You know, this does bring up an issue that I've really been wondering about lately: why are knitting blogs so dominated by women? Some kind of gatekeeper problem? Institutional barriers? The fact that generally men's fingers are pudgier and less nimble than women's?
Anti-Scots prejudice? After all, the Highlands are covered with manly kilted shepherds knitting themselves argyle socks -- the male knitters are out there, they just aren't blogging.
And that picture was so unambiguously male. I'm starting to realize why so many men are so excited by long hair -- it's the only way they can figure out who the girls are.
God, that "Mrs." makes me feel like such a bad boy for cursing. We love your knitting, Mrs. Kennedy! We totally don't mind you fucking with our self-perception, Mrs. Kennedy!
But the woman in the other pictures at that site looks like she could be O's type. That is, she looks like she could be tall, and she has a sort of wry expression. Actually, O, doesn't she look vaguely like your ex?
There's ex, and there's ex-before-last. There's also first-ex, but we don't talk about her. Anyway, Bob only knows ex, so it was clear (to me) who he meant.
ex-sub-n, maybe. (<sub> is getting stripped out of the comments!) Say that ex() is a function of one argument, which maps integers representing women (so that there's an ordering) to the amount of time ogged has been with them before the relationship ends. Say further that the ordering is chronological, so that 1 represents the first woman ogged went out with. Then ex' would be an idea that, as is rapidly becoming clear, isn't all that funny and is probably best abandoned.
Just come out of the closet already.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:12 AM
I so don't get this.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:16 AM
I'll explain. :) Ogged still thinks he's straight, but, a la Mr Garrison, the contrary evidence piles up.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:20 AM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:25 AM
Now that I think about, although I'm sure it's merely coincidence, Mr Garrison was also preoccupied with men's olympic swimming.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:28 AM
Does ogged have a little puppet?
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 1:35 AM
I'll never forget assalicious. Especially now.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 9:40 AM
Many men prefer to date women with breasts.
Posted by Adam Kotsko | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 10:07 AM
I didn't study the damn picture before I clicked on it, wiseass.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 10:13 AM
Burns: What do you think, Smithers?
Smithers: I think women and seamen don't mix.
Posted by Joe Drymala | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 10:59 AM
Many men prefer to date women with breasts.
Yes, and that photo was so obviously of a male body. So, if ogged is attracted to women with male bodies ...
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 11:17 AM
Does ogged have a little puppet?
hmmm....I'll guess we'll have to ask Wolfson and Kotsko if they're sure the guy they met was really Unf.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 11:24 AM
Listen, it was fun and all, but we didn't really get down to "little puppets", IYKWIM.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 11:26 AM
My evidence that it was the real Unf: He said he would post every two weeks, and he has basically done that.
Posted by Adam Kotsko | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 11:33 AM
You know, this does bring up an issue that I've really been wondering about lately: why are knitting blogs so dominated by women? Some kind of gatekeeper problem? Institutional barriers? The fact that generally men's fingers are pudgier and less nimble than women's?
Posted by Mitch Mills | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 12:16 PM
Anti-Scots prejudice? After all, the Highlands are covered with manly kilted shepherds knitting themselves argyle socks -- the male knitters are out there, they just aren't blogging.
And that picture was so unambiguously male. I'm starting to realize why so many men are so excited by long hair -- it's the only way they can figure out who the girls are.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 7:45 PM
Why does a moving moment demonstrating ogged's growing comfort with his sexuality have to be ruined by snark?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 8:37 PM
Thank you scmTim, I figured you'd be the sensitive one. I wonder if baa will make a reservation for us at Greens?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 8:41 PM
It will be under the name Butch Stonewall.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 9:07 PM
It's a knitting thread-- maybe our old friend Phil McCrakin?
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-26-05 9:27 PM
'I didn't study the damn picture before I clicked on it, wiseass.'
'When I saw the picture over at Fussy, I thought, "Hey, that looks like the kind of woman I'd date."'
scandal
Posted by bryan | Link to this comment | 02-27-05 2:22 PM
My initial reaction was "female" as well, and I think the picture is ambiguous.
Loose sweaters hide the "cash and prizes."
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 8:09 AM
You're welcome.
Posted by Mrs. Kennedy | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 9:18 AM
God, that "Mrs." makes me feel like such a bad boy for cursing. We love your knitting, Mrs. Kennedy! We totally don't mind you fucking with our self-perception, Mrs. Kennedy!
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 9:41 AM
But the woman in the other pictures at that site looks like she could be O's type. That is, she looks like she could be tall, and she has a sort of wry expression. Actually, O, doesn't she look vaguely like your ex?
Posted by Bob | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 10:45 AM
She looks a bit like ex, especially now that ex also has very short hair.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 10:51 AM
Is there but one ex? From whatever site reading I can claim, I thought that there were a couple.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 10:53 AM
There's ex, and there's ex-before-last. There's also first-ex, but we don't talk about her. Anyway, Bob only knows ex, so it was clear (to me) who he meant.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 10:56 AM
Questions for further clarification:
1. Is "formerly affianced" a prerequisite for being an ex?
2. Wouldn't ex, ex', and ex'' be a more concise rendition of the same thing?
3. As #1 might relate to the ongoing drought: you do know that you don't have to be engaged to them to sleep with them, right?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 12:14 PM
ex-sub-n, maybe. (<sub> is getting stripped out of the comments!) Say that ex() is a function of one argument, which maps integers representing women (so that there's an ordering) to the amount of time ogged has been with them before the relationship ends. Say further that the ordering is chronological, so that 1 represents the first woman ogged went out with. Then ex' would be an idea that, as is rapidly becoming clear, isn't all that funny and is probably best abandoned.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 02-28-05 12:40 PM