Definition of racially coded

[bruce bowser]

White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
-- https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html

[Hibou]

In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Den 10.12.2022 kl. 08.03 skrev Hibou:

> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?

Good question. Maybe we should find a team of experts in such issues.

Hey, wait a minute. The article says:

We are education researchers who specialize in cultural and
racial justice issues.

Hm ...

--
Bertel

[Richard Heathfield]

Racism.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[lar3ryca]

On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>
>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>> --
>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>
>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?
>
> Racism.

That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.

--
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
pause and reflect.
–Mark Twain

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 9:20:26 AM UTC-5, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> > On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
> >> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :

> >>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
> >>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
> >>> --
> >>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
> >> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?

House style.

> > Racism.
>
> That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.

Only bigoted racists think that what one black person may have
said indicates the position of all black people.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 10/12/2022 2:20 pm, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially
>>>> Coded Ways
>>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>>> --
>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>>
>>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and
>>> 'white' not?
>>
>> Racism.
>
> That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.

For a counter-example, see the above URL.

[bruce bowser]

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 10:24:12 AM UTC-5, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 10/12/2022 2:20 pm, lar3ryca wrote:
> > On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> >> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
> >>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially
> >>>> Coded Ways
> >>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
> >>>> --
> >>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
> >>>
> >>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and
> >>> 'white' not?
> >>
> >> Racism.
> >
> > That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.
>
> For a counter-example, see the above URL.

You mean as a devil's advocate? Black Teachers Often Talk About White Students In Racially Coded Ways ?

[lar3ryca]

On 2022-12-10 09:23, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 10/12/2022 2:20 pm, lar3ryca wrote:
>> On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>>>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
>>>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>>>> --
>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>>>
>>>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white'
>>>> not?
>>>
>>> Racism.
>>
>> That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.
>
> For a counter-example, see the above URL.

I did see it. That was sarcasm.

--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world;
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 10/12/2022 7:13 pm, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-12-10 09:23, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 10/12/2022 2:20 pm, lar3ryca wrote:
>>> On 2022-12-10 02:15, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>>>>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially
>>>>>> Coded Ways
>>>>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>>>>
>>>>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and
>>>>> 'white' not?
>>>>
>>>> Racism.
>>>
>>> That can't be right. Only white people can be racist.
>>
>> For a counter-example, see the above URL.
>
> I did see it. That was sarcasm.

Bien sûr. Sorry; tired.

[Hibou]

Le 10/12/2022 à 08:15, Richard Heathfield a écrit :
> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>
>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>> --
>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>
>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?
>
> Racism.

Could be - of the two-wrongs-make-it-right sort.

The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers to
black-skinned people of African descent.

If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black. (Confusing?
An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme [parochialism]?)

There is an inconsistency, I think, in not capitalising 'White' as well,
as a label for white-skinned people of European descent.

But the rule is unsatisfactory. It would make American natives 'Red',
causing confusion with Republicans and Communists.

This is a minefield, and I'm going to back away from it. Thank goodness
it's someone else's problem.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 1:06:38 AM UTC-5, Hibou wrote:
> Le 10/12/2022 à 08:15, Richard Heathfield a écrit :
> > On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
> >> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :

> >>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
> >>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022

> >>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
> >> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?
> > Racism.
>
> Could be - of the two-wrongs-make-it-right sort.
>
> The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers to
> black-skinned people of African descent.
>
> If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black. (Confusing?
> An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme [parochialism]?)
>
> There is an inconsistency, I think, in not capitalising 'White' as well,
> as a label for white-skinned people of European descent.
>
> But the rule is unsatisfactory. It would make American natives 'Red',
> causing confusion with Republicans and Communists.
>
> This is a minefield, and I'm going to back away from it. Thank goodness
> it's someone else's problem.

Just stop writing your fantasies about "American."

You don't know what you're talking about.

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 06:06:32 +0000, Hibou <h...@b.ou> wrote:

>Le 10/12/2022 à 08:15, Richard Heathfield a écrit :
>> On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
>>> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
>>>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
>>>> --
>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
>>>
>>> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?
>>
>> Racism.
>
>Could be - of the two-wrongs-make-it-right sort.
>
>The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers to
>black-skinned people of African descent.
>
>If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black. (Confusing?
>An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme [parochialism]?)

In the US, the term is applied to anyone who visually appears to be of
African descent. If an Australian Aboriginal would visit the US, and
that Australian Aboriginal visually appears to be of African descent,
the Aboriginal might be referred to as "Black".

>
>There is an inconsistency, I think, in not capitalising 'White' as well,
>as a label for white-skinned people of European descent.
>
>But the rule is unsatisfactory. It would make American natives 'Red',
>causing confusion with Republicans and Communists.

Well, they were. The term "Redskins" was commonly used in the US to
refer to native Americans. In the 1940s, I went to the Saturday
morning movies where, in an "Oater", the Redskins battled the
Palefaces. I read comic books where "Redskins" was in print.

Indians were never "Reds", though. "Reds" were communists.

Republicans have never been called "Reds". We refer to Red States and
Blue States, but we don't refer to Republicans as "Reds".

It wasn't until 2020 that the Washington (DC) National Football League
team dropped the name "Washington Redskins" and dropped their logo
that portrayed a Native American. They are now the "Washington
Commanders" and have a very innocuous logo with the letter "W".

There is an American major league basesball teams known as the "Reds".
(Cincinnati Reds) Nothing to do with Indians, though. The name comes
from the color of the stockings the players wore. The Boston Red Sox
are also named for the color of the stockings, but they are not called
simply the "Reds".

>
>This is a minefield, and I'm going to back away from it. Thank goodness
>it's someone else's problem.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

[bruce bowser]

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 1:06:38 AM UTC-5, Hibou wrote:

> Le 10/12/2022 à 08:15, Richard Heathfield a écrit :
> > On 10/12/2022 7:03 am, Hibou wrote:
> >> Le 09/12/2022 à 18:04, bruce bowser a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> White Teachers Often Talk About Black Students In Racially Coded Ways
> >>> Yahoo News - December 8, 2022
> >>> --
> >>> https://news.yahoo.com/white-teachers-often-talk-black-133302970.html
> >>
> >> In the body of this article, why is 'Black' capitalised and 'white' not?
> >
> > Racism.
>
> Could be - of the two-wrongs-make-it-right sort.
>
> The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers to
> black-skinned people of African descent.

And others of an African background, too. Comme une octaron? Ou comme la duchesse de sussex?

> If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black. (Confusing?
> An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme [parochialism]?)
>
> There is an inconsistency, I think, in not capitalising 'White' as well,
> as a label for white-skinned people of European descent.
>
> But the rule is unsatisfactory. It would make American natives 'Red',
> causing confusion with Republicans and Communists.
>
> This is a minefield, and I'm going to back away from it. Thank goodness
> it's someone else's problem.

No. As with central Europe, colors in a country's local, national politics and international politics may sharply differ in meaning, like in inner city Los Angeles jail house politics. Red means the Bloods gang and Crips use the blue color.

[Peter Moylan]

On 12/12/22 04:31, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 06:06:32 +0000, Hibou <h...@b.ou> wrote:

>> The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers
>> to black-skinned people of African descent.
>>
>> If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black.
>> (Confusing? An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme
>> [parochialism]?)
>
> In the US, the term is applied to anyone who visually appears to be
> of African descent. If an Australian Aboriginal would visit the US,
> and that Australian Aboriginal visually appears to be of African
> descent, the Aboriginal might be referred to as "Black".

Apart from skin colour, Australian indigenous people don't look like any
African group that I can think of. And, as Hibou said, they are called
black but not Black. Not often, any way. The upper case is an American
custom.

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

[Tony Cooper]

You know that, but my example was about an Abriginal visiting the US
where practically no one knows what an Abroriginal looks like. If,
visually, they appear to be a "Black", then they might be described as
a "Black". The skin color might be enough to make that association.

Dunno about that "any African group". Blacks in the US don't all fall
into a recognizable group.

[Hibou]

Le 11/12/2022 à 17:31, Tony Cooper a écrit :

> On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 06:06:32 +0000, Hibou wrote:
>>
>> There is an inconsistency, I think, in not capitalising 'White' as well,
>> as a label for white-skinned people of European descent.
>>
>> But the rule is unsatisfactory. It would make American natives 'Red',
>> causing confusion with Republicans and Communists.
>
> Well, they were. The term "Redskins" was commonly used in the US to
> refer to native Americans. In the 1940s, I went to the Saturday
> morning movies where, in an "Oater", the Redskins battled the
> Palefaces. I read comic books where "Redskins" was in print.
>
> Indians were never "Reds", though. "Reds" were communists.
>
> Republicans have never been called "Reds". We refer to Red States and
> Blue States, but we don't refer to Republicans as "Reds".
>
> It wasn't until 2020 that the Washington (DC) National Football League
> team dropped the name "Washington Redskins" and dropped their logo
> that portrayed a Native American. They are now the "Washington
> Commanders" and have a very innocuous logo with the letter "W".
>
> There is an American major league basesball teams known as the "Reds".
> (Cincinnati Reds) Nothing to do with Indians, though. The name comes
> from the color of the stockings the players wore. The Boston Red Sox
> are also named for the color of the stockings, but they are not called
> simply the "Reds".

Well, thanks for all the detail. I was writing tongue-in-cheek,
supposing there was a rule and then ridiculing it - clumsily, it seems.

The question remains unanswered: why Black but not White? Is it a
capital way to atone for the past?

[Richard Heathfield]

The question has been answered, whether or not you realise it.
The practice is discrimination based upon race or ethnicity -
i.e. racism.

[bruce bowser]

Hibou, if you must insist upon accuracy - this is also a valid question, why use White in the first place, instead of Pink or Peach-colored?

Si vous Hibou devez insister sur l'exactitude (c'est aussi une question valable), pourquoi utiliser le Blanc en premier lieu, au lieu du Rose ou de la couleur Pêche ?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:04:51 +1100, Peter Moylan
> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >On 12/12/22 04:31, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >> On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 06:06:32 +0000, Hibou <h...@b.ou> wrote:

> >>> The article is American, so my guess is that 'Black' here refers
> >>> to black-skinned people of African descent.
> >>> If so, an Australian Aborigine would be black but not Black.
> >>> (Confusing? An example of American midi-à-ma-portisme
> >>> [parochialism]?)
> >> In the US, the term is applied to anyone who visually appears to be
> >> of African descent. If an Australian Aboriginal would visit the US,
> >> and that Australian Aboriginal visually appears to be of African
> >> descent, the Aboriginal might be referred to as "Black".
> >Apart from skin colour, Australian indigenous people don't look like any
> >African group that I can think of. And, as Hibou said, they are called
> >black but not Black. Not often, any way. The upper case is an American
> >custom.
>
> You know that, but my example was about an Abriginal visiting the US
> where practically no one knows what an Abroriginal looks like. If,
> visually, they appear to be a "Black", then they might be described as
> a "Black". The skin color might be enough to make that association.

That's like saying a South Indian person would be thought to be black,
just because of their skin color.

Native Australians just don't look like African Americans.

(Neither do Africans who come from parts of the continent that
weren't harvested by slavers.)

[Tony Cooper]

You continue to be confused about the meaning of words and don't know
the difference between "might be" and "would be".

>just because of their skin color.
>
>Native Australians just don't look like African Americans.

Yeah, those African Americans all look alike.

>
>(Neither do Africans who come from parts of the continent that
>weren't harvested by slavers.)
>
>> Dunno about that "any African group". Blacks in the US don't all fall
>> into a recognizable group.

[Tony Cooper]

Which group is being discriminated against? The ones who get the
capital letter or the ones who don't?

Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
capitalized or non-capitalized version?

[Richard Heathfield]

'Against'? Excuse me?

Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
class or category rather than individual merit'.

> The ones who get the
> capital letter or the ones who don't?

The act of giving one group the capital and not the other is a
discriminatory act.

>
> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
> capitalized or non-capitalized version?

If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is

discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.

This really isn't hard.

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 17:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield

That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment or
consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving party,
in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being discriminated
against.

>> The ones who get the
>> capital letter or the ones who don't?
>
>The act of giving one group the capital and not the other is a
>discriminatory act.

If you think so, but who is being discriminated? The ones who get the
capital or the ones who don't?

>>
>> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
>> capitalized or non-capitalized version?
>
>If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is
>discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.

I recently saw a column in my newspaper that contained the following:

"Walker did not receive the number of votes from Blacks that he
expected, but did receive the expected number of votes from whites."

Leonard Pitts is an African American nationally syndicated columnist.
David Brooks is a white American nationally syndicated columnist.

Which one is being a racist if they are the writer of that column? If
either?

[Richard Heathfield]

Everybody. I cannot make sense of your question. When I
categorise soup by putting chicken soup at the left end of the
shelf and tomato soup at the right end of the shelf, I'm
categorising all the soup, not just this flavour or that.

When it's soup, of course, it doesn't matter that my
categorisation is based on the colour of the tin. But when we're
dealing with people, it can matter very much.

>>> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
>>> capitalized or non-capitalized version?
>>
>> If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is
>> discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.
>
> I recently saw a column in my newspaper that contained the following:
>
> "Walker did not receive the number of votes from Blacks that he
> expected, but did receive the expected number of votes from whites."
>
> Leonard Pitts is an African American nationally syndicated columnist.
> David Brooks is a white American nationally syndicated columnist.
>
> Which one is being a racist if they are the writer of that column? If
> either?

The sentence expresses discrimination based upon race or
ethnicity, so it is racist in content. Who wrote it is immaterial.

[bruce bowser]

No group can all look alike.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:16:05 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 17:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield
> <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
> >On 12/12/2022 4:41 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:59:37 +0000, Richard Heathfield
> >> <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

> >>>> The question remains unanswered: why Black but not White? Is it a
> >>>> capital way to atone for the past?
> >>> The question has been answered, whether or not you realise it.
> >>> The practice is discrimination based upon race or ethnicity -
> >>> i.e. racism.
> >> Which group is being discriminated against?
> >'Against'? Excuse me?
> >Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
> >which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
> >class or category rather than individual merit'.

This is amusing. Of course we can expect that Heathfield refuses
to accept that the current meaning of the word has changed --

> That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment or
> consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving party,
> in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being discriminated
> against.

-- but that TC insists (correctly, of course) that the current understanding
is so obvious that it's really the only one that comes into play here.

After all, they're not talking about an oenologist with a discriminating
palate.

> >> The ones who get the
> >> capital letter or the ones who don't?
> >The act of giving one group the capital and not the other is a
> >discriminatory act.
>
> If you think so, but who is being discriminated? The ones who get the
> capital or the ones who don't?

(The question would be _What_ is being discriminated, and the answer
would be capital vs. lowercase -- a really fatuous observation, but I
suppose that's Heathfield's level.)

> >> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
> >> capitalized or non-capitalized version?
> >If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is
> >discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.
>
> I recently saw a column in my newspaper that contained the following:
>
> "Walker did not receive the number of votes from Blacks that he
> expected, but did receive the expected number of votes from whites."
>
> Leonard Pitts is an African American nationally syndicated columnist.
> David Brooks is a white American nationally syndicated columnist.
>
> Which one is being a racist if they are the writer of that column? If
> either?

It's co-signed? I no longer see Brooks on the Sunday morning shows
(but he's a regular on the PBS News Hour), so I get the impression
that he's no longer a rabid rightwinger.

[Tony Cooper]

If you mean "What is the discrimination?", I'll go with "What". I'll
stick with "Who" when the question is about to whom the discrimination
is directed. Heathfield seems to feel that there is discrimination
being directed to one group or the other by the use or non-use of the
capital letter, but he's evading identifying which group it is.

>
>> >> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
>> >> capitalized or non-capitalized version?
>> >If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is
>> >discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.
>>
>> I recently saw a column in my newspaper that contained the following:
>>
>> "Walker did not receive the number of votes from Blacks that he
>> expected, but did receive the expected number of votes from whites."
>>
>> Leonard Pitts is an African American nationally syndicated columnist.
>> David Brooks is a white American nationally syndicated columnist.
>>
>> Which one is being a racist if they are the writer of that column? If
>> either?
>
>It's co-signed? I no longer see Brooks on the Sunday morning shows
>(but he's a regular on the PBS News Hour), so I get the impression
>that he's no longer a rabid rightwinger.

I picked two nationally known US columnists whose columns appear at
times in media I read. Their political positions - "right" or "left"
- is not at point here. Either would have occasion to write "Black".

They do often (always?) hold opposing views, and would not co-author a
column.

One doesn't need to be familiar with, in this example, either
columnist...only that one is white and the other isn't.

[Peter Moylan]

On the question of skin colour:

North Africans, from what I've seen, tend to have lighter skin than
people from further south in Africa. That conflicts with the common
feeling that you should get darker skin as you get closer to the equator.

The current theory, as I understand it, is that the original (African)
humans had dark skin, and then light-coloured skin appeared as a
mutation among those who had migrated to the colder parts of Europe and
Asia. A very successful mutation, probably because dark-skinned people
died out in the cold areas from a vitamin D deficiency.

Does this mean that North Africa is populated by people whose ancestors
migrated from Europe and/or north Asia back to Africa?

Side comment: I gather that (white) Australians have the worst incidence
of melanoma in the world. We're evolved to survive in a cold cloudy country.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 6:46:27 PM UTC-7, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On the question of skin colour:
>
> North Africans, from what I've seen, tend to have lighter skin than
> people from further south in Africa. That conflicts with the common
> feeling that you should get darker skin as you get closer to the equator.
>
> The current theory, as I understand it, is that the original (African)
> humans had dark skin, and then light-coloured skin appeared as a
> mutation among those who had migrated to the colder parts of Europe and
> Asia. A very successful mutation, probably because dark-skinned people
> died out in the cold areas from a vitamin D deficiency.
>
> Does this mean that North Africa is populated by people whose ancestors
> migrated from Europe and/or north Asia back to Africa?

...

Or partly by such people?

To go by

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_North_Africa

there's been a fair amount of gene flow between Europe, the Middle East,
and North Africa.

(The Vandals, originally from northern Europe, had a kingdom in northwest
Africa for a century or so, and probably contributed a little to the genes
there. Their presence is mostly revealed by graffiti, broken sculptures,
and... I'll stop now.)

--
Jerry Friedman

[bruce bowser]

Around the Mediterranean and other coastal areas, the actual shape of civilizations run by Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Greece and Sumeria easily explains how diverse North Africa could have become.

[Hibou]

I'm not insisting on anything, I'm asking a question - well, two - and
it's simpler to deal with them before moving on to others.

> Si vous Hibou devez insister sur l'exactitude (c'est aussi une question valable), pourquoi utiliser le Blanc en premier lieu, au lieu du Rose ou de la couleur Pêche ?

Réponse en anglais ci-dessus, comme il sied ici.

[Hibou]

Le 12/12/2022 à 20:15, Tony Cooper a écrit :

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>> Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
>> which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
>> class or category rather than individual merit'.
>
> That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment or
> consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving party,
> in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being discriminated

> against. [...]

Discrimination is only bad if it's unfair, I think. It's not unfair, for
example, it's not sexist, to offer prostate-cancer screening only to
those with a prostate. And I suppose it wouldn't be unfair, it wouldn't
be racist, to offer Vitamin D supplements, or higher doses, to
dark-skinned people living in less sunny latitudes (likewise, to people
whose religion requires them to cover up almost all their skin). And so on.

We should be discriminating about discrimination.

[Peter Moylan]

On 13/12/22 17:13, Hibou wrote:
> Le 12/12/2022 à 20:15, Tony Cooper a écrit :
>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>
>>> Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
>>> which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
>>> class or category rather than individual merit'.
>>
>> That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment
>> or consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving
>> party, in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being
>> discriminated against. [...]
>
> Discrimination is only bad if it's unfair, I think. It's not unfair,
> for example, it's not sexist, to offer prostate-cancer screening only
> to those with a prostate.

I got a letter from the federal government this year to say that I'm no
longer eligible for bowel cancer screening, because I'm too old.

> And I suppose it wouldn't be unfair, it wouldn't be racist, to offer
> Vitamin D supplements, or higher doses, to dark-skinned people living
> in less sunny latitudes (likewise, to people whose religion requires
> them to cover up almost all their skin). And so on.
>
> We should be discriminating about discrimination.
>

[Richard Heathfield]

On 12/12/2022 11:22 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 13:58:51 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:16:05 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 17:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield
>>> <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 12/12/2022 4:41 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:59:37 +0000, Richard Heathfield
>>>>> <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> The question remains unanswered: why Black but not White? Is it a
>>>>>>> capital way to atone for the past?
>>>>>> The question has been answered, whether or not you realise it.
>>>>>> The practice is discrimination based upon race or ethnicity -
>>>>>> i.e. racism.
>>>>> Which group is being discriminated against?
>>>> 'Against'? Excuse me?
>>>> Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
>>>> which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
>>>> class or category rather than individual merit'.
>>
>> This is amusing. Of course we can expect that Heathfield refuses
>> to accept that the current meaning of the word has changed --

PTD is in my killfile, so I will not enter into debate with him
via the quotes. I will simply observe that artificial new
meanings neither drive out old meanings nor prevent us from using
those older meanings.

>>> That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment or
>>> consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving party,
>>> in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being discriminated
>>> against.
>>
>> -- but that TC insists (correctly, of course) that the current understanding
>> is so obvious that it's really the only one that comes into play here.
>>
>> After all, they're not talking about an oenologist with a discriminating
>> palate.
>>
>>>>> The ones who get the
>>>>> capital letter or the ones who don't?
>>>> The act of giving one group the capital and not the other is a
>>>> discriminatory act.
>>>
>>> If you think so, but who is being discriminated? The ones who get the
>>> capital or the ones who don't?
>>
>> (The question would be _What_ is being discriminated, and the answer
>> would be capital vs. lowercase -- a really fatuous observation, but I
>> suppose that's Heathfield's level.)
>
> If you mean "What is the discrimination?", I'll go with "What". I'll
> stick with "Who" when the question is about to whom the discrimination
> is directed. Heathfield seems to feel that there is discrimination
> being directed to one group or the other by the use or non-use of the
> capital letter, but he's evading identifying which group it is.

We have not even agreed whether there is discrimination. If there
is no discrimination, how can it be directed against either
group? Let us settle that question first before we move on to
"which group it is".

Is it your position that the capitalising of one race but not the
other is, or is not, discriminatory?

<snip>

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

ITYM -------------------------^White.

Or is that a whoosh?

I don't think either columnist is[/are?] familiar to UK posters.

ISTM 'Black' is sometimes a specialist term for those that so identify,
'white' is unspecial as the default [majority] so lowercase; [unless
talking about supremicists].


--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[Janet]

In article <tn9a7s$2fedo$1...@dont-email.me>,
pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid says...

>
> On 13/12/22 17:13, Hibou wrote:
> > Le 12/12/2022 à 20:15, Tony Cooper a écrit :
> >> Richard Heathfield wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Consider this extract from Wiktionary, which gives the sense in
> >>> which I was using the word: 'treatment or consideration based on
> >>> class or category rather than individual merit'.
> >>
> >> That's the definiton of "discrimination". To engage in treatment
> >> or consideration, there must be a receiving party. The receiving
> >> party, in the case of discrimination, is the one who is being
> >> discriminated against. [...]
> >
> > Discrimination is only bad if it's unfair, I think. It's not unfair,
> > for example, it's not sexist, to offer prostate-cancer screening only
> > to those with a prostate.
>
> I got a letter from the federal government this year to say that I'm no
> longer eligible for bowel cancer screening, because I'm
too old.

Which bc screening? (High incidence in my family).
Since 50 I received regular NHS colonoscopy (every 3
years) and regular home FIT screening (every two years).

At 70 I was "retired" from routine (no-symptoms)
colonoscopy appts. OK by me, I know in older people
there's a higher risk of bowel perforation during the
procedure.

At 74 I received a letter from the SNHS to say, I was
now too old for automated FIT service but could opt back
in if I wished.I opted back in and received a charming
letter assuring me I'll continue to recieve FIT screening
every two years as before.

Janet

[Peter T. Daniels]

But that wasn't the question! You have to try to find Heathfield's level.

Can't you just ACCEPT it when I agree with and support you, but you
have to try to find SOMETHING to pick a fight about?

> Heathfield seems to feel that there is discrimination
> being directed to one group or the other by the use or non-use of the
> capital letter, but he's evading identifying which group it is.

No, he pretends that no such thing exists, and the only discrimination
is between the two spellings.

> >> >> Is a person a racist when they write about their own group using the
> >> >> capitalized or non-capitalized version?
> >> >If they ascribe the opposite case to other races, the practice is
> >> >discrimination based upon race or ethnicity - i.e. racism.
> >> I recently saw a column in my newspaper that contained the following:
> >> "Walker did not receive the number of votes from Blacks that he
> >> expected, but did receive the expected number of votes from whites."
> >> Leonard Pitts is an African American nationally syndicated columnist.
> >> David Brooks is a white American nationally syndicated columnist.
> >> Which one is being a racist if they are the writer of that column? If
> >> either?
> >It's co-signed? I no longer see Brooks on the Sunday morning shows
> >(but he's a regular on the PBS News Hour), so I get the impression
> >that he's no longer a rabid rightwinger.
>
> I picked two nationally known US columnists whose columns appear at
> times in media I read. Their political positions - "right" or "left"
> - is not at point here. Either would have occasion to write "Black".

Which has nothing to do with what I asked or the explanation of why
I asked. I am only wondering whether David Brooks (by being an
original never-T****er) lost all his rightwing cred.

> They do often (always?) hold opposing views, and would not co-author a
> column.

Then who wrote the paragraph that you indicated they wrote together?

> One doesn't need to be familiar with, in this example, either
> columnist...only that one is white and the other isn't.

You aren't aware that places like FoxNews go out of their way to find
black conservative columnists? (Not to mention Sen. Tim Scott, or
what was almost the junior senator from Georgia.)

> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida
> I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

And political naivety

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 8:46:27 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On the question of skin colour:
>
> North Africans, from what I've seen, tend to have lighter skin than
> people from further south in Africa. That conflicts with the common
> feeling that you should get darker skin as you get closer to the equator.

North Africans tend to be Arabs, who showed up there less than 1500
years ago, which probably isn't enough time to evolve a climate-related
adaptation.

Horn of Africa people (Ethiopians, Somalians) would be a better
example -- they're generally tall and slender (and, interestingly,
adapted for long-distance running, which would have been a
major survival skill on the savannah -- cheetahs and maybe lions
can go faster, but only for short bursts).

> The current theory, as I understand it, is that the original (African)
> humans had dark skin, and then light-coloured skin appeared as a
> mutation among those who had migrated to the colder parts of Europe and
> Asia. A very successful mutation, probably because dark-skinned people
> died out in the cold areas from a vitamin D deficiency.
>
> Does this mean that North Africa is populated by people whose ancestors
> migrated from Europe and/or north Asia back to Africa?

Nope, the Arabian peninsula.

> Side comment: I gather that (white) Australians have the worst incidence
> of melanoma in the world. We're evolved to survive in a cold cloudy country.

You've had 250 years to catch on. Can't keep up with those moths in
Manchester was it? (Who, apparently, have been going back to primarily
light-colored as the soot has gone away.)

[Peter T. Daniels]

Most trans women have prostates.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Then un-"killfile," moron!

What is "artificial" about language change?

It is, overwhelmingly, non-purposeful. The speech community
needs to communicate a concept, and a ready-made word
is readily available to be applied and its meaning expanded.

Heathfield simply refuses to acknowledge reality.

Maybe that works in his hermetically sealed upper-class British
mini-universe -- perhaps Wodehouse's imaginary Edwardian
society -- in which case he really doesn't belong in an international
forum.

> Is it your position that the capitalising of one race but not the
> other is, or is not, discriminatory?
>
> <snip>
> --
> Richard Heathfield

> vacant - apply within

Quite so.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 4:30:28 AM UTC-5, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

> ISTM 'Black' is sometimes a specialist term for those that so identify,
> 'white' is unspecial as the default [majority] so lowercase; [unless
> talking about supremicists].

Good analysis.

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 07:02:03 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

You don't get points here for agreeing with me. It doesn't even
qualify for a temporary Stooge pass.

Read what I wrote again. I said " Which one is being a racist if they

are the writer of that column? If either?"

That "they" does not suggest co-authorship when it follows "Which
one". It's been a recent topic of discussion there.

>
>> One doesn't need to be familiar with, in this example, either
>> columnist...only that one is white and the other isn't.
>
>You aren't aware that places like FoxNews go out of their way to find
>black conservative columnists? (Not to mention Sen. Tim Scott, or
>what was almost the junior senator from Georgia.)

Neither Scott nor Walker is a columnist. Perhaps you are confusing
"columnist" with "commentator". It's conceivable that Fox News would
engage Scott as a commentator at some time, but even Fox News would
not use Walker in that role.

[bruce bowser]

On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 1:13:24 AM UTC-5, Hibou wrote:

Me? Use only English above? Why? You didn't, here ==> Le 12/12/2022 à 12:23, bruce bowser a écrit.
[Mais moi? à Utiliser seulement l'anglais ci-dessus ? Pourquoi? Vous ne l'avez pas fait, ici ==> Le 12/12/2022 à 12:23, bruce bowser a écrit]

[Sam Plusnet]

On 13-Dec-22 13:48, Janet wrote:
> At 74 I received a letter from the SNHS to say, I was
> now too old for automated FIT service but could opt back
> in if I wished.I opted back in and received a charming
> letter assuring me I'll continue to recieve FIT screening
> every two years as before.

Thanks for that Janet.
Here in Wales the policy _seems_ to be that those over 74 will not be
eligible for screening. The current aim is to continue to lower the
starting age for routine screening, not increase the upper limit.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Peter Moylan]

On 14/12/22 00:48, Janet wrote:
> In article <tn9a7s$2fedo$1...@dont-email.me>, pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid
> says...

>> I got a letter from the federal government this year to say that
>> I'm no longer eligible for bowel cancer screening, because I'm
> too old.
>
> Which bc screening? (High incidence in my family). Since 50 I
> received regular NHS colonoscopy (every 3 years) and regular home FIT
> screening (every two years).
>
> At 70 I was "retired" from routine (no-symptoms) colonoscopy appts.
> OK by me, I know in older people there's a higher risk of bowel
> perforation during the procedure.
>
> At 74 I received a letter from the SNHS to say, I was now too old for
> automated FIT service but could opt back in if I wished.I opted back
> in and received a charming letter assuring me I'll continue to
> recieve FIT screening every two years as before.

The government here mails out a sampling kit to people of a certain age,
with which we can send back a sample to be analysed. I've forgotten the
definition of "a certain age", but as I've just discovered it stops
after age 74.

I do have a colonoscopy every five years or so, and as far as I know my
private health insurance will let me keep doing that. It's harder for
people who rely on the public health system, mostly because many
specialists will only work in privte hospitals.

[Hibou]

Français : je ne crois pas avoir dit qu'il fallait tout écrire en
anglais en ces lieux (ce n'est pas le sens de 'seoir'). Quelques bribes
ci et là en d'autres langues ajoutent du piment, peut-être. Mais nous
sommes entre anglophones ici, le sujet est la langue anglaise, qui est
aussi la langue de travail. C'est donc peu courtois d'en utiliser
systématiquement une autre. Si tu veux employer le français pour parler
de l'anglais, il existe un forum adapté : fr.lettres.langue.anglaise
(tout agonisant qu'il soit).

Quant à « [nom] a écrit », c'est une formule que j'utilise pour tous les
forums, aussi bien les français que les anglais. Que je sache, Oiseau de
tonnerre ne m'en permet qu'une seule, alors il faut faire avec.

English summary: I haven't said that everything should be in English,
but since the participants in this group are English speakers, since the
working language is English, and this is also the subject, it would be
discourteous to write persistently in another language.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Den 14.12.2022 kl. 09.25 skrev Hibou:

> Que je sache, Oiseau de tonnerre ne m'en permet qu'une seule, alors il faut faire avec.

"Oiseau de tonnerre"?

The expression "il faut faire avec" seems clumsy to me (limited
experience in French). Is it normal language?

--
Bertel

[Hibou]

Le 14/12/2022 à 08:40, Bertel Lund Hansen a écrit :
> Den 14.12.2022 kl. 09.25 skrev Hibou:
>>
>> Que je sache, Oiseau de tonnerre ne m'en permet qu'une seule, alors il
>> faut faire avec.
>
> "Oiseau de tonnerre"?

Thunderbird. ;-)

> The expression "il faut faire avec" seems clumsy to me (limited
> experience in French). Is it normal language?

Informal, and common enough. Here is an example from a debate in the
European Parliament:

« Bon, on a eu ce qu'on a eu. Il faut faire avec » -
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-5-2000-10-04_FR.html>

(Well, we've had what we've had. We'll have to make do.)

[Peter Moylan]

You are responding to the bowser, who has the rude habit of throwing in
comments in random languages for no good reason. I imagine he's already
in a few killfiles because of it.

Yes, there are times when something in another language is relevant to
the discussion, and I have nothing against that. But random brain-farts
are not helpful.

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 22:30:39 +1100
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 14/12/22 19:25, Hibou wrote:

[about bowser]

>
> You are responding to the bowser, who has the rude habit of throwing in
> comments in random languages for no good reason. I imagine he's already
> in a few killfiles because of it.
>
> Yes, there are times when something in another language is relevant to
> the discussion, and I have nothing against that. But random brain-farts
> are not helpful.
>

I note a recent anti-semitic post by bowser; I wonder if it's another
nym used by the troll that does the Skipflex hate-posts and it's slipped
up.

[Hibou]

Le 14/12/2022 à 11:30, Peter Moylan a écrit :
> On 14/12/22 19:25, Hibou wrote:
>>
>> English summary: I haven't said that everything should be in English,
>>  but since the participants in this group are English speakers, since
>> the working language is English, and this is also the subject, it
>> would be discourteous to write persistently in another language.
>
> You are responding to the bowser, who has the rude habit of throwing in
> comments in random languages for no good reason. I imagine he's already

> in a few killfiles because of it. [...]

A bowser who likes fuelling debate? That does make sense.

[CDB]

On 12/13/2022 10:18 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

>> ISTM 'Black' is sometimes a specialist term for those that so
>> identify, 'white' is unspecial as the default [majority] so
>> lowercase; [unless talking about supremicists].

> Good analysis.

But that depends on the colour of the majority. In Haitian Creole,
"neg" means "Black person", but it can be used to mean "person".

[Richard Heathfield]

On 14/12/2022 2:16 pm, CDB wrote:
> On 12/13/2022 10:18 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>
>>> ISTM 'Black' is sometimes a specialist term for those that so
>>> identify, 'white' is unspecial as the default [majority] so
>>> lowercase; [unless talking about supremicists].
>
>> Good analysis.
>
> But that depends on the colour of the majority.

The majority? That'd be the Chinese, who probably wouldn't thank
you for labelling them either black or white, no matter what case
you use.

[bruce bowser]

On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 6:40:55 AM UTC-5, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 22:30:39 +1100
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 14/12/22 19:25, Hibou wrote:
> [about bowser]
> >
> > You are responding to the bowser, who has the rude habit of throwing in
> > comments in random languages for no good reason. I imagine he's already
> > in a few killfiles because of it.
> >
> > Yes, there are times when something in another language is relevant to
> > the discussion, and I have nothing against that. But random brain-farts
> > are not helpful.
> >
> I note a recent anti-semitic post by bowser

We're waiting to see it. What's keeping you?

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

Maybe it was 'bozo' then, apologise to all.

[Ken Blake]

On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 12:13:50 +1100, Peter Moylan
<pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>The government here mails out a sampling kit to people of a certain age,
>with which we can send back a sample to be analysed. I've forgotten the
>definition of "a certain age", but as I've just discovered it stops
>after age 74.
>
>I do have a colonoscopy every five years or so, and as far as I know my
>private health insurance will let me keep doing that. It's harder for
>people who rely on the public health system, mostly because many
>specialists will only work in privte hospitals.

My last colonoscopy was ten years ago, when I was 75. The doctor who
did it told me it should be my last because after 75, the risk of the
colon being perforated and my dying of sepsis was greater than the
risk of my developing colon cancer.

[Sam Plusnet]

Not a word in many active vocabularies today, I think.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvanus_Bowser

states:

"In New Zealand and Australia it is still a generic term for consumer
fuel pumps, while in the United Kingdom it refers to wheeled water
tankers (either automotive or towed) used to supply fresh water to areas
where normal supplies have been interrupted."

I recognise the fresh water use, but also as a wheeled tanker used to
fuel aircraft.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Peter T. Daniels]

"Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
on 80s game shows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman

[bruce bowser]

On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 1:13:24 AM UTC-5, Hibou wrote:

> Le 12/12/2022 à 12:23, bruce bowser a écrit :
> > On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 1:54:23 AM UTC-5, Hibou wrote:
> >>
> >> The question remains unanswered: why Black but not White? Is it a
> >> capital way to atone for the past?
> >
> > Hibou, if you must insist upon accuracy - this is also a valid question, why use White in the first place, instead of Pink or Peach-colored?
>
> I'm not insisting on anything,

No. I never said that you insisted on anything. Just if ... [Non, je n'ai jamais dit que tu insistais sur quoi que ce soit. Juste si ... ]

> I'm asking a question - well, two -

And I am questioning one of these two questions: [Et je me pose une de ces deux questions:]
So, I'll ask again [sooo, je vais redemander]. Why say White in the first place. instead of Pink or Peach-colored? [Pourquoi utiliser le Blanc en premier lieu, au lieu du Rose ou de la couleur Pêche?]

[Peter Moylan]

Thanks for that comment. I'll air it the next time I see my GP.

[Hibou]

Yes, that's how I know it, from stories of the RAF.

[Hibou]

All right. I think the term Black exists, and is capitalised, just to
allow one to say: "Obama was the Black white hope of America."

Voilà !

[Ken Blake]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:43:50 +1100, Peter Moylan

<pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 15/12/22 04:23, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 12:13:50 +1100, Peter Moylan
>> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> The government here mails out a sampling kit to people of a certain age,
>>> with which we can send back a sample to be analysed. I've forgotten the
>>> definition of "a certain age", but as I've just discovered it stops
>>> after age 74.
>>>
>>> I do have a colonoscopy every five years or so, and as far as I know my
>>> private health insurance will let me keep doing that. It's harder for
>>> people who rely on the public health system, mostly because many
>>> specialists will only work in privte hospitals.
>>
>> My last colonoscopy was ten years ago, when I was 75. The doctor who
>> did it told me it should be my last because after 75, the risk of the
>> colon being perforated and my dying of sepsis was greater than the
>> risk of my developing colon cancer.
>
>Thanks for that comment. I'll air it the next time I see my GP.

You're welcome. Let me know whether he agrees.

[Tak To]

On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> on 80s game shows.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman

You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?

Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?

--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ta...@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr

[Sam Plusnet]

I'll be interesting to see if conventional wisdom within the medical
profession travels well.


--
Sam Plusnet

[Richard Heathfield]

On 15/12/2022 6:30 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
> I'll be interesting to see

I doubt it not, sir!

[bruce bowser]

Wow. If as an Aussie, that's your feeling, then you are much less polite than a good friend I have over at Monash Japanese language studies.

[charles]

In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,

Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> > on 80s game shows.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman

> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?

> Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?

Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> > on 80s game shows.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>
> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?

I have mentioned before that I have never knowingly heard any
song by [insert name of any popular music group other than the
Beach Boys], except for a handful of Beatles songs. I did once
try to listen to a Rolling Stones album at someone's behest.

I tried to watch the Woodstock movie once, and I also tried to
watch Ang Lee's midrash on the original. Didn't last more than
a few minutes of either.

> Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?

Probably.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:45:12 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:
> In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
> > On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> > > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> > > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> > > on 80s game shows.
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
> > You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
> > Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?
>
> Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?

Oh, _that_ Woodstock!

[charles]

In article <86bb286a-e2f9-4dca...@googlegroups.com>,

the only one I know

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:17:50 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
>> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
>> > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
>> > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
>> > on 80s game shows.
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>>
>> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
>
>I have mentioned before that I have never knowingly heard any
>song by [insert name of any popular music group other than the
>Beach Boys], except for a handful of Beatles songs. I did once
>try to listen to a Rolling Stones album at someone's behest.
>

That surprises me. You often refer to watching "The Late Show with
Stephen Colbert". At the end of (almost) every show, a "musical
guest" performs. Sometimes it is a guest who was interviewed earlier
in the show, but the appearance is usually limited to just the
performance part.

Do you switch off the TV before the "musical guest"?

"Musical group" is, I suppose, an ambigious term. Almost all
performers are part of a group if you include backup singers and
instrumentalists, but you may mean "group" in the sense of several
lead singers.

I'd cite some of the "musical guests", but I record the show and
rarely watch the "musical guest" part. I delete the recording before
they perform.




--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 20:22:59 +0000 (GMT), charles
<cha...@candehope.me.uk> wrote:

>In article <86bb286a-e2f9-4dca...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:45:12 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:
>> > In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> > Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
>> > > On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>> > > > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
>> > > > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
>> > > > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
>> > > > on 80s game shows.
>> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>> > > You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
>> > > Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?
>> >
>> > Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?
>
>> Oh, _that_ Woodstock!
>
>the only one I know

If all of the people who claim to have attended Woodstock (1969) were
actually there, Yasgur's farm would have been larger than the entire
state of New York.

[bruce bowser]

Listening to the Beach Boys and then being diverted to the Beatle? All that was slightly before my time.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:45:11 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:
> In article <86bb286a-e2f9-4dca...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:45:12 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:
> > > In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,
> > > Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
> > > > On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > > > > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> > > > > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> > > > > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> > > > > on 80s game shows.
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
> > > > You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
> > > > Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?
> > > Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?
> > Oh, _that_ Woodstock!
>
> the only one I know

Oh, my. Where do you suppose Schulz got the name from?

In an interview replayed on his 100th birthday the other day,
he said that he would never have called his strip "Peanuts" --
and asked what would be a good name, eventually he
suggested "Snoopy."

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:51:21 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:17:50 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
> >> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >> > "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> >> > a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> >> > a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> >> > on 80s game shows.
> >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
> >> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
> >I have mentioned before that I have never knowingly heard any
> >song by [insert name of any popular music group other than the
> >Beach Boys], except for a handful of Beatles songs. I did once
> >try to listen to a Rolling Stones album at someone's behest.
>
> That surprises me. You often refer to watching "The Late Show with
> Stephen Colbert". At the end of (almost) every show, a "musical
> guest" performs. Sometimes it is a guest who was interviewed earlier
> in the show, but the appearance is usually limited to just the
> performance part.

It's rarely a group.

Unless it's a Broadway scene, or Paul Simon, I turn it off before
that and go to the BBC on WNYC to lull me to sleep. (I would
also stay for Billy Joel, to whom I was introduced by SNL.)

Though I did just try Ed Scheeren to try to find out what the fuss
is -- longest run in the history of Madison Square Garden?? Didn't
make it to the end.

> Do you switch off the TV before the "musical guest"?
>
> "Musical group" is, I suppose, an ambigious term. Almost all
> performers are part of a group if you include backup singers and
> instrumentalists, but you may mean "group" in the sense of several
> lead singers.

Have there been "backup singers" since disco days??

You make it sound like there are "lead singers" and "follower

[Richard Heathfield]

Let's crunch some numbers. Estimated actual attendance 400,000
(whoa!). And yes, I checked and it seems there really were that
many (possibly even more) present all at the same time.

Yasgur's farm is 240 hectares (let's stick with metric, shall
we?) giving us 2,400,000 square metres, or 6 m^2 per person.

New York State has a land area of 12,205,700 hectares or
122,057,000,000 m^2.

So for the whole state to be needed to cater for everyone who
claimed to have been present (at the same population density),
we'd need 20,342,833,333 claimants, i.e. roughly 2.5 times the
number of people currently living.

(And for the record, I wasn't there.)

[Peter T. Daniels]

No idea what that's supposed to mean, but both Lennon and
McCartney acknowledged what a huge influence Brian Wilson
was on their development, especially the album *Pet Sounds*.

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 14:25:44 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

The term is still current. The backup singers for Paul Simon's
"Graceland" album:

https://www.postandcourier.com/charleston_scene/graceland-backup-singers-to-perform-at-the-music-hall/article_4c8460b4-f91f-11e6-832f-e3eddf07c3f9.html

The backup singer for Billy Joel

https://kbgo.iheart.com/featured/big-95-morning-show/content/2020-06-02-billy-joel-back-up-singer-crystal-taliefero-talks-about-decades-with-him/

And...Ed Sheeran appearance on SNL described as "Sheeran performed on
the most recent episode SNL – the fifth of season 47, which aired last
night (November 6) and marked his third appearance on the show –
alongside a three-piece band and two backup singers.

https://www.nme.com/news/music/watch-ed-sheeran-perform-overpass-graffiti-and-shivers-on-saturday-night-live-3089034

>You make it sound like there are "lead singers" and "follower
>singers."

The non-lead singers are sometimes described providing the "backing
vocals".

Do you think it will ever occur to you to actually find out if what
you are going to write should be written before you write it?

[bruce bowser]

Yes, used by Rick Springfield or Phil Collins? You don't know that? And Madonna, The Police, Janet Jackson (during the 80s).

Are you in your 80s.

[Madhu]

* "Kerr-Mudd, John" <20221214165150.4ff5...@127.0.0.1> :
> Maybe it was 'bozo' then, apologise to all.
It was forged. bozo/bruce/tz are gg users, the forged posts are not gg.

[Peter Moylan]

On 16/12/22 05:36, charles wrote:
> In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
>> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>>> "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
>>> a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
>>> a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
>>> on 80s game shows.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>
>> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
>
>> Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?
>
> Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?

How much wood would a Woodstock stock if a Woodstock would stock wood?

[bruce bowser]

> How much wood would a Woodstock stock if a Woodstock would stock ...

I mock the knock of the tic-toc by the clock on the block near the rock out at the dock.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 5:51:31 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 14:25:44 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:51:21 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:

> >> "Musical group" is, I suppose, an ambigious term. Almost all
> >> performers are part of a group if you include backup singers and
> >> instrumentalists, but you may mean "group" in the sense of several
> >> lead singers.
> >Have there been "backup singers" since disco days??
>
> The term is still current.

FSVO "current."

> The backup singers for Paul Simon's
> "Graceland" album:
>
> https://www.postandcourier.com/charleston_scene/graceland-backup-singers-to-perform-at-the-music-hall/article_4c8460b4-f91f-11e6-832f-e3eddf07c3f9.html
>
> The backup singer for Billy Joel
>
> https://kbgo.iheart.com/featured/big-95-morning-show/content/2020-06-02-billy-joel-back-up-singer-crystal-taliefero-talks-about-decades-with-him/

> Do you think it will ever occur to you to actually find out if what
> you are going to write should be written before you write it?

Which am I supposed to believe, my lying eyes (objective fact),
or your decades-old reminiscences?

[Peter T. Daniels]

That would be disco days.

> Are you in your 80s.

No,, but TC is.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 07:46:46 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 5:51:31 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 14:25:44 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:51:21 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> >> "Musical group" is, I suppose, an ambigious term. Almost all
>> >> performers are part of a group if you include backup singers and
>> >> instrumentalists, but you may mean "group" in the sense of several
>> >> lead singers.
>> >Have there been "backup singers" since disco days??
>>
>> The term is still current.
>
>FSVO "current."

If it's still in frequent use, it's "current".

>> The backup singers for Paul Simon's
>> "Graceland" album:
>>
>> https://www.postandcourier.com/charleston_scene/graceland-backup-singers-to-perform-at-the-music-hall/article_4c8460b4-f91f-11e6-832f-e3eddf07c3f9.html
>>
>> The backup singer for Billy Joel
>>
>> https://kbgo.iheart.com/featured/big-95-morning-show/content/2020-06-02-billy-joel-back-up-singer-crystal-taliefero-talks-about-decades-with-him/
>
>> Do you think it will ever occur to you to actually find out if what
>> you are going to write should be written before you write it?
>
>Which am I supposed to believe, my lying eyes (objective fact),
>or your decades-old reminiscences?

What do your eyes see when you are presented with links to current
articles about the backup singers of the people you used as examples:
Paul Simon, Billy Joel, and Ed Sheeran? (You maliciously snipped the
link to Sheeran on SNL)

Most Americans would probably pick Taylor Swift as the
most-currently-recognized name in pop music.

https://taylorswiftswitzerland.jimdo.com/wiki/the-starlights/

lists her "back up" singers as the Starlights.

[Tony Cooper]

No, the "disco days" would have been in the late 1970s.

[Sam Plusnet]

On 15-Dec-22 18:36, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 15/12/2022 6:30 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>>
>> I'll be interesting to see
>
> I doubt it not, sir!

I wonder where that "t" went?

It's too late to ask Santa for a new keyboard.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Sam Plusnet]

On 15-Dec-22 20:22, charles wrote:
> In article <86bb286a-e2f9-4dca...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:45:12 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:
>>> In article <tnfoqo$34t87$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>> Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx> wrote:
>>>> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>>>> "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
>>>>> a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
>>>>> a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
>>>>> on 80s game shows.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>>>> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
>>>> Has anyone else not seen /Woodstock/?
>>>
>>> Isn't he Snoopy's bird friend?
>
>> Oh, _that_ Woodstock!
>
> the only one I know

?? It's just north of Oxford.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Peter T. Daniels]

You cited "Graceland." You didn't bother to look up its date.

You cited nothing for Billy Joel, who hasn't had an advertised
gig in NY in years.

> Billy Joel, and Ed Sheeran? (You maliciously snipped the
> link to Sheeran on SNL)

If you had mentioned SNL earlier, I would have pointed out that
(if I'm awake) SNL regularly gives me two five-minute opportunities
to do sudoku or crosswords. I completely tune out the "musical
guest." On Colbert last week, he did not have backup singers
(unless they appeared after he put me to sleep -- I woke up when
James Corden was visiting one of his guests' dressing room).

> Most Americans would probably pick Taylor Swift as the
> most-currently-recognized name in pop music.

I recognize the name, of course. She just became the first
person to occupy all top ten slots in some popularity chart.
However, I would not be able to determine whether some
random song was her, Britney Spears, or any other woman
of their ilk.

> https://taylorswiftswitzerland.jimdo.com/wiki/the-starlights/
>
> lists her "back up" singers as the Starlights.

I really dpn't care.

That you are incapable of recognizing a "rhetorical question"
is more troubling.

Doubtless if someone were foolish enough to coerce you
into attending a performance of *Company*, when Elaine
Stritch (in the original, 51 years ago) or Patti LuPone (in
the current revival) sang "Does anybody still wear a hat?"
you would leap out of your seat and provide her with a
census of all the hats to be found that very moment in
the theater.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 11:18:28 AM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 07:48:10 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 6:08:12 PM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
> >> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 5:25:46 PM UTC-5, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >> > Have there been "backup singers" since disco days??
> >> Yes, used by Rick Springfield or Phil Collins? You don't know that? And Madonna, The Police, Janet Jackson (during the 80s).
> >That would be disco days.
>
> No, the "disco days" would have been in the late 1970s.

Studio 54 lasted until 1989.

Limelight operated as a disco from 1983 to "the 1990s,"
when it changed format to a rock club.

Go teach your grandsons to suck eggs.

And stop trying to "prove" that anything I post is wrong.

You almost always fail -- and you maintain your sleazy role
of stoogemaster by deleting every refutation when you reply
with some further inane comment.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 13:01:21 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

[Tak To]

On 12/15/2022 4:14 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
> [...]

>
> If all of the people who claim to have attended Woodstock (1969) were
> actually there, Yasgur's farm would have been larger than the entire
> state of New York.

I never knew that there were a lot of claims (true or false)
for having attended Woodstock.

One of my former colleagues said he was the one who had
appendicitis and was taken to a hospital by a helicopter
(as seen in the film). I believe he was telling the truth.

--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ta...@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr

[bruce bowser]

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 4:09:19 PM UTC-5, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 11:18:28 AM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 07:48:10 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> > <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 6:08:12 PM UTC-5, bruce bowser wrote:
> > >> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 5:25:46 PM UTC-5, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > >> > Have there been "backup singers" since disco days??
> > >> Yes, used by Rick Springfield or Phil Collins? You don't know that? And Madonna, The Police, Janet Jackson (during the 80s).
> > >That would be disco days.
> >
> > No, the "disco days" would have been in the late 1970s.
> Studio 54 lasted until 1989.
>
> Limelight operated as a disco from 1983 to "the 1990s,"
> when it changed format to a rock club.
>
> Go teach your grandsons to

When did breakdancing begin? After disco? Look up disco and breakdancing. Get your dates straight.

[Tak To]

On 12/15/2022 2:17 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
>> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>>> "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
>>> a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
>>> a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
>>> on 80s game shows.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
>>
>> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?
>

> I have mentioned before that I have never knowingly heard any
> song by [insert name of any popular music group other than the
> Beach Boys], except for a handful of Beatles songs. I did once
> try to listen to a Rolling Stones album at someone's behest.

You might have mentioned that but I was not paying attention.
Now the notions intrigues me. What do you mean by "knowingly
heard" exactly? Not recognizing the song? Recognizing the
song but not knowing the peformer(s)?

And what does "popular music group" mean? Music groups that
are popular, or groups of "popular music"? And what would
"popular music" means anyway? Anything but rock?

In any case, your lack of general curiosity musicology-wise
seems rather remarkably.

> I tried to watch the Woodstock movie once, and I also tried to
> watch Ang Lee's midrash on the original. Didn't last more than
> a few minutes of either.

The original /Woodstock/ is just a documentary, little more
than a series of performances. I first saw it when I was
still in Hong Kong. The only performer I knew back then was
Joan Baez (not a group).

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 13:01:21 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

The album is not what was cited. The article is about the backup
singers. A current reference a current reference to the term.

>
>You cited nothing for Billy Joel, who hasn't had an advertised
>gig in NY in years.

The article identifies the singer as a backup singer. A current
reference to the term.

>
>> Billy Joel, and Ed Sheeran? (You maliciously snipped the
>> link to Sheeran on SNL)
>
>If you had mentioned SNL earlier, I would have pointed out that
>(if I'm awake) SNL regularly gives me two five-minute opportunities
>to do sudoku or crosswords. I completely tune out the "musical
>guest." On Colbert last week, he did not have backup singers
>(unless they appeared after he put me to sleep -- I woke up when
>James Corden was visiting one of his guests' dressing room).
>
>> Most Americans would probably pick Taylor Swift as the
>> most-currently-recognized name in pop music.
>
>I recognize the name, of course. She just became the first
>person to occupy all top ten slots in some popularity chart.
>However, I would not be able to determine whether some
>random song was her, Britney Spears, or any other woman
>of their ilk.
>
>> https://taylorswiftswitzerland.jimdo.com/wiki/the-starlights/
>>
>> lists her "back up" singers as the Starlights.
>
>I really dpn't care.

So you don't watch musical guests when they appear on shows you do
watch, but you are nonetheless convinced that those other vocalists
that appear with them are not "backup singers"...an observation based
on not observing.

>
>That you are incapable of recognizing a "rhetorical question"
>is more troubling.

Yes, I know what a "rhetorical question" is when it's yours. It's
what you later call something you've finally figured out was a
question posed out of ignorance.

>
>Doubtless if someone were foolish enough to coerce you
>into attending a performance of *Company*, when Elaine
>Stritch (in the original, 51 years ago) or Patti LuPone (in
>the current revival) sang "Does anybody still wear a hat?"
>you would leap out of your seat and provide her with a
>census of all the hats to be found that very moment in
>the theater.

I've never been fortunate enough to have seen Stritch on stage, but I
did watch all of the "Two's Company" episodes. Back in the 1970s,
when cable wasn't a thing and most broadcast TV was pap, our local PBS
station carried a lot of Brit programs. We had a VCR and set it to
record shows like "Two's Company" in case we weren't at home for the
actual show. The dialog between Stritch and Sinden was brilliantly
funny.

It amuses me that Stritch was married to John Bay, of the Bays English
Muffins company and gave friends baskets of Bays English Muffins to
friends when they were living in London. I can imagine the wonder of
an English person receiving a gift that they would not consider to be
either a muffin or English.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 16:54:47 -0500, Tak To <ta...@alum.mit.eduxx>
wrote:

>On 12/15/2022 4:14 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> If all of the people who claim to have attended Woodstock (1969) were
>> actually there, Yasgur's farm would have been larger than the entire
>> state of New York.
>
>I never knew that there were a lot of claims (true or false)
>for having attended Woodstock.

https://ask.metafilter.com/43659/How-many-people-were-really-there

Woodstock is one of several events where more people claim to have
been there than were actually there.

Some "I was at Woodstock" stories even involved seeing Bob Dylan or
Led Zeppelin there.

>
>One of my former colleagues said he was the one who had
>appendicitis and was taken to a hospital by a helicopter
>(as seen in the film). I believe he was telling the truth.
--

[bruce bowser]

With England being the southern region of the UK outside of Wales and Scotland, the folks i've met from the UK would most certainly disagree with you.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 5:26:55 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
> On 12/15/2022 2:17 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 1:25:32 PM UTC-5, Tak To wrote:
> >> On 12/14/2022 2:19 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >>> "Bowser" is a pretty standard name for a junkyard sort of dog --
> >>> a big fierce sort of dog -- and thence (as "Bowzer") the name of
> >>> a member of Sha Na Na, whom I know only from appearances
> >>> on 80s game shows.
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Bauman
> >> You meant you didn't know about the band before the 80's?

I had heard of it, of course.

> > I have mentioned before that I have never knowingly heard any
> > song by [insert name of any popular music group other than the
> > Beach Boys], except for a handful of Beatles songs. I did once
> > try to listen to a Rolling Stones album at someone's behest.

Oh, also: Queen. On an airplane once, the only watchable thing was
a documentary about their big Wembley Stadium concert, and I
liked their stuff and Freddy Mercury.

> You might have mentioned that but I was not paying attention.
> Now the notions intrigues me. What do you mean by "knowingly
> heard" exactly? Not recognizing the song? Recognizing the
> song but not knowing the peformer(s)?

Certainly not "recognizing" something I had never heard.

Some songs are used in advertising, and later I find out that
they were licensed from years ago.

> And what does "popular music group" mean? Music groups that
> are popular, or groups of "popular music"? And what would
> "popular music" means anyway? Anything but rock?

Someone here bitched when I referred to "pop music," which
is apparently a genre within popular music.

> In any case, your lack of general curiosity musicology-wise
> seems rather remarkably.

?

> > I tried to watch the Woodstock movie once, and I also tried to
> > watch Ang Lee's midrash on the original. Didn't last more than
> > a few minutes of either.
>
> The original /Woodstock/ is just a documentary, little more
> than a series of performances. I first saw it when I was
> still in Hong Kong. The only performer I knew back then was
> Joan Baez (not a group).

She's still with us.

A number of years ago, when Trinity Church Wall Street had a
Thursday afternoon free concert series over about ten weeks
each summer, I went to one with Copland's "Lincoln Portrait"
and the narrator was Judy Collins.