"Mild language"

[Mike Barnes]

I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[the Omrud]

On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

No, I don't like it either.

--
David

[R H Draney]

the Omrud filted:

The same sort of warnings are issued regarding "adult situations", which appears
to mean "people behaving like adolescents"....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Peter Percival]

Mike Barnes wrote:
> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

I saw the phrase used some time ago in Radio Times about a film on
telly. It struck me as downright laughable.

--
[Dancing is] a perpendicular expression of a horizontal desire.
G.B. Shaw quoted in /New Statesman/, 23 March 1962

[Katy Jennison]

On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:

> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>

My first thought would be that it's a spoof, a play on 'strong language'
but jokily warning you that it's all very bland, unlike almost
everything else these days.

--
Katy Jennison

[Guy Barry]

"Katy Jennison" wrote in message news:lssmu4$vnc$1...@news.albasani.net...

Not a spoof, sadly. I came across it in a warning on a programme on the ITV
Player catch-up service: "Contains some sexual humour and mild language".
Quite incongruous.

--
Guy Barry

[Don Phillipson]

> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

"the Omrud" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:FmjIv.477969$kQ7....@fx12.am4...

> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

This was standard colloquial English 50+ years ago, as used in
Under Milk Wood where people censure others for "using language."
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Pablo]

Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
deaf people.

--

Pablo

http://www.ipernity.com/home/313627
http://paulc.es/

[Peter Moylan]

On 18/08/14 18:51, Mike Barnes wrote:

> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

Perhaps it means what it says. I'm sure that some TV viewers would
appreciate a warning "Does not contain nudity".

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org

[Peter T. Daniels]

So you're a fan of Maury Povich and Jerry Springer and the like? That's
the only place foul language is likely to appear on broadcast TV.

Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
programs, you might not want to continue residing there.

It isn't only deaf people who can recognize the Seven Dirty Words from
facial movements.

[Pablo]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> On Monday, August 18, 2014 8:16:02 AM UTC-4, Pablo wrote:
>> Katy Jennison wrote:
>> > On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>
>> >> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>> >> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>> >> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>> >> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>> > My first thought would be that it's a spoof, a play on 'strong
>> > language' but jokily warning you that it's all very bland, unlike
>> > almost everything else these days.
>>
>> Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
>> programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
>> mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
>> deaf people.
>
> So you're a fan of Maury Povich and Jerry Springer and the like? That's
> the only place foul language is likely to appear on broadcast TV.

I have no idea what you refer to.

> Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
> in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
> programs, you might not want to continue residing there.

The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
options to be VO - original language).

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <c5ej92...@mid.individual.net>,
Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:

>Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
>> in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
>> programs, you might not want to continue residing there.
>
>The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
>of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
>options to be VO - original language).

Cable channels (where that particular sort of crap airs) are not
subject to broadcast indecency regulations since they are not
broadcast. They are, however, subject to their owners' and viewers'
prudishness. (Even the broadcast channels are only subject to
broadcast indecency regulations between 6 AM and 10 PM, but their
owners' and viewers' prudishness generally prevents airing of indecent
content even when not prohibited. Graphic violence, of course, is
permitted 24 hours a day.)

PTD may perhaps not be familiar with the full spectrum of crappy cable
channels on offer today. HBO is not the whole universe of "cable".

-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:09:19 +0200, Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:

>>> Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
>>> programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
>>> mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
>>> deaf people.
>>
>> So you're a fan of Maury Povich and Jerry Springer and the like? That's
>> the only place foul language is likely to appear on broadcast TV.
>
>I have no idea what you refer to.
>
>> Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
>> in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
>> programs, you might not want to continue residing there.
>
>The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
>of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
>options to be VO - original language).

PTD does not subscribe to cable TV. Evidently, the antenna on his
Saturn doesn't pick up cable.

He's unfamiliar with those so-called reality shows where the language
is sometimes a bit raw. I'm also unfamiliar with them, but because I
don't choose to watch them. He might if he could. Anyone who would
watch "Dancing with the Stars" would watch anything.

I do admit to watching "Fashion Police". My wife got me hooked. It's
a show where Joan Rivers and three other fashionistas comment on show
biz celebrity outfits. I have a problem in not recognizing that
certain people are "celebrities" because I've never heard of them, but
Joan Rivers is devastatingly funny in her comments. Crude, but funny.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 11:09:19 AM UTC-4, Pablo wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Monday, August 18, 2014 8:16:02 AM UTC-4, Pablo wrote:

> >> Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
> >> programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
> >> mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
> >> deaf people.
> > So you're a fan of Maury Povich and Jerry Springer and the like? That's
> > the only place foul language is likely to appear on broadcast TV.
>
> I have no idea what you refer to.

Broadcast TV is TV that is broadcast. Anyone with a TV set can receive it.
Cable TV is sent through wires (or via satellite) and can only be seen by
people who pay for it, and the FCC does not have jurisdiction over it and
cannot censor even the Seven Dirty Words.

I don't know what your distinction between "left-pondian stuff" and
"American TV" could refer to.

> > Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
> > in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
> > programs, you might not want to continue residing there.
>
> The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
> of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
> options to be VO - original language).

I've heard of that series (though I don't know why anyone would watch
it), and it is CABLE TELEVISION "reality." Why is it being censored?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 11:40:57 AM UTC-4, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> PTD may perhaps not be familiar with the full spectrum of crappy cable
> channels on offer today. HBO is not the whole universe of "cable".

PTD only sees cable TV in hotels, and they normally don't have HBO
because it is a "premium" channel (extra payment). He buys DVDs of
interesting cable series (which tend to be on Showtime rather than
HBO, in fact.)

PTD has, however, heard of such things as "Honey Boo-Boo" and "Duck
Dynasty" and would avoid them if they became available.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 11:41:27 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:09:19 +0200, Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> wrote:

> >>> Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
> >>> programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
> >>> mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
> >>> deaf people.
> >> So you're a fan of Maury Povich and Jerry Springer and the like? That's
> >> the only place foul language is likely to appear on broadcast TV.
> >I have no idea what you refer to.
> >> Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
> >> in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
> >> programs, you might not want to continue residing there.
> >The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
> >of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
> >options to be VO - original language).
>
> PTD does not subscribe to cable TV. Evidently, the antenna on his
> Saturn doesn't pick up cable.

Are car televisions legal in Florida?

> He's unfamiliar with those so-called reality shows where the language
> is sometimes a bit raw. I'm also unfamiliar with them, but because I
> don't choose to watch them. He might if he could. Anyone who would
> watch "Dancing with the Stars" would watch anything.

I don't know anyone who watches *Dancing with the Stars*. Do you?

> I do admit to watching "Fashion Police". My wife got me hooked. It's
> a show where Joan Rivers and three other fashionistas comment on show
> biz celebrity outfits. I have a problem in not recognizing that
> certain people are "celebrities" because I've never heard of them, but
> Joan Rivers is devastatingly funny in her comments. Crude, but funny.

Try reading what I write instead of fantasizing something you intend
to mock.

Cable TV is not censored.

Broadcast TV is censored, but the only broadcast TV shows likely to
need censoring are the conflict ones such as the two I mentioned.

Did you understand it the _second_ time?

[the Omrud]

On 18/08/2014 17:29, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Monday, August 18, 2014 11:41:27 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> PTD does not subscribe to cable TV. Evidently, the antenna on his
>> Saturn doesn't pick up cable.
>
> Are car televisions legal in Florida?

FWIW, upmarket European cars sometimes have TVs built in, but they must
not be visible to the driver when the car is moving. Some disable
themselves when the car is in gear, and some point towards the passenger.

--
David

[Mike Barnes]

I've recently returned from Edinburgh where I heard some Fringe Festival
publicists shouting to passers-by that their show is "guaranteed to
include offensive language and full frontal nudity". They didn't say
whether the full-frontal nudes were male or female, which I'd have
thought was quite important to anybody swayed by the publicity. In the
shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score was male 3, female 0
(rather disappointing).

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

+1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
--
athel

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
> Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>

PeteY Daniels, of course.

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

[Mike Barnes]

IME gay men are often interested.

[R H Draney]

Pablo filted:

>
>Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
>programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
>mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
>deaf people.

It's contextual too...on one episode of "@midnight", a panelist made some sexual
joke involving a cat, saying something like "that pussy needs some pussy"...as
predicted by the show's MC, only the second "pussy" was bleeped....r

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2014-08-18, Garrett Wollman <wol...@bimajority.org> wrote:

> Cable channels (where that particular sort of crap airs) are not
> subject to broadcast indecency regulations since they are not
> broadcast. They are, however, subject to their owners' and viewers'
> prudishness. (Even the broadcast channels are only subject to
> broadcast indecency regulations between 6 AM and 10 PM, but their
> owners' and viewers' prudishness generally prevents airing of indecent
> content even when not prohibited.

Any discussion of American television and especially its censorship
standards will need to make the distinction between broadcast, basic
cable, and premium cable.

> Graphic violence, of course, is permitted 24 hours a day.)

I'm pretty sure there are gradings in this respect as well.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[Peter T. Daniels]

We have cars with built-in DVD players in the back seats to amuse the
kiddies, but not cars equipped to receive broadcast TV signals.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 2:20:41 PM UTC-4, Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> > Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>
> PeteY Daniels, of course.

ReinholY Aman has been too psychotically represed for nearly 80 years
now to admit, even to himself, his latent homosexuality. Perhaps his
fear of it was instilled by tales during his Hitler Youth period of
what happened to the SA. He expresses it instead in bizarre fantasies
imputed to imagined antagonists.

[Mike L]

It's a perfectly logical counterpart to "Contains graphic images."

--
Mike.

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2014-08-18, Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> PTD may perhaps not be familiar with the full spectrum of crappy cable
>> channels on offer today. HBO is not the whole universe of "cable".
>
> PTD only sees cable TV in hotels,

Yes, as usual you are ignorant about the topic and yet you make
authorative pronouncements about it.

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2014-08-18, Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:

>> In the shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score
>> was male 3, female 0 (rather disappointing).
>
> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?

*slowly raises hand*
In the spirit of equality and a balanced representation I fully
support male nudity.

More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
What's with the fear of penis?

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

PeteY "AUE's Idiot #1" Daniels, a person of homosexuality, drooled:

>
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>
>>> Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>>
>> PeteY Daniels, of course.
>>
> ReinholY Aman has been too psychotically represed
>

Oy! Yet another typo by faggy PeteY. Or is it a further proof of his
well-known ignorance of his mother tongue?

(Remainder of his psychotic drool "maliciously" snipped.)

[Garrett Wollman]

In article <c5et8d...@mid.individual.net>,

Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>+1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?

Umm, [raises hand].

But only if they're young (enough) and hot. And probably not at a
comedy show.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Mike Barnes wrote:

>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>
>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>
> IME gay men are often interested.
>

OMG, Mike, are you "represed" too?

[Tony Cooper]

On 18 Aug 2014 13:02:36 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
wrote:

Between September, 1972 and April, 1985, there were a gazillion
"pussy" double entendre jokes by or about "Mrs Slocombe" (Mollie
Sugden) in "Are You Being Served?".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRJlItzalJY

[Mike Barnes]

Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>
>> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>
>>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>>
>> IME gay men are often interested.
>>
> OMG, Mike, are you "represed" too?

Huh?

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Garrett Wollman wrote:

>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>
>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>
> Umm, [raises hand].
>
> But only if they're young (enough) and hot.
>

That means fat & ancient PeteY "Nobody loves you when you're old and
gay" Daniels is out of the question, right?

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Mike Barnes wrote:
>
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>>>
>>> IME gay men are often interested.
>>>
>> OMG, Mike, are you "represed" too?
>>
> Huh?
>

Please see my reply to PeteY sent at 14:27 (2:27).

[Paul Wolff]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Christian Weisgerber <na...@mips.inka.de> posted:

>On 2014-08-18, Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>>> In the shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score
>>> was male 3, female 0 (rather disappointing).
>>
>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>
>*slowly raises hand*
>In the spirit of equality and a balanced representation I fully
>support male nudity.

In good sports shops, you can buy garments dedicated to the support of

male nudity.
>
>More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
>What's with the fear of penis?
>

Mightier than the s-word, they say. But I can't think of a suitable
s-word. Shibboleth, perhaps.
--
Paul

[Mark Brader]

Mike Barnes:

>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild

>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language...

"David":
> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

Which has been going on for long enough for the phrase "Pardon my French"
to arise as a form of apology for bad language. And how old is that?
--
Mark Brader | "...a paradox that threatens to sink the whole concept that
Toronto | football games can predict electoral events"
m...@vex.net | --Chris Wilson

[Ross]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 9:06:45 PM UTC+12, the Omrud wrote:
> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:

> > I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild

> > language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> > interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> > its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>

> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

I used to be amused back in the 70s by the standard NZ warning: "Use of
language may offend". I think that was only for movies, as there was
probably nothing offensive on TV in those days.

Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
a refusal may offend."

[Robert Bannister]

On 18/08/2014 4:51 pm, Mike Barnes wrote:
> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>

Perhaps it means that people who are used to an expletive inserted
between almost every syllable won't effing undersuckingstand it.

--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia

[Robert Bannister]

Ah, but "graphic" is a bit like our recent favourite, "literal", in
being often a mere intensifier, and not just in "graphic detail".

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Mark Brader skrev:

>> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
>> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

> Which has been going on for long enough for the phrase "Pardon
> my French" to arise as a form of apology for bad language.
> And how old is that?

I don't see that as a parallel to language equalling rude
language. "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women
who are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -
supposedly - think that the man is speaking French, and he then
excuses for using a language that she does not understand.

From there it has developed into a general excuse, but the
condescending aspect is stilll there.

--
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

[Mark Brader]

"David":

>>> "Language" is being equated with "bad language".

Mark Brader:

>> Which has been going on for long enough for the phrase "Pardon
>> my French" to arise as a form of apology for bad language.
>> And how old is that?

Bertel Lund Hansen:

> I don't see that as a parallel to language equalling rude
> language.

French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
That's all.

> "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women
> who are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -

> supposedly - think that the man is speaking French...

Where did you get this explanation from?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | Bad news disturbs his game; so does good; so
m...@vex.net | also does the absence of news. --Stephen Leacock

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Busybody Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>
> I don't see that as a parallel to language equalling rude
> language. "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women
> who are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -
> supposedly - think that the man is speaking French, and he then
> excuses for using a language that she does not understand.
>

Utter horseshit!

>
> From there it has developed into a general excuse, but the
> condescending aspect is stilll there.
>

Horseshit.

[R H Draney]

Ross filted:

>
>I used to be amused back in the 70s by the standard NZ warning: "Use of
>language may offend". I think that was only for movies, as there was
>probably nothing offensive on TV in those days.
>
>Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
>used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
>a refusal may offend."

Yes, well, the best defense *is* a good offense....r

[Peter Moylan]

On 19/08/14 03:21, Mike Barnes wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote:

>> On 18/08/14 18:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>
>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>

>> Perhaps it means what it says. I'm sure that some TV viewers would
>> appreciate a warning "Does not contain nudity".
>
> I've recently returned from Edinburgh where I heard some Fringe Festival
> publicists shouting to passers-by that their show is "guaranteed to
> include offensive language and full frontal nudity". They didn't say
> whether the full-frontal nudes were male or female, which I'd have

> thought was quite important to anybody swayed by the publicity. In the

> shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score was male 3, female 0
> (rather disappointing).

Years ago, I was greatly disappointed when a department store advertised
"Women's underwear 50% off". It wasn't.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org

[Jerry Friedman]

On 8/18/14 9:09 AM, Pablo wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> On Monday, August 18, 2014 8:16:02 AM UTC-4, Pablo wrote:
>>> Katy Jennison wrote:

>>>> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>
>>>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.

>>>> My first thought would be that it's a spoof, a play on 'strong
>>>> language' but jokily warning you that it's all very bland, unlike
>>>> almost everything else these days.
>>>

>>> Apart from the left-pondian stuff. I've given up watching American TV
>>> programmes because everything is bleeped out. Hell, they even obscure the
>>> mouths of those uttering whatever it is they utter so as not to "offend"
>>> deaf people.

...


>> Anything scripted for broadcast TV doesn't have bleepable words in it
>> in the first place, and if someone in your area is censoring cable TV
>> programs, you might not want to continue residing there.
>
> The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
> of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
> options to be VO - original language).

I probably know less about this than anyone else here, but there have
been some highly regarded American crime series, such as /The Sopranos/
and /The Wire/, that contain a lot of unbleeped profanity. They're on
cable.

On the other hand, any reason to stop watching auction-of-shed-contents
series is a good one.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Mark Brader skrev:

> French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
> That's all.

Why not "Pardon my English"? - which is the language actually
spoken.

>> "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women
>> who are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -
>> supposedly - think that the man is speaking French...

> Where did you get this explanation from?

I don't remember.

--
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

[Tony Cooper]

Isn't the point being made that it's the Spanish authorities that are
requiring the profanities to be bleeped out? "The Sopranos", which
was a premium cable show, was aired here on cable there was no
bleeping. "The Wire" was also premium cable.

When some of Gordon Ramsay's British-made shows were on US standard
broadcast channels, the sound was almost a continuous bleep. His
cable shows were not bleeped.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 4:04:31 PM UTC-4, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2014-08-18, Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:

> >> In the shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score
> >> was male 3, female 0 (rather disappointing).
> > +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>
> *slowly raises hand*
> In the spirit of equality and a balanced representation I fully
> support male nudity.
> More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
> What's with the fear of penis?

Have you _met_ straight men? (And Aman.)

Maybe the very first "college gross-out" movie -- was it even earlier
than *Animal House*? -- *Porky's*, had about equal amounts of male and
female frontal nudity. *Porky's II* and "Porky's III* didn't.

[Jeffrey Turner]

Thanks for the history lesson.

[Steve Hayes]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:49:48 -0400, "Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca>

wrote:

>> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>

>"the Omrud" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:FmjIv.477969$kQ7....@fx12.am4...

>
>> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
>> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".
>

>This was standard colloquial English 50+ years ago, as used in
>Under Milk Wood where people censure others for "using language."

And this:

Well gather round children, a story I will tell
About Pretty Boy Floyd the outlaw, Oklahoma knew him well

Was in the town of Shawnee on a Saturday afternoon
His wife beside him in a wagon as into town they rode

And along come a deputy sheriff in a manner rather rude
Using vulgar words of language and his wife she overheard

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA3hJEbUp7g


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Steve Hayes]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 15:40:37 -0700 (PDT), Ross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

>On Monday, August 18, 2014 9:06:45 PM UTC+12, the Omrud wrote:
>> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>> > I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>> > language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>> > interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>> > its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>
>> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
>> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".
>
>I used to be amused back in the 70s by the standard NZ warning: "Use of
>language may offend". I think that was only for movies, as there was
>probably nothing offensive on TV in those days.

Yes, some use of language does offend me. Like the use of "refute" when people
mean "deny".

And the purpose of aue is to discuss such things.

But I would take "mild language" to mean "suitable for children", as opposed
to "strong language", which many people might think would not be suitable for
children.

[Steve Hayes]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 19:59:41 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:

>On 2014-08-18 17:21:34 +0000, Mike Barnes said:
>
>> Peter Moylan wrote:

>>> On 18/08/14 18:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>>

>>> Perhaps it means what it says. I'm sure that some TV viewers would
>>> appreciate a warning "Does not contain nudity".
>>
>> I've recently returned from Edinburgh where I heard some Fringe
>> Festival publicists shouting to passers-by that their show is
>> "guaranteed to include offensive language and full frontal nudity".
>> They didn't say whether the full-frontal nudes were male or female,
>> which I'd have thought was quite important to anybody swayed by the

>> publicity. In the shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score

>> was male 3, female 0 (rather disappointing).
>
>+1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?

Heterosexual females, homosexual males, and bisexual people of both sexes?

[Guy Barry]

"Athel Cornish-Bowden" wrote in message
news:c5et8d...@mid.individual.net...

>Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?

And this immediately after a post starting with the word "bollocks".

--
Guy Barry

[Guy Barry]

"Christian Weisgerber" wrote in message
news:slrnlv4n2f...@lorvorc.mips.inka.de...

>More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
>What's with the fear of penis?

I had a (male, heterosexual) friend at university who said he felt
uncomfortable seeing naked men on television because he identified with
them, and it made him feel naked himself. I can sympathize with that.

--
Guy Barry

[Mike Barnes]

Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>
>> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>>>>>
>>>> IME gay men are often interested.
>>>>
>>> OMG, Mike, are you "represed" too?
>>>
>> Huh?
>>
> Please see my reply to PeteY sent at 14:27 (2:27).

OK, thanks. I didn't see that, because my newsreader automatically marks
PTD's postings and their follow-ups as read.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Steve Hayes skrev:

>>+1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?

> Heterosexual females, homosexual males, and bisexual people of both sexes?

and artists of either sex or inclination.

--
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:57:33 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:

> But I would take "mild language" to mean "suitable for children", as opposed
> to "strong language", which many people might think would not be suitable for
> children.

But how else would they learn it?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:15:02 AM UTC-4, Mike Barnes wrote:

> OK, thanks. I didn't see that, because my newsreader automatically marks
> PTD's postings and their follow-ups as read.

Since that prevents you from seeing almost everything posted by the
sociopath, you should be thanking me.

I suppose it was gracious of you not to have proclaimed that before,
but it means I'll have to keep track of how often you repeat some
fact(oid) already posted by me.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, August 18, 2014 5:51:33 PM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2014 13:02:36 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:

> >It's contextual too...on one episode of "@midnight", a panelist made some sexual
> >joke involving a cat, saying something like "that pussy needs some pussy"...as
> >predicted by the show's MC, only the second "pussy" was bleeped....r
>
> Between September, 1972 and April, 1985, there were a gazillion
> "pussy" double entendre jokes by or about "Mrs Slocombe" (Mollie
> Sugden) in "Are You Being Served?".

Still clueless after all these years? Can you not tell the difference
between the line R H quoted and every single one of the AYBS references
to Mrs Slocombe's feline pet? Specifically, the difference between the
two occurrences of the word?

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2014-08-19, Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> The Spanish TV companies buy US crap (old) series like those about auctions
>> of shed contents etc. and almost all the words are bleeped out (I set audio
>> options to be VO - original language).
>
> I probably know less about this than anyone else here, but there have
> been some highly regarded American crime series, such as /The Sopranos/
> and /The Wire/, that contain a lot of unbleeped profanity. They're on
> cable.

These are shows on premium cable channels (HBO, Showtime, Starz,
etc.). In dramas written for basic cable (FX, AMC, SyFy, etc.) the
word "fuck" is conspicuously absent. There was a lot of of brouhaha
about the line "I f-cked Ted" in the basic cable drama _Breaking
Bad_, where the showrunner had gotten explicit permission by the
network to use the word but the sound was still dropped out in the
broadcast.

Apart from language, basic cable also has its own standards for
nudity and presumably other sensitive topics, sitting between the
broadcast networks and premium cable in this regard.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[Wayne Brown]

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:40:37 in article <37f9fa6c-0603-48e7...@googlegroups.com> Ross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
> used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
> a refusal may offend."

Someplace (I think it may have been in one of Donald E. Westlake's
"Dortmunder" novels) I encountered a description of a sign that read,
"Please do not ask for credit, as a punch in the mouth often offends."
(Now that I think about it, it might have been in a Douglas Adams novel.)

--
F. Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net>

Þæs ofereode, ðisses swa mæg. ("That passed away, this also can.")
from "Deor," in the Exeter Book (folios 100r-100v)

[the Omrud]

On 19/08/2014 17:17, Wayne Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:40:37 in article <37f9fa6c-0603-48e7...@googlegroups.com> Ross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
>> used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
>> a refusal may offend."
>
> Someplace (I think it may have been in one of Donald E. Westlake's
> "Dortmunder" novels) I encountered a description of a sign that read,
> "Please do not ask for credit, as a punch in the mouth often offends."
> (Now that I think about it, it might have been in a Douglas Adams novel.)

That was relatively common in UK pubs about 20 years ago, no doubt put
up by landlords who thought themselves humorous. Like "You don't have
to be mad to work here, but it helps".

--
David

[Peter Young]

On 19 Aug 2014 Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:40:37 in article
> <37f9fa6c-0603-48e7...@googlegroups.com> Ross
> <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
>> used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
>> a refusal may offend."

> Someplace (I think it may have been in one of Donald E. Westlake's
> "Dortmunder" novels) I encountered a description of a sign that read,
> "Please do not ask for credit, as a punch in the mouth often offends."
> (Now that I think about it, it might have been in a Douglas Adams novel.)

Not uncommon in certain sorts of UK pubs, or used to be, anyway.

Peter.

--
Peter Young, (BrE, RP), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004.
(US equivalent: Certified Anesthesiologist) (AUE Re)
Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired.
http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk

[Oliver Cromm]

* Paul Wolff:

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Christian Weisgerber <na...@mips.inka.de> posted:

>
>>More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
>>What's with the fear of penis?
>>

> Mightier than the s-word, they say. But I can't think of a suitable
> s-word. Shibboleth, perhaps.

In a sheep's world, is the pen mightier than the corral?

--
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach him to use
the 'Net and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Oliver Cromm]

* Ross:

> On Monday, August 18, 2014 9:06:45 PM UTC+12, the Omrud wrote:

>> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>

>> I suspect that it's not the adjective which is being misused, but the
>> noun. "Language" is being equated with "bad language".
>
> I used to be amused back in the 70s by the standard NZ warning: "Use of
> language may offend". I think that was only for movies, as there was
> probably nothing offensive on TV in those days.

I don't have a problem with that as I read it as "The (particular)
use of language (that occurs in this movie) may offend (some)",
not as "The fact that language is used ..."

No such obvious expansion of "mild language". It seems to mean
something like "mild case of use of strong language", if I take
"mild" as analoguous to other warnings like "mild cartoon
violence".

--
If the aeroplane industry had advanced at the same rate as the
computer industry, today's planes could circumnavigate the world
in ten seconds, be two inches long, and crash twice a day.
Peter Moylan in alt.usage.english

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:51:31 AM UTC-4, Lewis wrote:

> No, in the case he was talking about, it was some "auction of shed
> contents" show, and those are not on premium cable and they are
> broadcast with words like "fuck" "shit" and "god" bleeped out at
> airtime.

They are not broadcast. They are on basic cable. Maybe basic cable
bleeps.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 9:41:39 AM UTC-4, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2014-08-19, Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I probably know less about this than anyone else here, but there have
> > been some highly regarded American crime series, such as /The Sopranos/
> > and /The Wire/, that contain a lot of unbleeped profanity. They're on
> > cable.
>
> These are shows on premium cable channels (HBO, Showtime, Starz,
> etc.). In dramas written for basic cable (FX, AMC, SyFy, etc.) the
> word "fuck" is conspicuously absent. There was a lot of of brouhaha
> about the line "I f-cked Ted" in the basic cable drama _Breaking
> Bad_, where the showrunner had gotten explicit permission by the
> network to use the word but the sound was still dropped out in the
> broadcast.

In one or two of the DVD commentaries in *Breaking Bad*, they said
they were allowed two "fuck"s per season, so they considered carefully
when to use them so as to achieve maximum effect.

[Mark Brader]

Mark Brader:

>> French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
>> That's all.

Bertel Lund Hansen:

> Why not "Pardon my English"? - which is the language actually
> spoken.

I'd say it's not euphemistic enough, for exactly that reason.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "...what kind of mind has a steel trap got anyway?"
m...@vex.net | --Lawrence Block, "The Burglar in the Library"

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Mike Barnes]

Mark Brader wrote:
> "David":

>>>> "Language" is being equated with "bad language".
>

> Mark Brader:

>>> Which has been going on for long enough for the phrase "Pardon
>>> my French" to arise as a form of apology for bad language.
>>> And how old is that?
>

> Bertel Lund Hansen:

>> I don't see that as a parallel to language equalling rude
>> language.
>

> French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
> That's all.
>

>> "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women
>> who are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -

>> supposedly - think that the man is speaking French...
>
> Where did you get this explanation from?

I can't answer for Bertel but that's pretty close to the way I know the
expression. It creates the rather lame pretence that the listener
wouldn't have understood what was said. When someone uses language that
they realise might be considered unacceptable, they say "Pardon my
French" to acknowledge that a line might have unwittingly been crossed.

Of course the expression might be interpreted differently where you are.

[Mike Barnes]

Peter Young wrote:
> On 19 Aug 2014 Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:40:37 in article
>> <37f9fa6c-0603-48e7...@googlegroups.com> Ross
>> <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
>>> used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
>>> a refusal may offend."
>
>> Someplace (I think it may have been in one of Donald E. Westlake's
>> "Dortmunder" novels) I encountered a description of a sign that read,
>> "Please do not ask for credit, as a punch in the mouth often offends."
>> (Now that I think about it, it might have been in a Douglas Adams novel.)
>
> Not uncommon in certain sorts of UK pubs, or used to be, anyway.

Here's an example, from a pub I know well, that's been on display for
over 20 years.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7090/7177871755_3ede379e91_z.jpg

"PLEASE Don't ask the Landlord for DRAUGHT LAGER as a smack in the gob
may cause offence."

No, they don't serve draught lager, but as far as I know no-one has ever
been hit. Not for that, anyway. The usual response to a request for a
pint of lager is a simple "No". Asking for a lager and lime gets a
rather sterner "No".

[the Omrud]

On 19/08/2014 19:01, Mike Barnes wrote:

> Here's an example, from a pub I know well, that's been on display for
> over 20 years.
>
> https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7090/7177871755_3ede379e91_z.jpg
>
> "PLEASE Don't ask the Landlord for DRAUGHT LAGER as a smack in the gob
> may cause offence."
>
> No, they don't serve draught lager, but as far as I know no-one has ever
> been hit. Not for that, anyway. The usual response to a request for a
> pint of lager is a simple "No". Asking for a lager and lime gets a
> rather sterner "No".

Blimey, it must be 35 years since I saw anybody ask for lager and lime.

--
David

[Mike Barnes]

It might have been a lager top. Whatever. Something like that. Ginger
beer shandy maybe.

[R H Draney]

Mark Brader filted:

>
>Mark Brader:
>>> French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
>>> That's all.
>
>Bertel Lund Hansen:
>> Why not "Pardon my English"? - which is the language actually
>> spoken.
>
>I'd say it's not euphemistic enough, for exactly that reason.

You're not up on you kink, I take it...Greek is bottoms, French is mouths,
English is whips and leather....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Andrew B]

On 19/08/2014 17:17, Wayne Brown wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:40:37 in article <37f9fa6c-0603-48e7...@googlegroups.com> Ross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Actually that intransitive "offend" has a special flavour to it, too. There
>> used to be signs in some shops that said: "Please do not ask for credit, as
>> a refusal may offend."
>
> Someplace (I think it may have been in one of Donald E. Westlake's
> "Dortmunder" novels) I encountered a description of a sign that read,
> "Please do not ask for credit, as a punch in the mouth often offends."
> (Now that I think about it, it might have been in a Douglas Adams novel.)

"The bar used to have one of those signs hanging up which said, 'Please
don't ask for credit as a punch in the mouth often offends', but in the
interest of strict accuracy this was altered to, 'Please don't ask for
credit because having your throat torn out by a savage bird while a
disembodied hand smashes your head against the bar often offends'.
However, this made an unreadable mess of the notice, and anyway didn't
have the same ring to it, so it was taken down again."

(So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish)

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2014-08-19, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

>>I'd say it's not euphemistic enough, for exactly that reason.
>
> You're not up on you kink, I take it...Greek is bottoms, French is mouths,
> English is whips and leather....r

Whips, really? I thought riding crops.

[Robert Bannister]

At school like every other kid. That's the problem with home schooling:
no dirty words and no way of learning false facts about reproduction.

--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia

[Robert Bannister]

Is there a reason for not stocking a proper beer? (Apart from the fact
that decent Pilsner style beer is unobtainable in the UK.)

[Sam Plusnet]

In article <ROKIv.2504$XH2...@fx23.am4>, usenet...@gmail.com says...

Or the sign on or near a low ceiling beam

"Duck or Grouse"

--
Sam

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Jeffrey Turner wrote:

>
> On 8/18/2014 7:25 PM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>
>> "Pardon my French" is a condescending remark to women who
>> are not supposed to understand rude words and therefore -

>> supposedly - think that the man is speaking French, and he
>> then excuses for using a language that she does not understand.
>>
>> From there it has developed into a general excuse, but the
>> condescending aspect is stilll there.
>>
> Thanks for the history lesson.
>
Question:
Are you being ironic or sarcastic or do you
actually believe Bertel's utter horseshit?

Just curious.

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

[Peter Moylan]

On 20/08/14 02:32, Oliver Cromm wrote:
> * Paul Wolff:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, Christian Weisgerber <na...@mips.inka.de> posted:
>>
>>> More importantly, who _minds_ seeing full frontal male nudity?
>>> What's with the fear of penis?
>>>
>> Mightier than the s-word, they say. But I can't think of a suitable
>> s-word. Shibboleth, perhaps.
>
> In a sheep's world, is the pen mightier than the corral?
>

I thought the pen was mightier than the cob.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org

[Mike Barnes]

Who said they didn't stock a proper beer?

> (Apart from the fact
> that decent Pilsner style beer is unobtainable in the UK.)

That's what's known here in the UK as "complete bollocks".

[Steve Hayes]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 12:36:28 -0500, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:

>Mark Brader:
>>> French is a language. Pardon my language, pardon my French.
>>> That's all.
>
>Bertel Lund Hansen:
>> Why not "Pardon my English"? - which is the language actually
>> spoken.
>
>I'd say it's not euphemistic enough, for exactly that reason.

It works in Afrikaans, though.

"Engels praat" means to use bad language.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Steve Hayes]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:53:47 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>Okay, so one time? In band camp? Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> was all, like:
> --> Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:03:07 +0200 <git5v91mq9j5nedtq...@4ax.com>
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 19:59:41 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
>> <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>>>On 2014-08-18 17:21:34 +0000, Mike Barnes said:
>>>
>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:

>>>>> On 18/08/14 18:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>>>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>>>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>>>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>>>>

>>>>> Perhaps it means what it says. I'm sure that some TV viewers would
>>>>> appreciate a warning "Does not contain nudity".
>>>>
>>>> I've recently returned from Edinburgh where I heard some Fringe
>>>> Festival publicists shouting to passers-by that their show is
>>>> "guaranteed to include offensive language and full frontal nudity".
>>>> They didn't say whether the full-frontal nudes were male or female,
>>>> which I'd have thought was quite important to anybody swayed by the
>>>> publicity. In the shows I saw, without any such publicity, the score
>>>> was male 3, female 0 (rather disappointing).
>>>
>>>+1. Who wants to see full frontal male nudity?
>
>> Heterosexual females, homosexual males, and bisexual people of both sexes?
>
>You might be surprised in that rather fewer people than you might think
>want to see full frontal male nudity.

Depends on the circumstances, dunnit?

Like the two inmates of an old age home sitting chatting when a third, who has
decided to try streaking, comes past.

- What was that?
- I don't know, but whatever it was, it needed ironing.

[the Omrud]

I suspect that they consider that bottled lager can be very good, but
draught lager is beyond the pale.

--
David

[the Omrud]

On 20/08/2014 01:37, Lewis wrote:
> Okay, so one time? In band camp? Mike Barnes <mikeba...@gmail.com> was all, like:
> --> Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:01:55 +0100 <c5hi3i...@mid.individual.net>

> But 95% of lager is undrinkable without a lime, because 95% of lager is
> terrible.

Which is why I tend to avoid 100% of lager.

--
David

[charles]

In article <UN4Jv.154699$7b1....@fx01.am4>, the Omrud

It is possible to get get Peroni on draught - but perhaps that's not
considered a lager.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

[Mike Barnes]

Exactly. They stock good bottled lagers and quite a few of those Belgian
fruit beers which many people like but are not to my taste. There are
four excellent draught bitters as well, from here:
http://www.abbeydalebrewery.co.uk/

[Wayne Brown]

Yes, that's exactly the passage I was (vaguely) remembering. Thanks!

And thanks also to all those who replied about such signs being common
in the UK, because now I know where Adams got the idea.

--
F. Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net>

Þæs ofereode, ðisses swa mæg. ("That passed away, this also can.")
from "Deor," in the Exeter Book (folios 100r-100v)

[Paul Wolff]

On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> posted:

You mean it's down at the bitter end?
--
Paul

[Mike L]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 07:02:48 +0800, Robert Bannister
<rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote:

>On 19/08/2014 4:50 am, Mike L wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 12:09:57 +0100, Katy Jennison
>> <ka...@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:

>>
>>> On 18/08/2014 09:51, Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> I've just come across a warning that a stage production includes "mild
>>>> language". Presumably they mean mildly strong language. I find it
>>>> interesting that the expression is used to mean the exact opposite of
>>>> its literal meaning. And I don't like it.
>>>>
>>>

>>> My first thought would be that it's a spoof, a play on 'strong language'
>>> but jokily warning you that it's all very bland, unlike almost
>>> everything else these days.
>>
>> It's a perfectly logical counterpart to "Contains graphic images."
>>
>Ah, but "graphic" is a bit like our recent favourite, "literal", in
>being often a mere intensifier, and not just in "graphic detail".

Still a good match for this use of "mild".

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 06:44:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:15:02 AM UTC-4, Mike Barnes wrote:
>
>> OK, thanks. I didn't see that, because my newsreader automatically marks
>> PTD's postings and their follow-ups as read.
>
>Since that prevents you from seeing almost everything posted by the
>sociopath, you should be thanking me.
>
>I suppose it was gracious of you not to have proclaimed that before,
>but it means I'll have to keep track of how often you repeat some
>fact(oid) already posted by me.

I don't see why. Just let it happen. In these soir�es we often enough
repeat things without the aid of a kill filter, and it's no skin off
anybody's nose.

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:38:27 +0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
<na...@mips.inka.de> wrote:

>On 2014-08-19, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>>>I'd say it's not euphemistic enough, for exactly that reason.
>>
>> You're not up on you kink, I take it...Greek is bottoms, French is mouths,
>> English is whips and leather....r
>
>Whips, really? I thought riding crops.

Whips don't have to have lashes (I'm guessing that's the problem
here). Lashes are for extending one's reach. You'd go for an editor
with a whalebone job about a couple of feet long.

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

Well, I don't believe they get it by scraping the barrel. (In the old
days in Aus, that could have been a damning exercise, as really rough
publicans in really rough pubs were known occasionally to enhance the
effects of weak beer by inserting a plug of tobacco. Fence palings
were, I believe, often accepted as sound arguments in any resultant
discussion.)

--
Mike.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

A more neutral version, and the one I saw first, was "Please don't ask
for credit as refusal often offends".

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