, USA
email: ell...@minerva.cis.yale.edu
WWW: http://pantheon.cis.yale.edu/~elliott
>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<>=<
mince...@switchboardmail.com
ell...@pantheon.yale.edu (Alex Elliott) wrote:
>
> As to the Richard Gere story, most references seem to date it in
> the early 90's. I can report that I heard this story told about a
> Philadelphia-area local newsanchor back in 1983 (I even heard the
> story revectored this year from another displaced Greater Philadelphian
> who *swore* it was true because his friend's ex-boyfriend knew a guy
> who had been dating the newsanchor).
>
> This UL has been around a lot longer than it has been attached to Gere.
>
> Alex.
>
And told of others as well. The same story has been going around about a TV
newsman on a Huntington, West Virginia station. I first heard it of him during
the late Eighties. Of course, no cites from the vectors other than "I heard it
from a FOAFOAF.
No, I will *not* name either him or the station. He, and I'm sure the others
who have been the targets of this UL, have already put up with quite enough
embarrassment and plain bullshit, thank you. This story isn't like most of our
harmless UL's, where something-or-other happens to "this guy" or "that woman."
This booger sets out real names of real people, and somehow that bothers the
hell out of me. (Even if it were proved absolutely true, I'm not all that
certain I'd much care.)
I know the story's not going to die. But I can wish. In the meantime, I have
this prodigious digit poised over the DELETE key.
(No, SOCCERNUMB. Look as hard as you want. There is no Anti-Politeness
directed at you in this posting. But dammit, it's a close thing.)
Larry Palletti
--
Opinionated, but lovable
Iota Nu Beta
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Sue Watson
>In article <7181s3$n9r$1...@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
> ell...@pantheon.yale.edu (Alex Elliott) wrote:
>>
>> As to the Richard Gere story, most references seem to date it in
>> the early 90's. I can report that I heard this story told about a
>> Philadelphia-area local newsanchor back in 1983 (I even heard the
>> story revectored this year from another displaced Greater Philadelphian
>> who *swore* it was true because his friend's ex-boyfriend knew a guy
>> who had been dating the newsanchor).
>>
>> This UL has been around a lot longer than it has been attached to Gere.
>>
>> Alex.
>>
The story has also been attributed to an English band, the "pet shop
boys" - supposedly how they got their name.
--
Sue Watson
Gordon Baldwin
But what happened in the early '90's that got Gere so attached to this
story? My sister who worked in the LA health care business knows a bunch
of people who swear the gerbeling incident happened and swear they
actually saw Gere at one of the hospitals. It is usually attached to
Cedar Sini (however that is spelled). I don't for a minute believe Gere
was to get a rodent removed from his posterior, but I do believe Gere
must have done something to get so many people focused on this one
event.
Now it could be as simple as going in to get his blood pressure checked
and someone with a wild imagination got this story circulating.
--
Gordon Baldwin gor...@halcyon.com
Olympia Washington http://www.halcyon.com/gordon
Key fingerprint = BD B5 D6 83 01 64 9C 1A EB 3D BD 29 09 7B EA FD
Laura Jacquez Valentine
> In article <cgAVRBAo...@floorcrafti.demon.co.uk>,
> Sue Watson <s...@floorcrafti.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>In article <7181s3$n9r$1...@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
> >> ell...@pantheon.yale.edu (Alex Elliott) wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As to the Richard Gere story, most references seem to date it in
> >>> the early 90's. I can report that I heard this story told about a
> >>> Philadelphia-area local newsanchor back in 1983 (I even heard the
> >>> story revectored this year from another displaced Greater Philadelphian
> >>> who *swore* it was true because his friend's ex-boyfriend knew a guy
> >>> who had been dating the newsanchor).
> >>>
> >>> This UL has been around a lot longer than it has been attached to Gere.
> >>>
> >>> Alex.
> >>>
> >
> >The story has also been attributed to an English band, the "pet shop
> >boys" - supposedly how they got their name.
Which, according to the convenient PSB FAQ, is not true. Which I'm sure
we all suspected anyway. http://members.aol.com/somespec/psbfaq.txt, if
anyone cares.
--laura "at least one of them is gay but shows no gerbilling
tendencies" valentine
noone
mince...@switchboardmail.com wrote in article
<7196sk$469$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Being born and raised a few miles south of Huntington, West-By
God_Virginia, I know the story of which you speak, but wasn't it the
current weatherman ( the older one).
noone (trying to preserve anonymity sucks) atall
Meek606
story. Just last night at a Halloween party, I got in a heated argument with
one of my best friends who said that she knew the truth of the Gere story for
a fact because our friend Danny's father (a doctor at Cedar Sinai) was on duty
the night it happened. I scoffed and my friend got very angry, asking me how I
could doubt said doctor, a respected man in our community. I tried to explain,
but they will never believe... She went on to say that Rod Stewart's stomach
was pumped, only to find gallons of semen. Pshaw! I asked her if she was sure
it wasn't the New Kids on the Block kid, or Tom Cruise, or a Hanson brother.
-Mieke
mitcho
>
> I'm so sick of arguing with who aren't in the UL "know" about the Gere gerbil
> story. Just last night at a Halloween party, I got in a heated argument with
> one of my best friends who said that she knew the truth of the Gere story for
> a fact because our friend Danny's father (a doctor at Cedar Sinai) was on duty
> the night it happened. I scoffed and my friend got very angry, asking me how I
> could doubt said doctor, a respected man in our community.
Just ask for a date. Such a simple thing, a date.
Then if the date, um, postdates the earliest occurances of the legend
(as it likely will, since the legend is almsot as old as many college
undergraduates), gotcha.
Mitcho
Bill Pringle
Meek606 <mee...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19981101042900...@ng74.aol.com>...
[snip] Gere gerbil intro
asking me how I
> could doubt said doctor, a respected man in our community. I tried to
explain,
> but they will never believe...
Patient doctor confidentiality - the hall mark of a respected physician.
Bill "but you did not hear that from me" Pringle
Lou Serico
> Meek606 wrote:
> >
> > I'm so sick of arguing with who aren't in the UL "know" about the Gere
> > gerbil story. Just last night at a Halloween party, I got in a heated
> > argument with one of my best friends who said that she knew the truth
> > of the Gere story for a fact because our friend Danny's father (a
> > doctor at Cedar Sinai) was on duty the night it happened. I scoffed
> > a respected man in our community.
>
I don't know. I don't think she's my type.
Lou "Sorry, had to say it" Serico
Andrew Welsh
: I'm so sick of arguing with who aren't in the UL "know" about the Gere gerbil
: story. Just last night at a Halloween party, I got in a heated argument with
: one of my best friends who said that she knew the truth of the Gere story
While I'm always loathe to agree with an aoler (unless I'm related to them -
Hi Barbara!), I have to say that this does seem to have been resurgent in
recent weeks. I was discussing it with the woman I love, and she said that
several people had mentioned it in the bar in which she works. Anybody any
theories why?
andrew "not getting a gerbil for Christmas, alas" Welsh
--
Andrew Welsh (and...@panix.com|and...@nufc.com|http://www.panix.com/~andreww)
Opinions expressed above are not necessarily endorsed by my employers.
The AFU FAQ can be obtained from http://www.urbanlegends.com/afu.faq/
Old Qfwfq
>While I'm always loathe to agree with an aoler ...
We are devastate by the news.
Sol "E" Cism
Ewan Kirk
> Anybody any theories why?
Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman case in the UK I expect.
Ewan "aye, they're all gay those migit actors" Kirk.
--E.
You want to email me? You're probably some scum bag guy trying to tell me that I can hand over my credit card details in order to get some pictures of naked people or how I can make money with my computer. In the incredibly unlikely event that you aren't trying to send me commercial email and you want to email me, try "ewan at kirk dot demon dot co dot uk"