****
Adrian Smith
curious about a linguistic phenomenon some of you may have noticed.
It's the c-word. Oh, let's not be precious about this, it's the word
'cunt', specifically when it's used to refer to a person (it's rarely
applied to the pudendum itself AFAICT, apart from by people like DH
Lawrence, who I think may have had an axe of his own to grind). In the
UK, it usually refers to a male, and generally has overtones of
malice, though one does hear references to people as 'stupid cunts'
from time to time.
Thing is, when one uses this word in the UK (perhaps in a spirit of
scientific investigation), one is often met with the strange global
assertion that 'that word's offensive to women' (rather than the more
plausible local variant, 'I'm offended by that word for reasons which
I probably haven't examined yet').
Now, when I look for words intended to offend a class of people, I
come up with things like 'nigger' or 'kaffir'. *There's* a couple of
words that are offensive to a group, and are, in current usage,
intended to be. But how did 'cunt' get here? Do there exist men who
find themselves oppressed by the use of the word 'prick' to refer to a
person? Why do some women (and men) seem to believe that by using this
word, you're pouring scorn on the Holy Female Genitalia and hence upon
the whole distaff?
In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
--
Adrian Smith
Nathan Nagel
> In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
> classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
> get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
> is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
>
> --
> Adrian Smith
Well, I haven't noticed any feminazi types getting all offended by the
use of female genitalia nicknames as derogatory terms. However, almost
all of them are more or less "not said" in polite company. Oddly, the
term "pussy" generally refers to what we would call a "wimp" as opposed
to most of the other usages of similar terms (i.e. "dumb cunt") and
while still not particularly polite, is less likely to make a more
delicate listener gasp and turn pale at least IME.
nate
me
"Adrian Smith" <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b9ae8e0f.01081...@posting.google.com...
> In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
> classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
> get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
> is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
>
the folks that tell you there are no classes in the US of A are the folks in
the great vast middle class. the lower and upper classes have a better
understanding of the truth of the matter.
fra...@seed.net.tw
Adrian Smith wrote:
> It's probably a sign that I've too much time on my hands, but I'm
> curious about a linguistic phenomenon some of you may have noticed.
>
> It's the c-word. Oh, let's not be precious about this, it's the word
> 'cunt', specifically when it's used to refer to a person (it's rarely
> applied to the pudendum itself AFAICT, apart from by people like DH
> Lawrence, who I think may have had an axe of his own to grind). In the
> UK, it usually refers to a male, and generally has overtones of
> malice, though one does hear references to people as 'stupid cunts'
> from time to time.
>
> Thing is, when one uses this word in the UK (perhaps in a spirit of
> scientific investigation), one is often met with the strange global
> assertion that 'that word's offensive to women' (rather than the more
> plausible local variant, 'I'm offended by that word for reasons which
> I probably haven't examined yet').
I'm sure it has to do with the assertion, by American feminists at least,
that this synecdochism is demeaning to women because it reduces them
to their genitalia.
> Now, when I look for words intended to offend a class of people, I
> come up with things like 'nigger' or 'kaffir'. *There's* a couple of
> words that are offensive to a group, and are, in current usage,
> intended to be. But how did 'cunt' get here? Do there exist men who
> find themselves oppressed by the use of the word 'prick' to refer to a
> person? Why do some women (and men) seem to believe that by using this
> word, you're pouring scorn on the Holy Female Genitalia and hence upon
> the whole distaff?
>
> In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
> classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
> get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
> is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
There are a wealth of classes in the USA, and as a working-class boy
myself, I do not appreciate being thrown in with the great unwashed
middle classes (lower-middle, middle-middle, and upper-middle). A
matter of class pride, to be sure. And as for living in a trailer, it was
probably the best two years of my life when I lived in a 10-wide
(can't remember if it was 30 or 40 feet long) in Iowa City. Very cozy
it was, and I'd do it again if it were possible here in Taiwan. But it
ain't. Sigh.
R H Draney
<fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote:
>Adrian Smith wrote:
>
>> Now, when I look for words intended to offend a class of people, I
>> come up with things like 'nigger' or 'kaffir'. *There's* a couple of
>> words that are offensive to a group, and are, in current usage,
>> intended to be. But how did 'cunt' get here? Do there exist men who
>> find themselves oppressed by the use of the word 'prick' to refer to a
>> person? Why do some women (and men) seem to believe that by using this
>> word, you're pouring scorn on the Holy Female Genitalia and hence upon
>> the whole distaff?
>
>I'm sure it has to do with the assertion, by American feminists at least,
>that this synecdochism is demeaning to women because it reduces them
>to their genitalia.
The word may have become "special" because it has no other
meanings...if you use words like "snatch", "box", and "pussy" there's
always the chance--paraphrasing George Carlin--that you're talking
about stealing someone's cat and putting it in a crate...with "cunt"
there can be no ambiguity (I can just see *that* turning into a .sig
for some lucky person); anyone who hears you say it *knows* what
you're talking about...the equivalent male term can at least
potentially be used innocently, as noted by (again) Mr Carlin: "you
can prick your finger, but you'd better not finger your prick"....r
--
"Tell Katie Couric she can take her TV camera and stick it up....
she did?...when?...hmmm, must have been sweeps."
Adrian Smith
> Adrian Smith wrote:
> > Thing is, when one uses this word in the UK (perhaps in a spirit of
> > scientific investigation), one is often met with the strange global
> > assertion that 'that word's offensive to women' (rather than the more
> > plausible local variant, 'I'm offended by that word for reasons which
> > I probably haven't examined yet').
>
> I'm sure it has to do with the assertion, by American feminists at least,
> that this synecdochism is demeaning to women because it reduces them
> to their genitalia.
Yabbut, (fingers dictionary) it doesn't reduce them to anything.
Referring to *women* as 'cunt' (or the strangely uncountable 'pussy')
might, but I've never heard 'cunt' used like that. What happens is
that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
*bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
been somehow disrespected.
Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
--
Adrian Smith
Andy Walton
adrian_...@yahoo.com (Adrian Smith) wrote:
:It's the c-word. Oh, let's not be precious about this, it's the word
:'cunt', specifically when it's used to refer to a person (it's rarely
:applied to the pudendum itself AFAICT, apart from by people like DH
:Lawrence, who I think may have had an axe of his own to grind). In the
:UK, it usually refers to a male, and generally has overtones of
:malice, though one does hear references to people as 'stupid cunts'
:from time to time.
That's a major difference from the U.S. usage. On this side of the pond,
"cunt" is almost exclusively used to refer to women, as a stronger and
more offensive version of "bitch." Men are occasionally referred to as
"cunts," but like "pussy" or "bitch" applied to a man, the implication
of femininity is part of the insult. The word is also used to refer to
the female genetalia, usually in a pornographic context.
The claim that the word is offensive to women makes more sense with the
USAn usage.
--
"Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
hesitating, non-committal language."
-- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://atticus.home.mindspring.com/
Aaron Davies
> In article <b9ae8e0f.01081...@posting.google.com>,
> adrian_...@yahoo.com (Adrian Smith) wrote:
>
> :It's the c-word. Oh, let's not be precious about this, it's the word
> :'cunt', specifically when it's used to refer to a person (it's rarely
> :applied to the pudendum itself AFAICT, apart from by people like DH
> :Lawrence, who I think may have had an axe of his own to grind). In the
> :UK, it usually refers to a male, and generally has overtones of
> :malice, though one does hear references to people as 'stupid cunts'
> :from time to time.
>
> That's a major difference from the U.S. usage. On this side of the pond,
> "cunt" is almost exclusively used to refer to women, as a stronger and
> more offensive version of "bitch." Men are occasionally referred to as
> "cunts," but like "pussy" or "bitch" applied to a man, the implication
> of femininity is part of the insult. The word is also used to refer to
> the female genetalia, usually in a pornographic context.
That's the way I usually hear (well, read--I don't hang around the sort
of people who actually use that sort of language) it used here. I don't
think I've ever seen applied generically to a man.
--
__ __
/ ) / )
/--/ __. __ ______ / / __. , __o _ _
/ (_(_/|_/ (_(_) / <_ /__/_(_/|_\/ <__</_/_)_
Maria Conlon
Adrian Smith wrote in message ...
[...]
>In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
>classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
>get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
>is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
You were told wrong. (Actually, what you were told sounds like a joke.)
If by "class," you mean economic class, there are several here. If you
mean something else by "class," you'd need to define it for me.
The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of the
jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live in
trailers -- or rather, in mobile homes, to use the more modern term.
Good and bad people live in 3-bedroom brick bungalows. Good and bad
people live in mansions. Good and bad people live on houseboats.
Good and bad people have a lot of money, or don't have much at all.
Having decent teeth does not indicate that a person is of the "better
class." Nor does having a high IQ. Nor does being honest.
People are people. It's impossible and unfair to classify them by what
sort of place they live in or how much money they have to spend on
dentists. Other things are much more important.
End of sermon, which was not aimed at Adrian Smith but at whoever told
him about -- and defined -- the alleged two classes in the US. Sorry if
I over-reacted.
Maria (Tootsie)
Earle D Jones
dado...@earthlink.net (R H Draney) wrote:
[...]
>
> The word may have become "special" because it has no other
> meanings...if you use words like "snatch", "box", and "pussy" there's
> always the chance--paraphrasing George Carlin--that you're talking
> about stealing someone's cat and putting it in a crate...with "cunt"
> there can be no ambiguity (I can just see *that* turning into a .sig
> for some lucky person); anyone who hears you say it *knows* what
> you're talking about...the equivalent male term can at least
> potentially be used innocently, as noted by (again) Mr Carlin: "you
> can prick your finger, but you'd better not finger your prick"....r
*
George Carlin's monologue on dirty words was the subject of a lawsuit
between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
I have a copy if anyone is interested. It is absolutely a riot! I
giggle just thinking about it.
earle
*
Nathan Nagel
> Yabbut, (fingers dictionary) it doesn't reduce them to anything.
> Referring to *women* as 'cunt' (or the strangely uncountable 'pussy')
> might, but I've never heard 'cunt' used like that. What happens is
> that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
> *bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
> been somehow disrespected.
>
> Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
>
> --
> Adrian Smith
Hmm, I've been used to hearing the term "cunt" used to describe an
obnoxious or useless female, while "twat" can be used either way
(although still more commonly used re: females) and "pussy" generally is
used as an insult towards a less than macho male. Guess things really
do mean different things in different places.
nate
Richard Fontana
> In article <3b800c3f....@news.earthlink.net>,
> dado...@earthlink.net (R H Draney) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > The word may have become "special" because it has no other
> > meanings...if you use words like "snatch", "box", and "pussy" there's
> > always the chance--paraphrasing George Carlin--that you're talking
> > about stealing someone's cat and putting it in a crate...with "cunt"
> > there can be no ambiguity (I can just see *that* turning into a .sig
> > for some lucky person); anyone who hears you say it *knows* what
> > you're talking about...the equivalent male term can at least
> > potentially be used innocently, as noted by (again) Mr Carlin: "you
> > can prick your finger, but you'd better not finger your prick"....r
>
> *
> George Carlin's monologue on dirty words was the subject of a lawsuit
> between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
> part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
Actually, it was the subject of a lawsuit between the FCC and a *New York*
radio station, WBAI, which was owned by the Pacifica foundation which also
owns KPFA, a Berkeley radio station.
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>George Carlin's monologue on dirty words was the subject of a lawsuit
>between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
>part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
>
>I have a copy if anyone is interested. It is absolutely a riot! I
>giggle just thinking about it.
As a fellow EE, Earle, I feel obligated to point out to you that Real
Men don't giggle. They laugh, they guffaw, they roar, they chuckle,
but they don't giggle.
Charles Riggs
fra...@seed.net.tw
Adrian Smith wrote:
I know from the utterings of a former British friend of mine that
in BrE "cunt" is used to refer to males in a disparaging way, but
when an American male says "You stupid cunt!", it is generally
(if not always) addressed to a female of the species. Differences
in usage can lead to differences in perceptions of the value of
the word.
> Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
You will have to ask one. It might simply be a matter of
ideology.
fra...@seed.net.tw
Andy Walton wrote:
> [snipt]--
> "Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
> hesitating, non-committal language."
> -- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
An outstanding SIG. I do believe I will borrow this and use
it on my posts. Unless you object, of course.
Franke
Maria Conlon wrote:
> [to aue only; copy emailed to poster]
>
> Adrian Smith wrote in message ...
> [...]
> >In Britain, it could be a class thing, but I'm told there are no
> >classes in the States apart from the class of people who can afford to
> >get their teeth fixed and the class of people who live in trailers. So
> >is this a Stateside thing too? I need data points.
>
> You were told wrong. (Actually, what you were told sounds like a joke.)
>
> If by "class," you mean economic class, there are several here. If you
> mean something else by "class," you'd need to define it for me.
>
> The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of the
> jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live in
> trailers -- or rather, in mobile homes, to use the more modern term.
As a trailer veteran, I like to make the distinction between those
modern "mobile homes" and what I lived in. My trailer could have
been hitched up to a pickup truck and moved to anywhere there
was a hoohup available, but your average 1990s "mobile home"
is, I think, a prefab that requires a few semi's to haul around. I
would never call them trailers any more than I would have called
my trailer a mobile home
[Strong sentiments with which I agree snipt]
Andy Walton
"fra...@seed.net.tw" <fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote:
No objection. As I'm quoting it, I don't think I can lay a claim to it.
And to think I plugged in the Strunk .sig without realizing I was
crossposting to aue.
--
"Make definite assertions. Avoid tame, colorless,
hesitating, non-committal language."
-- William Strunk Jr., "Elements of Style"
Peter Seebach
>between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
>part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
Fascinating. Got a URL?
Ah-hah!
http://w3.trib.com/FACT/1st.net.free.fccVpac.html
-s
--
Copyright 2001, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
+--- Need quality network services, server-grade computers, or a shell? ---+
v C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon! v
Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: http://www.plethora.net/
rich
>What happens is
>that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
>*bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
>been somehow disrespected.
>
>Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all. Pussy for a
sissipated man, sure. But calling a man a cunt wouldn't earn you anything
but a confused look from people around hyar.
--
OS/X: Because making unix user friendly was easier than debugging Windows
Registered Linux user 220048 on http://counter.li.org
Earle D Jones
se...@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) wrote:
> In article <earle.jones-EE8B...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>,
> Earle D Jones <earle...@home.com> wrote:
> >George Carlin's monologue on dirty words was the subject of a lawsuit
> >between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
> >part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
>
> Fascinating. Got a URL?
*
Even better:
George Carlin's
Seven Dirty Words
A monologue -- as transcribed by the FCC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
438 U.S. 726 (1978)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT
The following is a verbatim transcript of "Filthy Words" prepared by the
Federal Communications Commission.
Aruba-du, ruba-tu, ruba-tu. I was thinking about the curse words and the
swear words, the cuss words and the words that you can't say, that
you're not supposed to say all the time, [']cause words or people into
words want to hear your words. Some guys like to record your words and
sell them back to you if they can, (laughter) listen in on the
telephone, write down what words you say. A guy who used to be in
Washington knew that his phone was tapped, used to answer, Fuck Hoover,
yes, go ahead. (laughter) Okay, I was thinking one night about the words
you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves, um, the ones you
definitely wouldn't say, ever, [']cause I heard a lady say bitch one
night on television, and it was cool like she was talking about, you
know, ah, well, the bitch is the first one to notice that in the litter
Johnie right (murmur) Right. And, uh, bastard you can say, and hell and
damn so I have to figure out which ones you couldn't and ever and it
came down to seven but the list is open to amendment, and in fact, has
been changed, uh, by now, ha, a lot of people pointed things out to me,
and I noticed some myself. The original seven words were, shit, piss,
fuck, cunt, cocksucker, mother-fucker, and tits. Those are the ones that
will curve your spine, grow hair on your hands and (laughter) maybe,
even bring us, God help us, peace without honor (laughter) um, and a
bourbon. (laughter) And now the first thing that we noticed was that
word fuck was really repeated in there because the word motherfucker is
a compound word and it's another form of the word fuck. (laughter) You
want to be a purist it doesn't really it can't be on the list of basic
words. Also, cocksucker is a compound word and neither half of that is
really dirty. The word the half sucker that's merely suggestive
(laughter) and the word cock is a half-way dirty word, 50% dirty dirty
half the time, depending on what you mean by it. (laughter) Uh, remember
when you first heard it, like in 6th grade, you used to giggle. And the
cock crowed three times, heh (laughter) the cock three times. It's in
the Bible, cock in the Bible. (laughter) And the first time you heard
about a cock-fight, remember What? Huh? naw. It ain't that, are you
stupid? man. (laughter, clapping) It's chickens, you know, (laughter)
Then you have the four letter words from the old Anglo-Saxon fame. Uh,
shit and fuck. The word shit, uh, is an interesting kind of word in that
the middle class has never really accepted it and approved it. They use
it like, crazy but it's not really okay. It's still a rude, dirty, old
kind of gushy word. (laughter) They don't like that, but they say it,
like, they say it like, a lady now in a middle-class home, you'll hear
most of the time she says it as an expletive, you know, it's out of her
mouth before she knows. She says, Oh shit oh shit, (laughter) oh shit.
If she drops something, Oh, the shit hurt the broccoli. Shit. Thank you.
(footsteps fading away) (papers ruffling)
Read it! (from audience)
Shit! (laughter) I won the Grammy, man, for the comedy album. Isn't that
groovy? (clapping, whistling) (murmur) That's true. Thank you. Thank you
man. Yeah. (murmur) (continuous clapping) Thank you man. Thank you.
Thank you very much, man. Thank, no, (end of continuous clapping) for
that and for the Grammy, man, [']cause (laughter) that's based on people
liking it man, yeh, that's ah, that's okay man. (laughter) Let's let
that go, man. I got my Grammy. I can let my hair hang down now, shit.
(laughter) Ha! So! Now the word shit is okay for the man. At work you
can say it like crazy. Mostly figuratively, Get that shit out of here,
will ya? I don't want to see that shit anymore. I can't cut that shit,
buddy. I've had that shit up to here. I think you're full of shit
myself. (laughter) He don't know shit from Shinola. (laughter) you know
that? (laughter) Always wondered how the Shinola people felt about that
(laughter) Hi, I'm the new man from Shinola. (laughter) Hi, how are ya?
Nice to see ya. (laughter) How are ya? (laughter) Boy, I don't know
whether to shit or wind my watch. (laughter) Guess, I'll shit on my
watch. (laughter) Oh, the shit is going to hit de fan. (laughter) Built
like a brick shit-house. (laughter) Up, he's up shit's creek. (laughter)
He's had it. (laughter) He hit me, I'm sorry. (laughter) Hot shit, holy
shit, tough shit, eat shit, (laughter) shit-eating grin. Uh, whoever
thought of that was ill. (murmur laughter) He had a shit-eating grin! He
had a what? (laughter) Shit on a stick. (laughter) Shit in a handbag. I
always like that. He ain't worth shit in a handbag. (laughter) Shitty.
He acted real shitty. (laughter) You know what I mean? (laughter) I got
the money back, but a real shitty attitude. Heh, he had a shit-fit.
(laughter) Wow! Shit-fit. Whew! Glad I wasn't there. (murmur, laughter)
All the animals Bull shit, horse shit, cow shit, rat shit, bat shit.
(laughter) First time I heard bat shit, I really came apart. A guy in
Oklahoma, Boggs, said it, man. Aw! Bat shit. (laughter) Vera reminded me
of that last night, ah (murmur). Snake shit, slicker than owl shit.
(laughter) Get your shit together. Shit or get off the pot. (laughter) I
got a shit-load full of them. (laughter) I got a shit-pot full, all
right. Shit-head, shit-heel, shit in your heart, shit for brains,
(laughter) shit-face, heh (laughter) I always try to think how that
could have originated; the first guy that said that. Somebody got drunk
and fell in some shit, you know. (laughter) Hey, I'm shit-face.
(laughter) Shit-face, today. (laughter) Anyway, enough of that shit.
(laughter) The big one, the word fuck that's the one that hangs them up
the most. [']Cause in a lot of cases that's the very act that hangs them
up the most. So, it's natural that the word would, uh, have the same
effect. It's a great word, fuck, nice word, easy word, cute word, kind
of. Easy word to say. One syllable, short u. (laughter) Fuck. (Murmur)
You know, it's easy. Starts with a nice soft sound fuh ends with a kuh.
Right? (laughter) A little something for everyone. Fuck (laughter) Good
word. Kind of a proud word, too. Who are you? I am FUCK. (laughter) FUCK
OF THE MOUNTAIN. (laughter) Tune in again next week to FUCK OF THE
MOUNTAIN. (laughter) It's an interesting word too, [']cause it's got a
double kind of a life personality dual, you know, whatever the right
phrase is. It leads a double life, the word fuck. First of all, it
means, sometimes, most of the time, fuck. What does it mean? It means to
make love. Right? We're going to make love, yeh, we're going to fuck,
yeh, we're going to fuck, yeh, we're going to make love. (laughter)
we're really going to fuck, yeh, we're going to make love. Right? And it
also means the beginning of life, it's the act that begins life, so
there's the word hanging around with words like love, and life, and yet
on the other hand, it's also a word that we really use to hurt each
other with, man. It's a heavy. It's one that you have toward the end of
the argument. (laughter) Right? (laughter) You finally can't make out.
Oh, fuck you man. I said, fuck you. (laughter, murmur) Stupid fuck.
(laughter) Fuck you and everybody that looks like you. (laughter) man.
It would be nice to change the movies that we already have and
substitute the word fuck for the word kill, wherever we could, and some
of those movie cliches would change a little bit. Madfuckers still on
the loose. Stop me before I fuck again. Fuck the ump, fuck the ump, fuck
the ump, fuck the ump, fuck the ump. Easy on the clutch Bill, you'll
fuck that engine again. (laughter) The other shit one was, I don't give
a shit. Like it's worth something, you know? (laughter) I don't give a
shit. Hey, well, I don't take no shit, (laughter) you know what I mean?
You know why I don't take no shit? (laughter) [']Cause I don't give a
shit. (laughter) If I give a shit, I would have to pack shit. (laughter)
But I don't pack no shit cause I don't give a shit. (laughter) You
wouldn't shit me, would you? (laughter) That's a joke when you're a kid
with a worm looking out the bird's ass. You wouldn't shit me, would you?
(laughter) It's an eight-year-old joke but a good one. (laughter) The
additions to the list. I found three more words that had to be put on
the list of words you could never say on television, and they were fart,
turd and twat, those three. (laughter) Fart, we talked about, it's
harmless It's like tits, it's a cutie word, no problem. Turd, you can't
say but who wants to, you know? (laughter) The subject never comes up on
the panel so I'm not worried about that one. Now the word twat is an
interesting word. Twat! Yeh, right in the twat. (laughter) Twat is an
interesting word because it's the only one I know of, the only slang
word applying to the, a part of the sexual anatomy that doesn't have
another meaning to it. Like, ah, snatch, box and pussy all have other m
eanings, man. Even in a Walt Disney movie, you can say, We're going to
snatch that pussy and put him in a box and bring him on the airplane.
(murmur, laughter) Everybody loves it. The twat stands alone, man, as it
should. And two-way words. Ah, ass is okay providing you're riding into
town on a religious feast day. (laughter) You can't say, up your ass.
(laughter) You can say, stuff it! (murmur) There are certain things you
can say its weird but you can just come so close. Before I cut, I, uh,
want to, ah, thank you for listening to my words, man, fellow, uh space
travelers. Thank you man for tonight and thank you also. (clapping
whistling).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to the index for this case
*
earle
*
Tony Cooper
> Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all.
The following was posted in soc.culture.irish a while back. There are
several uses of the word "cunt", and not one of them refers to a
female.
"Dateline Skerries, Co. Dublin Friday night piss up results:
I went to Joe May's last night fer a few pints. Well more than a few.
I
happen to like, no make that love, Irish traditional music. Well on
Friday
nights there's always music in there. There was a fiddle, button
accordion,
flute, bodhran, guitar, mandolin and banjo. They played up a fuckin'
storm
with some good rousing reels and the usual jigs and airs etc The place
wasn't too packed, enough to be lively without getting trampled on.
The
pints were soft and I was having a brilliant time. We were all really
enjoying ourselves, getting lubricated, until a crowd of fuckin' Yanks
came
in. They all sat at a table next to us and started roaring their
bullshit
trying to make themselves heard over some bloody good music like we'd
want
to hear them instead. So here we were trying to listen to the seisun
over
some cunt yelling off about some shite or other. Reciting a Yank
commercial
I suppose. Then the fuckin' cameras come out, flashes popping off all
over
the place, putting the musicians off and generally pissin' everyone
off.
One bitch comes up to me and says "I'll take yer picture" I said ya
fuckin'
well won't. I told two of them to please put away the shaggin' cameras
and
just enjoy. Then yer man after a coupla pints gets up in his Blarney
woolen
jumper and his Donegal tweed Tam O'Shanter hat with the shamrock on
the
front and wants to sing with his big fat arse bumping into the fiddle
player putting him off and his belly down around his knees. They
politely
told him no, and he goes into a roar of Danny Boy. Well at this point,
they
all stopped playing and went up to the bar. This cunt had the "who
me"??
look on him. THen to cap it all, this other cunt says "is this the
peasant
music?" I was floored. Another good reason to hate stupid fuckin'
Yanks.
So I fucked off out of there and went up to Nealon's. No Yanks in
there
thanks be ta Jaysus.
SCI Resident Yank Hater-Baiter
The One And Only GoldenArse
Ireland's Favourite Son
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
www.mantra.com/jyotish
spam...@atdot.org posted:
> Also schrieb adrian_...@yahoo.com:
>
> >What happens is
> >that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
> >*bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
> >been somehow disrespected.
> >
> >Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
>
> Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all. Pussy for a
> sissipated man, sure. But calling a man a cunt wouldn't earn you anything
> but a confused look from people around hyar.
Search the web: there are some pages with such usage -- not many, but some.
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
AB
> "fra...@seed.net.tw" <fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote:
>> Adrian Smith wrote:
>> > Thing is, when one uses this word in the UK (perhaps in a spirit of
>> > scientific investigation), one is often met with the strange global
>> > assertion that 'that word's offensive to women' (rather than the more
>> > plausible local variant, 'I'm offended by that word for reasons which
>> > I probably haven't examined yet').
>>
>> I'm sure it has to do with the assertion, by American feminists at least,
>> that this synecdochism is demeaning to women because it reduces them
>> to their genitalia.
>
> Yabbut, (fingers dictionary) it doesn't reduce them to anything.
No, but it *is* rather insulting to a gal's genitalia.
That, and it's a Bad Word, one that isn't used nearly as often as the
others and thus shocks delicate sensibilities all the more.
But, of course, a Thoroughly Modern Woman is supposed to be beyond
all that "delicate sensibilities" crap. She is immune to such things.
So, obviously, her shock at hearing "cunt", used incongruously and in
anger as well, must surely be due to something else, perhaps an
intuitive sense of Feminist Wrong that brooks no argument.
Et voila, she is sophisticated after all, and simply shocked at
hearing something so demeaning to women.
ObPeeve: The perpetually jaded. Kid, you'll live long enough to get
used to just about everything you ever encounter, so enjoy naivete
while it lasts.
ObUsage: If Chow Mein was actually invented in America, is the term
properly a loanword or a neologism?
> Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
One of which? A cunt[1], a cunt[2], a cunt[3] or a woman?
I'm likely one of the above so three more to go.
[1] http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/profile/thatcher.html
[2] http://www.twoshortplanks.com/simon/cunt/
[3] http://www.kalikunti.com/
--
See you when tea is hot.
Charles Riggs
<tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Rich wrote:
>
>> Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all.
>
>The following was posted in soc.culture.irish a while back. There are
>several uses of the word "cunt", and not one of them refers to a
>female.
<funny story>
The word is far more universally applied here in Ireland than it is in
America. I've heard, in the West, "a shower of cunts" which doesn't
refer to a group of females either. Exactly what it does refer to, I'm
not certain but it is always said in a humorous vein.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
>As a trailer veteran, I like to make the distinction between those
>modern "mobile homes" and what I lived in. My trailer ...
>[Strong sentiments with which I agree snipt]
I don't have strong objections to trailer people and have known a few
I've liked very much. However, one is far less likely to find refined
types of individuals living in trailers compared with those who live
in suburban houses or in city townhouses. They tend to be poor and,
let's face it, poor people can be troublesome. Crime rates in trailer
parks are notoriously high compared with the rates in richer
neighborhoods in the very same town or city: that is almost always
true.
In Ireland we have what are called "travelers" and the case is similar
with them. Some are hippies and cause no trouble but a significantly
large number, disproportionate to their population, are hoodlums. Few
want them in or near their own neighborhoods. Sorry, boys and girls,
but that's the way it is.
Namby-pamby folks can rant and rave about how all of us are equal, all
of us are good, and so forth and so on, but, unfortunately, saying it
is so doesn't make it so.
Charles Riggs
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Adrian Smith wrote:
>
> > Yabbut, (fingers dictionary) it doesn't reduce them to anything.
> > Referring to *women* as 'cunt' (or the strangely uncountable 'pussy')
> > might, but I've never heard 'cunt' used like that. What happens is
> > that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
> > *bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
> > been somehow disrespected.
> >
> > Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
> >
> > --
> > Adrian Smith
>
> Hmm, I've been used to hearing the term "cunt" used to describe an
> obnoxious or useless female, while "twat" can be used either way
Quimsically, as it were, eh?
> (although still more commonly used re: females) and "pussy" generally is
> used as an insult towards a less than macho male. Guess things really
> do mean different things in different places.
Does everyone understand what is a poof is or are there alternate
terms in various places?
> nate
Padraig Breathnach
>The word is far more universally applied here in Ireland than it is in
>America. I've heard, in the West, "a shower of cunts" which doesn't
>refer to a group of females either. Exactly what it does refer to, I'm
>not certain but it is always said in a humorous vein.
>
You might be even more challenged by the variant form: a shower of
fucking cunts.
PB
Adrian Smith
> Adrian Smith wrote:
> > Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
>
> You will have to ask one.
For sure. There might be one here...
> It might simply be a matter of ideology.
My working hypothesis was that it was *some* sort of substitute for thought, yeah.
--
Adrian Smith
Christopher Kluth
>In article <to11nsl...@corp.supernews.com>,
> spam...@atdot.org posted:
>
>
>> Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all. Pussy for a
>> sissipated man, sure. But calling a man a cunt wouldn't earn you anything
>> but a confused look from people around hyar.
>
>Search the web: there are some pages with such usage -- not many, but some.
One web page that comes to mind is dedicated to Jamie Oliver
('The Naked Chef'), who is frequently referred to using the
C*** word. Some of the 'montages' are really quite artistic:
http://hairytongue.com/gallery/fattongue/
--
Christopher
Adrian Smith
> Adrian Smith <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "fra...@seed.net.tw" <fra...@seed.net.tw> wrote:
> >> I'm sure it has to do with the assertion, by American feminists at least,
> >> that this synecdochism is demeaning to women because it reduces them
> >> to their genitalia.
> >
> > Yabbut, (fingers dictionary) it doesn't reduce them to anything.
>
> No, but it *is* rather insulting to a gal's genitalia.
People can be insulted, not genitalia. Genitalia don't have the means
of perception required, and if you're an exception here I'll thank you
to keep it to yourself, or they'll all want one. A woman who decides
to be insulted by the word in question is doing the synecdochism
thing, AFAICT.
Hello, Aaron. Long time no.
> That, and it's a Bad Word, one that isn't used nearly as often as the
> others and thus shocks delicate sensibilities all the more.
Mmm. Would you say it's the most taboo word in US English? It
certainly seems to be over here. I'm curious about this, as parallels
in other languages - 'con' in French and 'cono' in Spanish,
particularly - have far less power.
> But, of course, a Thoroughly Modern Woman is supposed to be beyond
> all that "delicate sensibilities" crap. She is immune to such things.
> So, obviously, her shock at hearing "cunt", used incongruously and in
> anger as well, must surely be due to something else, perhaps an
> intuitive sense of Feminist Wrong that brooks no argument.
I wasn't going to go there, at least not via the front door. But if we
must...
> Et voila, she is sophisticated after all, and simply shocked at
> hearing something so demeaning to women.
And once I get an explanation of how one man calling another a cunt
(UK context)demeans women, we'll be up and running. I do hope no one
says 'It just *does*, all right?'
> > Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
>
> One of which? A cunt[1], a cunt[2], a cunt[3] or a woman?
>
> I'm likely one of the above so three more to go.
I need the last one. That's where the authority lies.
--
Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith
> That's the way I usually hear (well, read--I don't hang around the sort
> of people who actually use that sort of language) it used here. I don't
> think I've ever seen applied generically to a man.
Aha - signs of possible class distinction. Could you perhaps describe
some of the characteristics of these people you don't hang around
with, apart from the fact that they say 'cunt' a lot? How do you
recognise them?
--
Adrian Smith
Franke
AB wrote:
"Chow mien" is one way of spelling the Chinese term that means
"fried noodles"; "chow fan" is fried rice.
The Chinese restaurant dish that was invented in America is called
"chop suey". I've never heard that in Taiwan. It calls to mind what
the cook must be doing to what he considers to be pig food and
then is calling the hogs to come get it.
I Am
Adrian Smith <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b9ae8e0f.01082...@posting.google.com...
(snip)
> Mmm. Would you say it's the most taboo word in US English? It
> certainly seems to be over here. I'm curious about this, as parallels
> in other languages - 'con' in French and 'cono' in Spanish,
> particularly - have far less power.
It is certainly true in Spanish. It is very commonly used by everyone, of
both sexes and all ages. In fact, many people are totally unaware of the
etymological meaning of the word.
Principally, it is used as an interjection to express surprise, anger, or
joy.
***
From The Collins Concise Spanish Dictionary © 1998 HarperCollins Publishers
at WordReference.com:
coño
1 (nm) (LAm fam) cunt;
(pey) viven en el quinto ~, they live way out in the sticks, they live at
the back of beyond;
nickname for Spaniard;
2 (interj) (enfado) hell!;damn!;
(sorpresa) well I'm damned!; Christ!;
(alegría) ¡esto hay que celebrarlo, ~!, we jolly well must celebrate this!;
¿qué ~ te importa?, why the hell does it matter to you?
cunt (n)(fam!) coño m fam!; concha f And, CSur fam!;
***
From The Collins Paperback French Dictionary © 1995 HarperCollins Publishers
at WordReference.com:
con, ne [kÃ, kn]
(adj)(fam!) bloody (BRIT) or damned stupid (!).
cunt [knt]
(n) (col!) chatte f (!);
(insult) salaud m (!), salope f (!).
-
Jacqui
> Also schrieb adrian_...@yahoo.com:
>
> >What happens is
> >that one man refers to another *man* as a cunt, and a female
> >*bystander* feels that her genitalia (and by extension herself) have
> >been somehow disrespected.
> >
> >Perhaps one of them will enlighten me as to how this works.
>
> Never heard the word 'cunt' used to refer to a man at all. Pussy for a
> sissipated man, sure. But calling a man a cunt wouldn't earn you anything
> but a confused look from people around hyar.
It's more common here, and if used in the same vein for a woman would be
unusual - when it's used of a woman IME it's nearly always a very
sexually-slanted term, derogatory and abusive ("fat cunt" is the only
non-sexual use I can recall hearing when it is used of/to a woman). Used
of/to a man it can be admiring - "you jammy cunt" - derogatory/abusive -
Irvine Welsh's "radge cunts" in Trainspotting veer between admiring and
abusive, "he's a right cunt" is abusive - and several other shades of
meaning.
I object to its use in abusive contexts, not because it refers to
genitalia (although when used of genitalia I object to its imprecise
use!) but because I object generally to abusive words, especially sexual
ones. Insults can be so much more creative and appropriately chosen, why
settle for essentially meaningless anatomical ones?
Jac
Christopher Kluth
[..]
>The reason being that I find it offensive. And I can't put my finger on
>exactly why, but it has to do with the singularly harsh way it sounds
>when it comes out of the mouth. No matter how much affection you might
>have for the item (or its owner), use the word c*nt to describe it and
>it will *still* sound like you hate it with a passion.
[..]
Is it possible that it has something to do with the fact that there
are quite a lot of other "*unt" words in English which often have
rather negative connotations? For example:
blunt, brunt, hunt, grunt, runt, shunt, etc.
Perhaps there's something about "*unt" in English that simply sounds
offensive?
Apparently, the word c*nt in English is etymologically akin to middle
low German 'kunte'. Reinhold, can you shed any light on this discussion?
It's more your field of expertise. :-)
--
Christopher
Elaine Richards
Peter Seebach <se...@plethora.net> wrote:
>In article <earle.jones-EE8B...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>,
>Earle D Jones <earle...@home.com> wrote:
>>George Carlin's monologue on dirty words was the subject of a lawsuit
>>between the FCC and a Berkeley radio station. The exact words became
>>part of the evidence are are available in the court transcripts.
>
> http://w3.trib.com/FACT/1st.net.free.fccVpac.html
I wonder if the Court asked this question of the Plaintiff:
"Sir, when you heard those words on your radio while your child was
listening, did you think to turn the radio off?"
ER
Tim Emanuel
A parent, take resposibility for their child? Don't be silly.
--
Tim Emanuel http://cantona.org.uk
Leap nimbly!
Tony Cooper
> In Ireland we have what are called "travelers" and the case is
similar
> with them. Some are hippies and cause no trouble but a significantly
> large number, disproportionate to their population, are hoodlums.
Few
> want them in or near their own neighborhoods. Sorry, boys and girls,
> but that's the way it is.
Speaking of the Irish Travellers, they are called "tinkers" by some.
This goes back to the days when they traveled around repairing pots
and pans.
The phrase "I don't give a tinker's damn" probably originated from
this. Only, it was probably "I don't give a tinker's dam." meaning
the soldering "dam" as an insignificant thing. I'm sure there are
other attributions for this expression.
rich
Isn't that what we have villages for?
--
OS/X: Because making Unix user friendly was easier than debugging Windows
Tony Cooper
(the phrase trailer-trash springs
> to mind, but there isn't such a thing here, really).
While the term "trailer trash" might not be used in Oz, I would think
that you have a comparable term. Who watches Jerry Springer there?
Fiction and Friction
>The Chinese restaurant dish that was invented in America is called
>"chop suey". I've never heard that in Taiwan. It calls to mind what
>the cook must be doing to what he considers to be pig food and
>then is calling the hogs to come get it.
Is this where the term "chop sticks" comes from?
I can't remember off-hand what the Chinese folks I know call them, but
it didn't sound anything even remotely like "chop".
--
Eric O'Connor <ad...@fundynips.com>
There's always someone who can't bear not to help. - Marc Frizzell
www.mantra.com/jyotish
e...@idiom.com (Elaine Richards) posted:
Why, are radio broadcasts reversible?
Truly Donovan
<mcon...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of the
>jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live in
>trailers . . . .
I've heard a lot of jokes about people who live in trailers,
but none of them had anything to do with goodness or
badness; if I were to generalize about them at all, they
seemed to be metaphoric references to taste rather than
virtue.
--
Truly Donovan
http://www.trulydonovan.com
Wayne Brown
news:m8q2otk9nou2hu9s6...@4ax.com...
> Franke wrote:
>
> >The Chinese restaurant dish that was invented in America is called
> >"chop suey". I've never heard that in Taiwan. It calls to mind what
> >the cook must be doing to what he considers to be pig food and
> >then is calling the hogs to come get it.
>
> Is this where the term "chop sticks" comes from?
>
> I can't remember off-hand what the Chinese folks I know call them, but
> it didn't sound anything even remotely like "chop".
It depends on which dialect of Chinese you're listening to. The system of
writing is uniform, but the pronunciation varies radically in various parts
of China. In Mandarin, chopsticks are called "kuaizi," and the word reminds
Chinese speakers of a homonym meaning "fast, quick," with the noun suffix
"zi" added to it. Although the two words are also written similarly, they
have entirely different radicals, an important feature in written Chinese,
which helps to distinguish between homonyms. The first syllable of the
English word "chop" comes from an English distortion of the way the first
part of the two-character concept is pronounced in Cantonese. Chopsticks are
ancient, although their exact age is unknown. They were first mentioned in a
well-known monument of Chinese literature some 2,000 years ago.
Regards, ----- WB.
Aaron Davies
That's easy, they're the people who are where I am when I'm not.
--
__ __
/ ) / )
/--/ __. __ ______ / / __. , __o _ _
/ (_(_/|_/ (_(_) / <_ /__/_(_/|_\/ <__</_/_)_
Aaron Davies
> Also schrieb t...@cantona.org.uk:
> >On 20 Aug 2001 10:07:13 -0700, Elaine Richards wrote:
> >>"Sir, when you heard those words on your radio while your child was
> >>listening, did you think to turn the radio off?"
> >
> >A parent, take resposibility for their child? Don't be silly.
>
> Isn't that what we have villages for?
I always thought it took a village to raise an idiot.
Aaron Davies
It's not a term native to AmE, but the Pythons have spread it around
pretty well, so as long as you're talking to someone online, it's a safe
bet they'll know it.
Fishpiggle
indeed the most horrifying word that could be uttered in any context at all,
even a purely anatomical one. Feminist theory seemed to have little to do
with this; "cunt" was simply an appallingly bad word.
Several years ago, I married a Brit and was enlightened to hear him
frequently use "cunt" to mean "idiot" (or "asshole," a rather odd anatomical
inversion), most fervently when some old fart pulled an unusually stupid
move on the highway and DH would scream, "Fucking CUNT!" out the window. The
object of the epithet is almost always male; although annoying females can
also be called cunts, the venom refers to their stupidity, not their gender.
"Twat" is used the same way, although it doesn't have the punch of "cunt."
I have become liberated and use both words freely now, although I rein
myself in a bit when around American family and cow-orkers.
Strangely, DH uses the word in one other specific context -- an intimate
context, in which he sometimes informs me that I have the most fantastic
cunt in the world. For some reason, although flattered, I always find myself
somewhat jarred by this, which suggests, I suppose, that early conditioning
can rarely be fully overcome.
Fishpiggle
(email disabled)
Mary MacTavish
said:
>
>Strangely, DH uses the word in one other specific context -- an intimate
>context, in which he sometimes informs me that I have the most fantastic
>cunt in the world. For some reason, although flattered, I always find myself
>somewhat jarred by this, which suggests, I suppose, that early conditioning
>can rarely be fully overcome.
That's the only context I use it in.
I consider using it as an insult or "dirty word" to spoil it for those
of us who think it's a fabulous body part.
`
Mary MacTavish
http://www.prado.com/~iris
"I like you guys who want smaller government - you
know, just small enough to fit in our bedrooms."
Josh to Congressman Skinner, The West Wing
Maria Conlon
Truly Donovan wrote in message ...
>Maria Conlon wrote:
>>The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of the
>>jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live in
>>trailers . . . .
>I've heard a lot of jokes about people who live in trailers,
>but none of them had anything to do with goodness or
>badness; if I were to generalize about them at all, they
>seemed to be metaphoric references to taste rather than
>virtue.
Okay, but the jokes that refer to taste refer to the *bad* taste of
people who live in trailers as opposed to the supposed *good* taste of
people who don't.
Whether the reference is to taste or money or education or whatever, the
implication is that mobile home residents are a cut below anyone else. I
think it's an unfair generalization.
We need another Rockford Files on TV.
Maria (Tootsie)
Tony Cooper
> Whether the reference is to taste or money or education or whatever,
the
> implication is that mobile home residents are a cut below anyone
else. I
> think it's an unfair generalization.
Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have engendered
no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
"manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has
been replaced by "communities".
Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy band has
pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat rings
in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of Florida to
change the name of the "Department of Business
and Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales,
Condominiums and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their
name to strike out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with
"manufactured housing". They feel this is far more important than
hurricane proof tie downs and electrical wiring codes.
Maria Conlon
Tony Cooper wrote in message
>Maria Conlon wrote:
>>Whether the reference is to taste or money or education or whatever,
the implication is that mobile home residents are a cut below anyone
else. I think it's an unfair generalization.<<
>Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have engendered
no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
"manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has been
replaced by "communities".<
Did I say "parks"?
>.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy band
has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums
and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to strike
out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
housing". They feel this is far more important than hurricane proof tie
downs and electrical wiring codes.<
Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way" or
possibly, "What nonsense.")
I'm a bit surprised at the term "manufactured housing" being used for
"mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to something
else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it with
"modular homes."
We had a discussion on aue about this before, and I don't remember what
conclusions (if any) we reached. I think I'll just accept your word that
the now-preferred name in Florida is "manufactured housing."
But whichever term is used in Florida, I don't think that the "trailer
trash" jokes are aimed at the people who live in "manufactured housing"
in Florida. I tend to think of those folks as senior citizens --
retirees -- living in quite different circumstances than normally
associated with the jokes we were talking about. Is my impression wrong?
(Polyester plaid jackets? Sweat rings? Is there an attitude here, or is
it something else? You can be very hard to figure at times, so I don't
want to assume anything.)
Maria (Tootsie)
Tony Cooper
> > The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of
the
> > jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live
in
> > trailers -- or rather, in mobile homes, to use the more modern
term.
How is "trailer trash" any less kind than "not our sort"?
There are hundreds of euphemisms for this sort of distinction. There
are
the those that don't specify the group the speaker is placing himself
above
(ie: hoi polloi, the masses, the great unwashed, the average joe,
etc.) but
the commonality is that the speaker is placing himself in a superior
position.
Perhaps Wm F. Buckley, William Safire, or George Will could express
disdain
more imaginatively, but the meaning would be the same. We need terms
to
succinctly describe concepts. The terms are not always couched in
polite
form, but there is no difference between - say - "some people" and
"trailer
trash" in many utterances.
Richard Fontana
> Tony Cooper wrote in message
>
> >Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have engendered
> no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
> "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has been
> replaced by "communities".<
>
> Did I say "parks"?
>
> >.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy band
> has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
> rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
> Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
> Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums
> and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to strike
> out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
> housing". They feel this is far more important than hurricane proof tie
> downs and electrical wiring codes.<
>
> Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way" or
> possibly, "What nonsense.")
>
> I'm a bit surprised at the term "manufactured housing" being used for
> "mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to something
> else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it with
> "modular homes."
Possibly.
> We had a discussion on aue about this before, and I don't remember what
> conclusions (if any) we reached. I think I'll just accept your word that
> the now-preferred name in Florida is "manufactured housing."
In the federal statutes both "mobile home" and "manufactured home" are
used, but "manufactured home" seems to be the preferred term and,
apparently, a euphemism for "mobile home", which would appear to have
been the original term. The chapter of the US Code entitled "Manufactured
Home Construction and Safety Standards" defines "manufactured home" as
follows:
''manufactured home'' means a structure, transportable in
one or more sections, which, in the traveling mode, is eight body
feet or more in width or forty body feet or more in length, or,
when erected on site, is three hundred twenty or more square
feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to
be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when
connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing,
heating, air-conditioning, and electrical systems contained
therein; except that such term shall include any structure which
meets all the requirements of this paragraph except the size
requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer
voluntarily files a certification required by the Secretary and
complies with the standards established under this chapter; and
except that such term shall not include any self-propelled
recreational vehicle;
The notes to this particular statutory provision say:
References to ''mobile homes'', wherever appearing in text,
changed to ''manufactured homes'' in view of the amendment of title
VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (this
chapter) by section 308(c)(4) of Pub. L. 96-399 requiring the
substitution of ''manufactured home'' for ''mobile home'' wherever
appearing in title VI of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974, and section 339B(c) of Pub. L. 97-35 (set out as a note
under section 1703 of Title 12, Banks and Banking) providing that
the terms ''mobile home'' and ''manufactured home'' shall be deemed
to include the terms ''mobile homes'' and ''manufactured homes'',
respectively.
That amendment, changing "mobile home" to "manufactured home", was enacted
in 1980. See 42 U.S.C. s. 5402n.
I found this on one regional mobile home manufacturers'
trade group's propagandistic web page:
Manufactured housing has undergone a transformation in the past two
decades. Not only has this type of housing changed its appearance and
soundness, but it has also changed its name. The factory-built home of
today is stronger, more durable, more attractive, permanent and often
virtually indistinguishable from a site-built home. In fact, one of the
only characteristics that links it to its ancestors in the "mobile home"
market and distinguishes it from its neighbors in the site-built
communities of today is its continuing affordability. The new name given
these homes is "manufactured housing," a name that more adequately
describes the reality of the present market.
In 1980, recognizing the progress made by the industry, Congress
officially changed all references in Federal law and regulations from
the term "mobile home" to "manufactured home." ....
The mobile homes of the 1920's and manufactured homes of the 1990's
would show few similarities. Manufactured housing today is primarily
used as a form of low and moderate-income permanent housing, and not as
a "mobile" home. The difference between a "mobile home" and a
"manufactured home" is illuminated in the American Planning Association,
a planning guide which differentiates the two forms of housing by
defining a "mobile home" as transportable and built before the MHCSS Act
of 1974; and a "manufactured home" as one fabricated in an off-site
manufacturing facility for installation at the building site and built
to the HUD Code.
Tony Cooper
> >Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have
engendered
> no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
> "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has
been
> replaced by "communities".<
>
> Did I say "parks"?
No, but you were about to. That was just added in as part of what's
going on in the semantics in the industry.
> >.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy
band
> has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
> rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
> Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
> Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales,
Condominiums
> and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to
strike
> out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
> housing". They feel this is far more important than hurricane proof
tie
> downs and electrical wiring codes.<
>
> Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way"
or
> possibly, "What nonsense.")
Well, you judge. They are fighting in court regulations that would
require stricter rules on tie downs and electrical safety
requirements. At the same time, they are lobbying in Tallahassee for
the change in name.
Hurricanes - and the strong winds of sub-hurricane conditions - are a
major problem here. Every time there's a hurricane or a strong wind,
some mobile home(s) gets blown off the ground because they are just
set on concrete slabs. Tie downs are the metal stakes set in the
ground to hold them down. It's often not done, or not done to code.
Mobile homes are very subject to fire damage. They are gutted in
minutes. Cheap wiring is often the cause. Many people are killed
every year in Florida for these two reasons.
Why would it surprise you that an industry would fight rules to
improve safety that would cost the members of the industry money? The
auto dealers, the tire manufacturers, and the amusement park ride
makers all do....why not the mobile home industry?
>
> I'm a bit surprised at the term "manufactured housing" being used
for
> "mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to
something
> else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it
with
> "modular homes."
Mobile homes are not mobile. They are trucked in and set in place. A
"double wide" is trucked in in two pieces. They are manufactured
elsewhere and set up on site. They are not designed to be mobile.
Modular homes are manufactured in smaller increments. Things like
electricity and plumbing come with a mobile home, but are added on
site with a modular.
A daily sight on Florida highways is a half of a double wide on a
tractor trailer going down the road. The open side is covered with a
plastic material, but if it blows off you can see half a house, often
with furniture in place.
> We had a discussion on aue about this before, and I don't remember
what
> conclusions (if any) we reached. I think I'll just accept your word
that
> the now-preferred name in Florida is "manufactured housing."
The industry prefers it. The residents prefer it. The rest of us are
unconcerned.
> But whichever term is used in Florida, I don't think that the
"trailer
> trash" jokes are aimed at the people who live in "manufactured
housing"
> in Florida. I tend to think of those folks as senior citizens --
> retirees -- living in quite different circumstances than normally
> associated with the jokes we were talking about. Is my impression
wrong?
Yes and no. It depends on the age of the unit and the location. Some
manufactured housing communities are quite nice. Some people put up a
manufactured housing unit on a sandy lot in the woods and fit all
descriptions of trailer trash. Older "communities" tend to get very
run down very quickly. Some retirees live in trashy parks; some live
in upscale communities.
> (Polyester plaid jackets? Sweat rings? Is there an attitude here, or
is
> it something else?
Some mobile home salesmen have the status of used car salesmen. It is
a pp jacket group. They fleece a lot of retirees. I could explain,
but e-mail me if you want to know more. It would bore the group.
You can be very hard to figure at times, so I don't
> want to assume anything.)
I always tell the truth unless I'm making up a story.
Maria Conlon
Tony Cooper wrote in message
>
>> > The only reason I'm responding here is that I'm a little tired of
the
>> > jokes about people who live in trailers. Good and bad people live
>in
>> > trailers -- or rather, in mobile homes, to use the more modern
>term.
>How is "trailer trash" any less kind than "not our sort"?
Who said it was or wasn't? IMO, they're both condescending. But so what?
>There are hundreds of euphemisms for this sort of distinction. There
>are
>the those that don't specify the group the speaker is placing himself
>above
>(ie: hoi polloi, the masses, the great unwashed, the average joe,
>etc.) but
>the commonality is that the speaker is placing himself in a superior
>position.
And? I'm not sure how this relates to my post. Did you delete someone
else's comments that you meant to reply to?
>Perhaps Wm F. Buckley, William Safire, or George Will could express
>disdain
>more imaginatively, but the meaning would be the same. We need terms
>to
>succinctly describe concepts. The terms are not always couched in
>polite
>form, but there is no difference between - say - "some people" and
>"trailer
>trash" in many utterances.
And in other utterances, there is. But I wasn't speaking to the
terminology issue.
Either you're tired or I am.
Maria (Tootsie)
Tony Cooper
> I found this on one regional mobile home manufacturers'
> trade group's propagandistic web page:
The factory-built home of today is....
> virtually indistinguishable from a site-built home.
Yeah. And a hair piece is virtually indistinguishable from a real
head of hair.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
<Sirlawren...@hotmail.com> dropped trou in alt.peeves and left
the following steaming pile:
There are just some people in dire need of being offended, so here in
Merka, we use one of the few words left, which is almost guaranteed to
generate the desired level of offense. We have become desensitized to
foul language. Whether it's prefaced by "fat", "stupid", "lazy",
"fucking", or just about any other word, it leaves no doubt that
maximum offense was intended.
Across the Pond, where it has taken on a different meaning, it isn't
as effective.
--
V.G.
"I didn't dodge the question, I just simply did not answer it."
Vegas Luna "spells it out" for us.
Maria Conlon
Tony Cooper wrote in message
>>Tony said
>>>Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have
>>>engendered
>>> no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
>>> "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has
been
>>>replaced by "communities".<
>> Did I say "parks"?
>No, but you were about to. That was just added in as part of what's
>going on in the semantics in the industry.
Amazing. You know what I'm about to say even though I don't.
>> >.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy
>band
>>> has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
>>>rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
>>>Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
>>>Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales,
Condominiums
>>> and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to
strike
>>>out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
>>>housing". They feel this is far more important than hurricane proof
tie
>>>downs and electrical wiring codes.<
>> Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way"
or
>> possibly, "What nonsense.")
>Well, you judge. They are fighting in court regulations that would
>require stricter rules on tie downs and electrical safety
>requirements. At the same time, they are lobbying in Tallahassee for
>the change in name.
The fog lifts a bit. I thought, when you mentioned the "Manufactured
Homes Association," you were talking about *owners* -- the people who
buy the homes and live in them. Thus I also thought you were referring
to the owners as the ones who thought the name was more important than
the safety issues. (Note that you started out talking about my "defense
of the double-wide set." It didn't occurred to me that you switched
horses and that the subsequent comments referred to the manufacturers or
sales staffs and not to the residents.)
[...]
>Why would it surprise you that an industry would fight rules to
>improve safety that would cost the members of the industry money? The
>auto dealers, the tire manufacturers, and the amusement park ride
>makers all do....why not the mobile home industry?
As I already said, I misunderstood what you were saying.
[...]
>>You can be very hard to figure at times, so I don't
>> want to assume anything.)
>I always tell the truth unless I'm making up a story.
I don't doubt that you're telling the truth, but I find your way of
telling it hard to follow. It's probably just me. Others may well have
understood what you were saying.
Maria (Tootsie)
Adrian Smith
> I object to its use in abusive contexts, not because it refers to
> genitalia (although when used of genitalia I object to its imprecise
> use!) but because I object generally to abusive words, especially sexual
> ones. Insults can be so much more creative and appropriately chosen, why
> settle for essentially meaningless anatomical ones?
I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
--
Adrian Smith
R J Valentine
...
} But whichever term is used in Florida, I don't think that the "trailer
} trash" jokes are aimed at the people who live in "manufactured housing"
} in Florida. I tend to think of those folks as senior citizens --
} retirees -- living in quite different circumstances than normally
} associated with the jokes we were talking about. Is my impression wrong?
I don't think I've actually heard any of the jokes we've been talking
about. Can anyone supply an example?
Of the fictional trailers I know about, a lot of the residents are not
particularly rich. Luanne and her parents on _King of the Hill_ spring to
mind, as does the father of Victor Joseph in _Smoke Signals_. But Lucille
Ball and Desi Arnaz's trailer in _The Long, Long Trailer_ was a fancy one.
Of the people I know who live in trailers, one used to live across the
street from me here lived in a trailer in Florida for a while and now
lives in a house in New England, and the other is my Uncle Bill (The
Valentine, as it were, since my Uncle Fred died) who lives in a
double-wide in Florida (I think of him as old, and he did move there when
he retired from Grumman). My former boss lived in a trailer when I met
him, but moved from there to a fancy house in Columbia.
I guess that my impression is that there are all kinds of people living in
trailers, just as there are all kinds of people living in stick houses or
apartments.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:r...@smart.net>
Robert E. Lewis
Tony Cooper <tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9lsogv$eu2$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
> Maria wrote:
>
> > >Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have
> engendered
> > no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
> > "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has
> been
> > replaced by "communities".<
> >
> > Did I say "parks"?
>
> No, but you were about to. That was just added in as part of what's
> going on in the semantics in the industry.
You are psychic? Miss Cleo, look out!
> > >.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy
> band
> > has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
> > rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
> > Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
> > Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales,
> Condominiums
> > and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to
> strike
> > out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
> > housing". They feel this is far more important than hurricane proof
> tie
> > downs and electrical wiring codes.<
> >
> > Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way"
> or
> > possibly, "What nonsense.")
>
> Well, you judge. They are fighting in court regulations that would
> require stricter rules on tie downs and electrical safety
> requirements. At the same time, they are lobbying in Tallahassee for
> the change in name.
"They"? "They are not occupants/owners of mobile/manufactured homes, are
they?
> Hurricanes - and the strong winds of sub-hurricane conditions - are a
> major problem here. Every time there's a hurricane or a strong wind,
> some mobile home(s) gets blown off the ground because they are just
> set on concrete slabs.
I was discussing this just this past weekend with a friend - looking at some
modular housing built in a very hurricane-prone area. My friend had watched
this particular housing being put in (modules three stories high atop
concrete pilings), and I recalled reading criticisms that the modules were
connected to one another with four eight-penny nails per unit. The modular
housing survived a major storm that hit shortly after they were built (a
storm that did $16,000 in damage to my father's stick-built
(well-constructed stick-built) beach house not far away.
> Why would it surprise you that an industry would fight rules to
> improve safety that would cost the members of the industry money? The
> auto dealers, the tire manufacturers, and the amusement park ride
> makers all do....why not the mobile home industry?
And that makes the buyers of mobile home declassé in what way? ("Man! She
stripped like an owner of Firestone tires!" "She went down faster than a
rider on a roller coaster!")
> Mobile homes are not mobile. They are trucked in and set in place. A
> "double wide" is trucked in in two pieces. They are manufactured
> elsewhere and set up on site. They are not designed to be mobile.
[...]
> A daily sight on Florida highways is a half of a double wide on a
> tractor trailer going down the road. The open side is covered with a
> plastic material, but if it blows off you can see half a house, often
> with furniture in place.
This seems to me to be a description of a home in motion - a mobile home.
If seeing such is a "daily sight," and they are often moved more than once
(surely no one buys a new mobile home and brings in furniture before moving
it to its (permanent?) location - those that are being moved are often being
moved more than once. Because they are mobile.
It's not uncommon around here (semi-rural East Texas) for people to buy some
property in the country, buy a mobile home and have it moved in and live
there until they can have a conventional house built.
> Modular homes are manufactured in smaller increments. Things like
> electricity and plumbing come with a mobile home, but are added on
> site with a modular.
The modular housing I have seen presented on television shows ("This Old
House" special segments, for example), have had most of the wiring done at
the factory, with special harnesses to hook things up once the module is on
site.
You seem to be arguing at cross-purposes - that mobile homes are not
"mobile," and yet are inferior construction in that they are designed to be
moved in one or two pieces.
--
Robert
Mike Barnes
>trade group's propagandistic web page:
>
>Manufactured housing has undergone a transformation in the past two
> decades. Not only has this type of housing changed its appearance and
> soundness, but it has also changed its name. The factory-built home of
> today is stronger, more durable, more attractive, permanent and often
> virtually indistinguishable from a site-built home. In fact, one of the
> only characteristics that links it to its ancestors in the "mobile home"
> market and distinguishes it from its neighbors in the site-built
> communities of today is its continuing affordability. The new name given
> these homes is "manufactured housing," a name that more adequately
> describes the reality of the present market.
Both factory-built housing and site-built housing is manufactured. So
should they be talking about "pre-manufactured" housing?
--
Mike Barnes
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote
> > I object to its use in abusive contexts, not because it refers to
> > genitalia (although when used of genitalia I object to its imprecise
> > use!) but because I object generally to abusive words, especially sexual
> > ones. Insults can be so much more creative and appropriately chosen, why
> > settle for essentially meaningless anatomical ones?
>
> I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
> sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
> Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
> profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
Many. "Here on Google"?
If ignorance is bliss, you must be ecstatic.
Jac
Bob Cunningham
<rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu> said:
[...]
> The mobile homes of the 1920's and manufactured homes of the 1990's
> would show few similarities. Manufactured housing today is primarily
> used as a form of low and moderate-income permanent housing, and not as
> a "mobile" home. The difference between a "mobile home" and a
> "manufactured home" is illuminated in the American Planning Association,
> a planning guide which differentiates the two forms of housing by
> defining a "mobile home" as transportable and built before the MHCSS Act
> of 1974; and a "manufactured home" as one fabricated in an off-site
> manufacturing facility for installation at the building site and built
> to the HUD Code.
That fails to get directly to a very significant difference between a
mobile home and a manufactured home. That difference is that a mobile
home has wheels and a manufactured home does not.
The wheels on a mobile home, as situated in a mobile-home community,
can be hard to discern -- typically covered by wooden enclosures that
are designed to disguise the existence of wheels, but they are there.
They're not as useful as one might think they should be, because when
you want to move your mobile home, you have to get a house-mover to do
it for you.
The last I heard -- and assume is still true -- the reason mobile-home
owners are careful to keep the wheels on is that it gives the owner a
tax break. A mobile home with its wheels is subject to a vehicle tax
and not to a real-estate property tax, even though it's installed on a
lot and will in general remain there for many years. A manufactured
home, because it has no wheels, is subject to a real-estate property
tax and not to a vehicle tax.
It may be argued that this point is covered by the word
"transportable" in the American Planning Association document quoted
above, but it's not really. House movers move fairly large buildings,
mobile homes, and manufactured homes; and when they do so, they are
transporting them.
_Webster's Third New International Dictionary_ (CD-ROM version)
supports what I've said:
Main Entry:mobile home
Function: noun
: a dwelling structure built on a vehicle chassis and
intended to be trailered to a permanent site
(I note that that entry does not appear in the print copy, so this is
yet another indication of modernization in the CD-ROM version.)
Franke
Mike Barnes wrote:
I don't think this is the proper adjective for site-built housing. That, I
would say, is "built". Manufacturing strongly suggests the involvement
of a factory and machinery despite its denotation as something made
from raw materials by hand or machine.
Modular mobile homes are prefab sections fitted and connected
together on site, but they aren't built there. And as "prefabricated"
already exists, there seems no reason to use "pre-manufactured".
>
>
> --
> Mike Barnes
Bob Cunningham
said:
As I see it, housing constructed in the traditional ways differ from
"manufactured" houses only in that the manufactured house arrives on
the building lot in larger pieces. They're both assembled at the
site.
Bob Cunningham
<rfon...@mail.wesleyan.edu> said:
>On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Maria Conlon wrote:
>> Tony Cooper wrote in message
>> >Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have engendered
>> no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the term
>> "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has been
>> replaced by "communities".<
That may be true somewhere, but it's not true in Southern California,
which has many mobile-home parks. There may be promoters who call
them communities because of the added prestige they think it provides,
but they're still parks in every conversation I've heard.
They're also listed under "Mobile Home Parks" in the classified
section of our telephone directory.
>> Did I say "parks"?
>> >.....Florida has more of whatever you want to call them than a boy band
>> has pimples. The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat
>> rings in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
>> Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
>> Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums
>> and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to strike
>> out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with "manufactured
>> housing". [...]
This may be okay if they're trying to change the nomenclature for one
type of construction, but the fact remains that new mobile homes and
manufactured homes still exist and are two different things.
If anyone wants to buy a brand new mobile home, I can give you
addresses and phone numbers, again from the classified section of the
phone book. On another page, I can find places where you can buy
manufactured housing.
>> Do they really? (That means, "Oh, I highly doubt they feel that way" or
>> possibly, "What nonsense.")
>> I'm a bit surprised at the term "manufactured housing" being used for
>> "mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to something
>> else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it with
>> "modular homes."
>Possibly.
A trailer is something else. I have one parked in my driveway. It's
intended to be towed on the highway behind a tow vehicle to travel to
weekend-or-longer vacation destinations. (My tow vehicle is a Chevy
Suburban.) To be more specific and avoid confusion with cargo
trailers, you can use the term "travel trailer". They're essentially
recreation vehicles (RVs) that are towed instead of having their own
engine and drive train.
My trailer has thermostatically controlled refrigeration air
conditioning and furnace; hot and cold running water; a range with
three burners and an oven; a bathroom with toilet, wash basin, and
shower; a sofa and a comfortable tilting armchair; and a built-in
microwave oven. Despite all of those conveniences -- plus the VCR and
TV we take along, we still say we're "going camping" when we go out
for a weekend or a week with it; the group we go with about once a
month is known as a "camping club", and the weekend outings are called
"campouts". Nowadays, most of the people in our camping club have
more or less luxurious motor homes; a few of us still have trailers.
Some trailers have "popouts". After you get to your destination and
get parked, you push a button and a large section of the side slides
out to make a greatly expanded living area.
An RV salesman once wryly remarked to me, "People say they want to go
camping to get away from it all, but they still want to take it all
with them."
>> We had a discussion on aue about this before, and I don't remember what
>> conclusions (if any) we reached. I think I'll just accept your word that
>> the now-preferred name in Florida is "manufactured housing."
In California, if you want to talk about mobile homes, you say "mobile
homes"; if you want to talk about manufactured housing, you say
"manufactured housing"; if you want to talk about recreational
vehicles, you say "motor home" or "travel trailer", whichever is
appropriate.
>In the federal statutes both "mobile home" and "manufactured home" are
>used, but "manufactured home" seems to be the preferred term and,
>apparently, a euphemism for "mobile home", which would appear to have
>been the original term.
Manufactured housing may have evolved in some degree from mobile
homes, but the term "manufactured home" has not replaced "mobile
home", and it's not a euphemism. They are two different things and
they have two different names.
Mike Lyle
agree it's useful to have a way of distinguishing factory-made from both
site-built and prefabricated houses; but I don't think many would naturally
think of bricklaying etc as "manufacture", so we're well equipped already.
As a word "Pre-manufactured" doesn't seem to add much to the elegance of our
discourse.
Mike.
Mike Lyle
Valentine wrote:
>
>On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:33:45 -0400 Maria Conlon <mcon...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>...
>} But whichever term is used in Florida, I don't think that the "trailer
>} trash" jokes are aimed at the people who live in "manufactured housing"
>} in Florida. I tend to think of those folks as senior citizens --
>} retirees -- living in quite different circumstances than normally
>} associated with the jokes we were talking about. Is my impression wrong?
>
>I don't think I've actually heard any of the jokes we've been talking
>about. Can anyone supply an example?
>
We don't have indigenous ones over here, but imported American ones are on the
lines of Q: "How does a redneck know he's moved into a bad area?" A: "When
somebody steals the hubcaps off his house."
Mike.
Adrian Smith
> Adrian Smith wrote:
> > I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
> > sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
> > Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
> > profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
>
> Many. "Here on Google"?
Sorry, 'twas a brainfart. I'm posting through it so I momentarily
assumed everyone else on Usenet was doing the same. Mea maxima culpa.
> If ignorance is bliss, you must be ecstatic.
Is this an example, then?
I'm *really* unconvinced now.
--
Adrian Smith
Franke
Bob Cunningham wrote:
That may be true these days, but when I was a kid, the people who
built houses did not assemble them from kits. They were real
carpenters, masons, plumbers, electricians, and roofers and actually
*built* the houses.
Rowan Dingle
>Speaking of the Irish Travellers, they are called "tinkers" by some.
>This goes back to the days when they traveled around repairing pots
>and pans.
>
>The phrase "I don't give a tinker's damn" probably originated from
>this. Only, it was probably "I don't give a tinker's dam." meaning
>the soldering "dam" as an insignificant thing. I'm sure there are
>other attributions for this expression.
I've only ever heard it (until now) as 'I don't give a tinker's cuss'.
--
Rowan Dingle
Bob Cunningham
>Bob Cunningham wrote:
That doesn't disagree with what I said. Houses built the traditional
way arrived at the lot in smaller pieces: two-by-fours, nails, lengths
of pipe, coils of wire, boxes of electrical fixtures, bundles of
shingles, piles of rock, piles of sand, bags of cement ... . That was
what I meant by pieces. And the skilled tradesmen you listed, and
some others, assembled all of these pieces to make a house.
R H Draney
<vgor...@pobox.alaska.net> wrote:
>There are just some people in dire need of being offended, so here in
>Merka, we use one of the few words left, which is almost guaranteed to
>generate the desired level of offense. We have become desensitized to
>foul language. Whether it's prefaced by "fat", "stupid", "lazy",
>"fucking", or just about any other word, it leaves no doubt that
>maximum offense was intended.
"Communist" used to work pretty well here, but it's lost a certain
amount of its sting in the last ten years or so...and it never did
have much impact on people from other countries...I recall being
startled by the bold campaign posters describing candidates as
"Communisto" when I happened to visit Agua Prieta, Sonora during an
election....
Of late I've taken to using "mollusc" as a general-purpose insult...if
it doesn't offend the referent, at least it wakes him up a bit....r
--
Sig files under construction until I get all my data files transferred
to the new hard drive
Sara Moffat Lorimer
And sometimes they were working from kits, as with the Arts and Crafts
houses available from Sears. I'm picking nits, though.
--
SML
Queens, New York
Robert E. Lewis
R J Valentine <r...@smart.net> wrote in message
news:to3ukah...@corp.supernews.com...
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:33:45 -0400 Maria Conlon <mcon...@sprynet.com>
wrote:
> ...
> } But whichever term is used in Florida, I don't think that the "trailer
> } trash" jokes are aimed at the people who live in "manufactured housing"
> } in Florida. I tend to think of those folks as senior citizens --
> } retirees -- living in quite different circumstances than normally
> } associated with the jokes we were talking about. Is my impression wrong?
>
> I don't think I've actually heard any of the jokes we've been talking
> about. Can anyone supply an example?
One of Clinton's supporters (James Carvalle, perhaps?) suggested that the
then-President's critics were digging up women who claimed to have had sex
with then-Go.v Clintoon by "dragging a hundred-dollar-bill through a trailer
park."
Then there are the numerous "You might be a redneck if..." jokes originated
by comic Jeff Foxworthy:
You might be a redneck if...
... Your cousin bought a new house and you went over to help him take the
wheels off.
...Hail hits your house and you have to take it to the body shop for an
estimate.
> Of the fictional trailers I know about, a lot of the residents are not
> particularly rich. Luanne and her parents on _King of the Hill_ spring to
> mind, as does the father of Victor Joseph in _Smoke Signals_. But Lucille
> Ball and Desi Arnaz's trailer in _The Long, Long Trailer_ was a fancy one.
Don't forget Jim Rockford, Private Investigator!
--
Robert
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote
> > > I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
> > > sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
> > > Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
> > > profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
> >
> > Many. "Here on Google"?
>
> Sorry, 'twas a brainfart. I'm posting through it so I momentarily
> assumed everyone else on Usenet was doing the same. Mea maxima culpa.
I did wonder...
> > If ignorance is bliss, you must be ecstatic.
>
> Is this an example, then?
>
> I'm *really* unconvinced now.
Nigel.
Any more convinced? <g>
Jac
Thomas Chan
>"Fiction and Friction" <big...@texticle.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:m8q2otk9nou2hu9s6...@4ax.com...
>> Franke wrote:
>> >The Chinese restaurant dish that was invented in America is called
>> >"chop suey". I've never heard that in Taiwan. It calls to mind what
>> >the cook must be doing to what he considers to be pig food and
>> >then is calling the hogs to come get it.
>>
>> Is this where the term "chop sticks" comes from?
>>
>> I can't remember off-hand what the Chinese folks I know call them, but
>> it didn't sound anything even remotely like "chop".
>
>It depends on which dialect of Chinese you're listening to. The system of
>writing is uniform, but the pronunciation varies radically in various parts
>of China. In Mandarin, chopsticks are called "kuaizi," and the word reminds
>Chinese speakers of a homonym meaning "fast, quick," with the noun suffix
>"zi" added to it. Although the two words are also written similarly, they
>have entirely different radicals, an important feature in written Chinese,
>which helps to distinguish between homonyms. The first syllable of the
>English word "chop" comes from an English distortion of the way the first
>part of the two-character concept is pronounced in Cantonese. Chopsticks are
>ancient, although their exact age is unknown. They were first mentioned in a
>well-known monument of Chinese literature some 2,000 years ago.
Some corrections and additions here...
1) "chop suey" 'miscellaneous scraps' is:
', ; ', , ',
';''';',';'';'' ''';'' ';''';'
,', ,', ;,,;,, ; ,', ,',
,,,;,,, ; ; ,';''; ;
,;, ;'';'' ; ;,,,,;,,;,
,' ; ', ; ; ;,,; ;
; ;''''' ' ;
which is pronounced in Mandarin as za2sui4 /tsa35 sueI51/ and in Cantonese
as jaap6seui3 /tSap22 s@.j<rnd>33/ (@. = IPA barred o, j<rnd> = IPA turned h).
The "chop" in "chop suey" is not the same "chop" as "chopsticks" or
"chop chop".
2) Chopsticks were originally named by a now-obsolete word (in almost all
Chinese languages) which was written as:
;,,,,, ;,,,,,
,' ' , ' ',
'''';'';''
'''';''''''''''
,';'''''';
'' ;'''''';
;'''''';
which is pronounced in (contemporary) Mandarin as zhu4 /ts.u51/ and in
(contemporary) Cantonese as jyu6 /tSy22/. However, the character for
this word is still used in Japanese, where it is used to write the native
word hashi of the same meaning. (s. = IPA s with hook).
3) After #2 above, chopsticks were named by a word which was first
written as:
; ; ,,,,,,,,,;,
, ;, ,,;,,,;, ,'
; ; ' ; ; ;' ,
' ;,,,,;,,,;,, ''''''';'''''''
; ,' , ;
; ,' ', ;
;,' '; ','
which means 'fast ones', which is pronounced in Mandarin as kuai4zi
/k<asp>uae51 tsz/ and in Cantonese as faai3ji2 /fai33 tSi35/.
This written form can be seen in nineteenth century works.
Note the 'fast' connection between the "chop" of "chopstick", the
"chop" of Pidgin English "chop chop", and the current Chinese term.
Later, a 'bamboo' radical was added to top of the first character
sometime in the mid to late nineteenth century, just to make it
explicit:
;,,,, ;,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,;,
,' ', ,' ', ,'
' ; ; , ;' ,
, ;',''';'';' ''''''';'''''''
,' ; ,,,,;,,;,, ;
; ,' ', ;
;,,' ';' ','
which is now the current written form.
4) "chop chop" (as well as the "chop" of "chopsticks") is supposedly a
reduplicated "chop", which some explain as sourced from the Cantonese
pronounciation of:
;,,,,,
,' ,' ,
' '''''''';'
'''''''';
''';''''';
; ; ; , ',
' ',,,,,,,; '
which means 'hurry', pronounced in Mandarin as ji2 /tCi35/ and in Cantonese
as gap1 /k@p55/ (@ = IPA turned print a, not Kirshenbaum usage; C = IPA c
with a tail that loops back counterclockwise across itself, also not
Kirshenbaum usage).
However, the discrepency between Cantonese g /k/ and English ch /tS<asp>/ is
a problem.
Thomas Chan
tc...@cornell.edu
N.Mitchum
----
> "mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to something
> else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it with
> "modular homes."
First they were "trailers," but people objected to that and they
became "mobile homes." The euphemism didn't work out as well as
expected, so now it seems the makers (and owners) want them called
"manufactured housing."
Even when they were still "trailers," they tended to have
permanent sites: perhaps the wheels remained on the body, but the
whole thing was raised off the ground. With "mobile homes" they
abandoned the pretense that these were ever going anywhere again:
concrete footings, complete plumbing, etc.
As a kid I called them trailers. I still call them trailers,
regardless of size.
----NM
Linz
> On 20 Aug 2001 10:07:13 -0700, Elaine Richards wrote:
> >I wonder if the Court asked this question of the Plaintiff:
> >
> >"Sir, when you heard those words on your radio while your child was
> >listening, did you think to turn the radio off?"
>
> A parent, take resposibility for their child? Don't be silly.
Oh! Tim! Fancy seeing you here! Are you peevish or English?
--
I look pretty young but I'm just backdated
Tim Emanuel
Eyup. I'm a peevish lurker. But I'm English too. And I suppose I'd
better say that I know I shouldn't have started a sentence with a
preposition.
--
Tim Emanuel http://cantona.org.uk
Leap nimbly!
R J Valentine
} Maria Conlon wrote:
} ----
}> I'm a bit surprised at the term "manufactured housing" being used for
}> "mobile homes" or "trailers." I thought the term referred to something
}> else -- a prefab to be put on a foundation. I may be confusing it with
}> "modular homes."
}>....
}
} First they were "trailers," but people objected to that and they
} became "mobile homes." The euphemism didn't work out as well as
} expected, so now it seems the makers (and owners) want them called
} "manufactured housing."
You're getting to sound like George Carlin, attributing euphemification
where only distinction is intended. Bob Cunningham has several excellent
postings in this thread, describing several types of trailers (including
his own) and non-trailers. Manufactured housing that never has its own
wheels is not trailers.
Trailers may include house trailers that rarely move and travel trailers,
as well as various utility trailers for carrying furniture, boats,
motorcycles, or cars.
I'm talking out my hat here (is that Bob Cunningham baiting? (surely
_that_ is (unless it's Dallas Al baiting))), but it could be that the term
"mobile homes" includes both towable trailers and self-powered vehicles
that could be lived in indefinitely, containing as they do all the major
amenities of a fixed home or apartment. If that's not the term, there
must be one like it that covers that area.
You can see the beginnings of manufactured housing (which now suggests
preconstructed walls or even rooms) in the 1926 catalog of Sears, Roebuck
houses, where they go into great detail about their line of Honor Bilt
pre-cut and pre-numbered houses.
People that I know who live in or tow trailers _call_ them trailers.
People who call them "double-wides" are making an important distinction.
There are a couple of houses in my neighborhood that were trucked in in
house=trailer-size chunks, but within a day or two they were barely
distinguishable from ordinary houses under construction (especially once
the peaked roof went on). My Uncle Fred used to move houses by towing
them along city streets (with the help of (among others) the guy on the
roof who lifted the power lines out of the way), but those were by no
stretch "trailers".
} Even when they were still "trailers," they tended to have
} permanent sites: perhaps the wheels remained on the body, but the
} whole thing was raised off the ground. With "mobile homes" they
} abandoned the pretense that these were ever going anywhere again:
} concrete footings, complete plumbing, etc.
}
} As a kid I called them trailers. I still call them trailers,
} regardless of size.
Oh? Where do you draw the line? Are trucked-in rooms trailers? Is a
double-wide a trailer (or is it two)? Do you make any trailer
distinctions in English usage? Do you imagine people living on a
motorcycle trailer?
(Those are the sort of rhetorical questions that I'd put a question mark
on, but that I don't necessarily expect a surprising answer to. But
they're not the sort of question that I'd have to announce (as some people
seem to) that I don't _want_ an answer to (if only because I wouldn't mind
one).)
N.Mitchum
----
> You're getting to sound like George Carlin, attributing euphemification
>....
Taking this awfully seriously, aren't you?
----
> Trailers may include house trailers that rarely move and travel trailers,
> as well as various utility trailers for carrying furniture, boats,
> motorcycles, or cars.
>....
Okay, but a plain "trailer" is still the thing that sits in a trailer park.
----
> it could be that the term
> "mobile homes" includes both towable trailers and self-powered vehicles
> that could be lived in indefinitely, containing as they do all the major
> amenities of a fixed home or apartment. If that's not the term, there
> must be one like it that covers that area.
>....
How about RV? Recreational vehicle. Some of them come as big as
buses -- and are indeed sometimes converted buses. All mod cons.
Not a trailer, although they often stop at special trailer parks.
----
> You can see the beginnings of manufactured housing (which now suggests
> preconstructed walls or even rooms) in the 1926 catalog of Sears, Roebuck
>....
Sounds like their Craftsman line. The pieces were shipped to
customers, who would then assemble them. Nothing like trailers.
----
> } As a kid I called them trailers. I still call them trailers,
> } regardless of size.
>
> Oh? Where do you draw the line? Are trucked-in rooms trailers? Is a
> double-wide a trailer (or is it two)? Do you make any trailer
> distinctions in English usage? Do you imagine people living on a
> motorcycle trailer?
>.....
None of these are serious questions. Now let me ask you one, a
serious one: Do you really not know a trailer when you see one?
Do you go throught these convolutions every time, trying to find a
different word for it?
----NM
Tony Cooper
> Amazing. You know what I'm about to say even though I don't.
I knew you were going to say that.
> The fog lifts a bit. I thought, when you mentioned the "Manufactured
> Homes Association," you were talking about *owners* -- the people
who
> buy the homes and live in them.
The owners might belong to associations, but they would be something
like "The Shady Grove Association" or "The Blue Hairs of Blue Sky Park
Association".
(Note that you started out talking about my "defense
> of the double-wide set." It didn't occurred to me that you switched
> horses and that the subsequent comments referred to the
manufacturers or
> sales staffs and not to the residents.)
I would provide a bouncing ball for you to follow, but it requires all
of my concentration to steer the horse and jump to the next one.
> As I already said, I misunderstood what you were saying.
But I didn't know you were going to say that. Who do you think I am?
Kreskin?
> I don't doubt that you're telling the truth, but I find your way of
> telling it hard to follow. It's probably just me.
I don't mean to be obtuse. I figure if I can follow it, anyone can.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Tony Cooper
> I don't think I've actually heard any of the jokes we've been
talking
> about. Can anyone supply an example?
I don't know of any "jokes" per se. It's more of a term. During the
Paula Jones fracas, someone prominent said something about "dragging a
pile of money through a trailer park" implying that Paula is trailer
trash.
> Of the fictional trailers I know about, a lot of the residents are
not
> particularly rich. Luanne and her parents on _King of the Hill_
That's like assuming birds can talk because Heckle and Jeckle (sp?)
can.
> mind, as does the father of Victor Joseph in _Smoke Signals_.
I liked that movie. Loved the line about needing a passport off the
reservation.
But Lucille
> Ball and Desi Arnaz's trailer in _The Long, Long Trailer_ was a
fancy one.
That movie from the 50s? That was a recreational trailer like an
Airstream, was it not? I remember it.
> I guess that my impression is that there are all kinds of people
living in
> trailers, just as there are all kinds of people living in stick
houses or
> apartments.
Very true. "Trailer trash" applies to a particular type of person. A
person that may not even live in a trailer.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Tony Cooper
> > Well, you judge. They are fighting in court regulations that
would
> > require stricter rules on tie downs and electrical safety
> > requirements. At the same time, they are lobbying in Tallahassee
for
> > the change in name.
>
> "They"? "They are not occupants/owners of mobile/manufactured
homes, are
> they?
You will have to work at retaining information read for at least short
bursts of time. Just a couple of paragraphs above I said in the same
post: "The Manufactured Homes Association is working up sweat rings
in their polyester plaid jackets trying to get the State of
Florida to change the name of the "Department of Business and
Professional Regulation, Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums
and Mobile Homes, Bureau of Mobile Homes" to change their name to
strike out the words "mobile homes" and replace them with
"manufactured housing". They feel this is far more important than
hurricane proof
tie downs and electrical wiring codes."
This clearly identifies "they".
>
> > Why would it surprise you that an industry would fight rules to
> > improve safety that would cost the members of the industry money?
The
> > auto dealers, the tire manufacturers, and the amusement park ride
> > makers all do....why not the mobile home industry?
>
> And that makes the buyers of mobile home declassé in what way?
Two separate subjects. Surely, you can multi-task on subjects within
thread. By the way, I have not stated or implied that residents of
mobile homes are declassé. People that are "trailer trash" are
declassé. Some "trailer trash" live in mobile homes and some don't.
> > Mobile homes are not mobile. They are trucked in and set in
place. A
> > "double wide" is trucked in in two pieces. They are manufactured
> > elsewhere and set up on site. They are not designed to be mobile.
> [...]
>
> > A daily sight on Florida highways is a half of a double wide on a
> > tractor trailer going down the road. The open side is covered
with a
> > plastic material, but if it blows off you can see half a house,
often
> > with furniture in place.
>
> This seems to me to be a description of a home in motion - a mobile
home.
Again, work on retaining what was written in the same post. I said
the mobile homes were "trucked in". They are trucked in from the
factory where they are made to the installation location. If you have
a regular house, it is not mobile because the lumber to build it was
trucked in.
> If seeing such is a "daily sight," and they are often moved more
than once
I was referring to new ones. I did not say they were moved more than
once, Miss Cleo. A used one could be moved from one lot to another,
but it's not done that much to my knowledge. Hundreds of new ones are
being trucked in every day, though.
> (surely no one buys a new mobile home and brings in furniture before
moving
> it to its (permanent?) location
Many of them are purchased with factory installed furniture. Not
installed as in bolted down, but installed as in set in place. I
referred to scams by the salesmen in another post. One of the scams
is selling older people package deals with cheap, pre-installed
furniture at outrageous prices and subject to mortgage interest.
> The modular housing I have seen presented on television shows ("This
Old
> House" special segments, for example), have had most of the wiring
done at
> the factory, with special harnesses to hook things up once the
module is on
> site.
Dunno for sure. Local construction codes may have something to do
with this. Even unions, maybe. Most of the modular homes here seem
to have the plumbing and wiring done on site. I may be wrong, but I
see the trucks and workmen on the job sites.
>
> You seem to be arguing at cross-purposes - that mobile homes are not
> "mobile," and yet are inferior construction in that they are
designed to be
> moved in one or two pieces.
Mobile homes are *not* mobile. I don't consider the delivery of the
home to be a mobile aspect anymore than delivering bricks a mobile
aspect. The reason "double-wides" are moved in two pieces is that
they would not be allowed on the roads - or even fit on the roads - in
their final form.
As far as inferior construction....that's a debatable point. Many are
inferior and many of the better ones have inferior aspects. Many are
placed in less than ferior (sic) locations. However, it's all some
people want, can afford, or can qualify to rent or buy.
Tony Cooper
> That may be true these days, but when I was a kid, the people who
> built houses did not assemble them from kits. They were real
> carpenters, masons, plumbers, electricians, and roofers and actually
> *built* the houses.
Sears, Roebuck and Company was selling kit houses in the early 1900s.
They were shipped to the buyer by railroad. There are at least two in
this town that have been preserved. Even the rafters have part codes
on them. Kind of a "tab a" in slot b" thing.
see: http://www.oldhouseweb.net/stories/Detailed/10105.shtml
for one from 1918.
Tony Cooper
Manufactured housing that never has its own
> wheels is not trailers.
The "is" looks wrong even if it is right.
but it could be that the term
> "mobile homes" includes both towable trailers and self-powered
vehicles
> that could be lived in indefinitely, containing as they do all the
major
> amenities of a fixed home or apartment. If that's not the term,
there
> must be one like it that covers that area.
The term here would be "Recreational Vehicle" or "RV".....A Winnebago
or Airstream or any of the other brands of self-propelled or towed
accomodation intended for vacation or short-stay use. A camper
trailer would be one that is like a collapsable tent on wheels.
I am surprised that none of the right pondians have chimed in on the
word "caravan" and what that defines.
Tony Cooper
> >> >Despite your noble defense of the double-wide set, you have
engendered
> >> no respect from them with your comments. They now prefer the
term
> >> "manufactured housing". "Parks" is no longer acceptable and has
been
> >> replaced by "communities".<
>
> That may be true somewhere, but it's not true in Southern
California,
I call them trailers, mobile homes, and parks. It's the Association
and the (some) residents that make the semantic distinction. I'm not
saying the term has changed, but that the Association would like the
public's perception to change.
My statement is true that they want the change. Maybe the California
groups do too. That doesn't mean we are going to make the change.
Tony Cooper
> That fails to get directly to a very significant difference between
a
> mobile home and a manufactured home. That difference is that a
mobile
> home has wheels and a manufactured home does not.
>
> The wheels on a mobile home, as situated in a mobile-home community,
> can be hard to discern -- typically covered by wooden enclosures
that
> are designed to disguise the existence of wheels, but they are
there.
> They're not as useful as one might think they should be, because
when
> you want to move your mobile home, you have to get a house-mover to
do
> it for you.
>
> The last I heard -- and assume is still true -- the reason
mobile-home
> owners are careful to keep the wheels on is that it gives the owner
a
> tax break. A mobile home with its wheels is subject to a vehicle
tax
> and not to a real-estate property tax, even though it's installed on
a
> lot and will in general remain there for many years. A manufactured
> home, because it has no wheels, is subject to a real-estate property
> tax and not to a vehicle tax.
This is not true in Florida. It may have been once, but not now. See
http://www.state.fl.us/dor/property/mobile.html
for a clear explanation of this. Mobile homes by any name are subject
to property tax and Homestead exemption. Some mobile homes are set on
rented property (as in a trailer park) and the property tax for the
land is paid by the park.
Recreational vehicles (Winnebagos) fit what you say, but the Country
Tax Appraiser can declare them to be "permanent" (wheels or no wheels)
if he feels they are a permanent fixture.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
> It may be argued that this point is covered by the word
> "transportable" in the American Planning Association document quoted
> above, but it's not really. House movers move fairly large
buildings,
> mobile homes, and manufactured homes; and when they do so, they are
> transporting them.
>
> _Webster's Third New International Dictionary_ (CD-ROM version)
> supports what I've said:
>
> Main Entry:mobile home
> Function: noun
>
> : a dwelling structure built on a vehicle chassis and
> intended to be trailered to a permanent site
>
> (I note that that entry does not appear in the print copy, so this
is
> yet another indication of modernization in the CD-ROM version.)
>
Tony Cooper
> As a word "Pre-manufactured" doesn't seem to add much to the
elegance of our
> discourse.
There is "elegance" to a thread that started out about "trailer
trash"?
Peter Seebach
Adrian Smith <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
>sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
>Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
>profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
A guy I knew in college once used "waste of valuable carbon" in anger.
Very well done. There are lots of good examples to be had.
-s
--
Copyright 2001, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
+--- Need quality network services, server-grade computers, or a shell? ---+
v C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon! v
Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: http://www.plethora.net/
Franke
Tony Cooper wrote:
> Franke wrote:
>
> > That may be true these days, but when I was a kid, the people who
> > built houses did not assemble them from kits. They were real
> > carpenters, masons, plumbers, electricians, and roofers and actually
> > *built* the houses.
>
> Sears, Roebuck and Company was selling kit houses in the early 1900s.
> They were shipped to the buyer by railroad. There are at least two in
> this town that have been preserved. Even the rafters have part codes
> on them. Kind of a "tab a" in slot b" thing.
>
> see: http://www.oldhouseweb.net/stories/Detailed/10105.shtml
>
> for one from 1918.
I wonder how many of them they sold. In any case, neither my father
(electrician) not my uncle (roofer) ever put any of those babies together.
Franke
Tony Cooper wrote:
> RJ Valentine wrote:
>
> > I don't think I've actually heard any of the jokes we've been
> talking
> > about. Can anyone supply an example?
>
> I don't know of any "jokes" per se. It's more of a term. During the
> Paula Jones fracas, someone prominent said something about "dragging a
> pile of money through a trailer park" implying that Paula is trailer
> trash.
>
> > Of the fictional trailers I know about, a lot of the residents are
> not
> > particularly rich. Luanne and her parents on _King of the Hill_
>
> That's like assuming birds can talk because Heckle and Jeckle (sp?)
> can.
>
> > mind, as does the father of Victor Joseph in _Smoke Signals_.
>
> I liked that movie. Loved the line about needing a passport off the
> reservation.
>
> But Lucille
> > Ball and Desi Arnaz's trailer in _The Long, Long Trailer_ was a
> fancy one.
>
> That movie from the 50s? That was a recreational trailer like an
> Airstream, was it not? I remember it.
You can see a photo of it at these two locations:
<http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?style=movie&PID=1264134&frm=sh_google>
<http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/6066/longlongtrailer.html>
It appears to have been a 30 or 40-foot 10-wide
Jim Hill
>In article <b9ae8e0f.01082...@posting.google.com>,
>Adrian Smith <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
>>profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
>
>A guy I knew in college once used "waste of valuable carbon" in anger.
I've heard "Somewhere there's a village that wants its idiot back."
Jim
--
"[A]ll experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer,
while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the
forms to which they are accustomed." -- Thomas Jefferson
Richard Fontana
> Very true. "Trailer trash" applies to a particular type of person. A
> person that may not even live in a trailer.
Yes, I agree with this. I don't think there's really much of a close
connection between the people who tend to be labelled by others as
"trailer trash" and trailers or mobile homes or really
any particular kind of home. "Trailer trash" does mean something like
"the relatively lower-class white persons with certain (perceived)
distinctive socio-cultural characteristics and aesthetic tastes who one
*might* expect to find living in a trailer park, among other places"; as
such I think it's actually just a slight euphemization of "white trash".
bbriggs
foundation is considered, for tax
purposes, to be "personal property" as opposed to "real
property". The mobile home or
trailer owner has to buy a license just like a boat or car
and somewhere in the mobile
home should be the plates even if the mobile hasn't motated
in decades.
Modular or permanently affixed mobile homes are taxed as
real property and included in the assessed value of the
land. For lending purposes (I
used to be a banker before I morphed into a stock broker)
the mobile home is treated
as a car or boat loan with a higher interest rate and a
shorter loan term because the
mobile is considered a depreciable asset. The modular is
treated as a house loan: lower
interest rates and a longer term because the land is
included in the overall value.
Usually real property will appreciate and be worth more
in the future rather than less as would be true of most
mobile homes
...... unless you have an Airstream.
Barbara
Joe Manfre
> I don't think there's really much of a close connection between the
> people who tend to be labelled by others as "trailer trash" and
> trailers or mobile homes or really any particular kind of home.
> "Trailer trash" does mean something like "the relatively lower-class
> white persons with certain (perceived) distinctive socio-cultural
> characteristics and aesthetic tastes who one *might* expect to find
> living in a trailer park, among other places"; as such I think it's
> actually just a slight euphemization of "white trash".
Come to think of it, Nicolas Cage and Holly Hunter's characters in
"Raising Arizona" actually *did* live in a trailer, factually.
JM
--
Joe Manfre, Hyattsville, Maryland.
Nathan Nagel
>
> In article <b9ae8e0f.01082...@posting.google.com>,
> Adrian Smith <adrian_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >I've heard this line of reasoning before - that 'abusive words' are a
> >sign of a lack of ability to express oneself. I remain unconvinced.
> >Can you think of any examples of such wonderfully creative yet
> >profanity-free insults, possibly archived here on Google?
>
> A guy I knew in college once used "waste of valuable carbon" in anger.
> Very well done. There are lots of good examples to be had.
>
> -s
I am more used to "waste of oxygen," I've used that one a few times
myself. Unfortunately, people who truly are wastes of oxygen usually
don't understand what the fsck that phrase means, so the effort is
mostly wasted unless there is an audience.
nate