This just shows that when we enter a battle to change our language, we should remember that we're armed with clubs and not rapiers. It's like the story of ain't -- it was a perfectly good contraction of am not, but then people started using it for the other persons & numbers as well. So the English Teacher Mafia attempted to correct people's usage, but instead of "only use ain't for first person singular", the message that was heard by the people was "don't use ain't".
Re W2, just to be pedantic, it's not really that they're difficult to translate, it's that they're difficult to work into a translation (because there's no single word or phrase that captures them). "Untranslatable" (their word, not yours) suggests that there's no way even to capture the meaning in our language.
BTW, the Russian one is based on the word for "why" -- basically like calling someone a "why-er".
Not to mention that if God made us, then whatever choices we make are really His/Her responsibility. Otherwise it's like a programmer getting mad at his/her own code for not working properly. Which, of course, happens all the time -- maybe programmers especially were made in God's image.
Yeah, but presumably at that point there won't be any Pat Robertson consciousness able to realize his mistake. That's the problem with being an atheist -- you can't comfort yourself with the thought that people will eventually be confronted with the Truth.
It was sincere, but it may not be a conversation worth having, or at least not in this venue. I was just struck by the "in and of themselves" part -- if we assumed that someone was indulging in these fantasies but was never going to act on them, or even let them affect his/her real-world actions in any way, would we still feel the need to condemn them? And then I thought about Grand Theft Auto and that sort of thing, which seemed like a not-dissimilar issue but with a less offensive fantasy. But feel free not to respond -- it's getting pretty far off-topic anyway.
Not every harm can be prevented. It's a little hard to imagine our society accepting obligatory vaccinations, but liability would at least change the incentives in the right direction.
Oh, well, apart from Take It Easy, of course -- for some reason when I first read your comment, I thought you were just asking for the other songs besides the obvious one.
Working my way through Bit.Trip.Runner 2, which is a great way to kill a few minutes.. and then a few more minutes... OK, just a few more... It's kind of a perfect game for me, as a fan of both rhythm games and platformers. Though my wife is concerned about the recent uptick in the incidence of profanity emanating from the family room.
Female Reporter #1: Yes, is it true that the president is 100 feet tall?
Ross Denton: Nooooo! Absolutely not!
Male reporter #3: Is the president 90 feet tall?
Ross Denton: No comment.
I wouldn't disagree with anything you wrote, but I think you're kind of changing the subject here -- I was specifically thinking of the sorts of older stereotypes that we all agree would never be tolerated if the given work was created today. My kids never for a moment thought that Native Americans said "how" or "ugh" or any of that stuff -- starting in first grade they were going on field trips to the Mashantucket Pequot Museum and attending Schemitzuns. The idea of gender equality was firmly embedded in their schooling and churching, and it wasn't long before they were even more sensitive than we were (if such is possible!!) to the portrayal of stereotypical gender roles and traits.
Of course, this experience is certainly not society-wide, but I'd guess that the environment that Doc Saunders is raising his kids in is broadly similar to ours.
The approach you mention is the approach we took with our kids (teach rather than censor, assuming it's good enough otherwise to be worth it). But on reflection, I think this kind of thing would've had pretty close to no impact on our kids regardless of how we handled it -- a stray bit of racial or religious stereotyping here or there could never overcome the influence of the family, community, and culture they were raised in. If either of them had ever uncritically accepted such a stereotype, the first time they referenced it among any peers or adults would've brought a swift correction.
It is politically incorrect to acknowledge the truth and simplicity of the condom’s inadequacy
I didn't know this was a thing. I don't remember ever being told that there were no disadvantages to using a condom -- just that there was one very important advantage. I think I'm older than the median around here, though, so maybe this is something that started after my school days.
On “Have We Gone Too Far Now?”
This just shows that when we enter a battle to change our language, we should remember that we're armed with clubs and not rapiers. It's like the story of ain't -- it was a perfectly good contraction of am not, but then people started using it for the other persons & numbers as well. So the English Teacher Mafia attempted to correct people's usage, but instead of "only use ain't for first person singular", the message that was heard by the people was "don't use ain't".
On “Race and Culture”
what’s all this crap about “off limits”?
"off limits" means "you will be accused of being a racist for bringing it up at all".
On “Peyton Manning: Mr. 41%”
And Tim didn't have Wes Welker to throw to.
On “Linky Friday #38”
And Russian has no word for "gullible".
"
Re W2, just to be pedantic, it's not really that they're difficult to translate, it's that they're difficult to work into a translation (because there's no single word or phrase that captures them). "Untranslatable" (their word, not yours) suggests that there's no way even to capture the meaning in our language.
BTW, the Russian one is based on the word for "why" -- basically like calling someone a "why-er".
On “Many of You Are Going to Hell”
Not to mention that if God made us, then whatever choices we make are really His/Her responsibility. Otherwise it's like a programmer getting mad at his/her own code for not working properly. Which, of course, happens all the time -- maybe programmers especially were made in God's image.
On “Pat Robertson is a liar and hypocrite”
Yeah, but presumably at that point there won't be any Pat Robertson consciousness able to realize his mistake. That's the problem with being an atheist -- you can't comfort yourself with the thought that people will eventually be confronted with the Truth.
"
I'm no expert, but I don't remember anything in the Law about insufficient fact-checking.
On “Put it away, Miley”
It was sincere, but it may not be a conversation worth having, or at least not in this venue. I was just struck by the "in and of themselves" part -- if we assumed that someone was indulging in these fantasies but was never going to act on them, or even let them affect his/her real-world actions in any way, would we still feel the need to condemn them? And then I thought about Grand Theft Auto and that sort of thing, which seemed like a not-dissimilar issue but with a less offensive fantasy. But feel free not to respond -- it's getting pretty far off-topic anyway.
"
This is interesting -- do you feel the same way about, say, violent video games?
On “Who could have seen this coming? Oh, yes… EVERYONE.”
Not every harm can be prevented. It's a little hard to imagine our society accepting obligatory vaccinations, but liability would at least change the incentives in the right direction.
On “Monday Trivia, No. 128 [KenB wins!]”
Oh, well, apart from Take It Easy, of course -- for some reason when I first read your comment, I thought you were just asking for the other songs besides the obvious one.
"
Woohoo! I appreciate you lobbing up a softball for trivia-challenged folks like me once in a while.
I'm no help on the bonus question, but as other people post the answers, I'm sure I'll say "oh, right, I knew that" once or twice.
"
Based on Winslow AZ, I'm going to guess cities mentioned in Eagles songs.
On “The Child-Free Generation’s Hard Bargain With Capitalism”
It's threads like these that make me miss the old name for the site -- just a bunch of ordinary guys, don't get your expectations up too high...
On “Saturday!”
Working my way through Bit.Trip.Runner 2, which is a great way to kill a few minutes.. and then a few more minutes... OK, just a few more... It's kind of a perfect game for me, as a fan of both rhythm games and platformers. Though my wife is concerned about the recent uptick in the incidence of profanity emanating from the family room.
On “Who has two thumbs, is named Tim Tebow, and won his second preseason game?”
Hmm... as of yesterday's game, the Pats are 2-0 in the preseason in games Tebow's played in, and 0-1 without him. Can't argue with the facts.
On “Our Government Lies. Deal With It.”
Reminds me of that bit in The Pepsi Syndrome:
Female Reporter #1: Yes, is it true that the president is 100 feet tall?
Ross Denton: Nooooo! Absolutely not!
Male reporter #3: Is the president 90 feet tall?
Ross Denton: No comment.
On “5 People Who Should Have Played Batman Instead of Ben Affleck”
So, sorta like the Scarlet Pimpernel.
On “Rethinking a classic”
@Kazzy,
I wouldn't disagree with anything you wrote, but I think you're kind of changing the subject here -- I was specifically thinking of the sorts of older stereotypes that we all agree would never be tolerated if the given work was created today. My kids never for a moment thought that Native Americans said "how" or "ugh" or any of that stuff -- starting in first grade they were going on field trips to the Mashantucket Pequot Museum and attending Schemitzuns. The idea of gender equality was firmly embedded in their schooling and churching, and it wasn't long before they were even more sensitive than we were (if such is possible!!) to the portrayal of stereotypical gender roles and traits.
Of course, this experience is certainly not society-wide, but I'd guess that the environment that Doc Saunders is raising his kids in is broadly similar to ours.
"
"articular human being"? Are you saying that because he's performed in a lot of joints, or perhaps smoked them?
"
The approach you mention is the approach we took with our kids (teach rather than censor, assuming it's good enough otherwise to be worth it). But on reflection, I think this kind of thing would've had pretty close to no impact on our kids regardless of how we handled it -- a stray bit of racial or religious stereotyping here or there could never overcome the influence of the family, community, and culture they were raised in. If either of them had ever uncritically accepted such a stereotype, the first time they referenced it among any peers or adults would've brought a swift correction.
On “Sex-ed, Lies, & Protection”
I didn't know this was a thing. I don't remember ever being told that there were no disadvantages to using a condom -- just that there was one very important advantage. I think I'm older than the median around here, though, so maybe this is something that started after my school days.
"
Yeah, you guys are too good -- I knew I wouldn't be able to keep it up. I feel very sheepish for even trying.
"
That's very magnumanimous of you.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.