1. Brooks is a hack. We've known that for a while. (Is there anyone whose credibility crash came so soon after his rise to prominence? He's like the right wing VC - he's going to have change teams to get back the love.) Now if only our liberal media representatives would acknowledge it.
2. 6 feet tall and weigh 150. You've got to be kidding. You're not even a girl; you're like a flouncing little boy*. Cripes, Iverson's thicker than you.
3. I don't understand the following: The only important question that remains in the case of David Brooks is whether he could be any dumber. Outdoing himself doesn't count.
Doesn't "could be any dumber" make a comparison between his potential dumbness and his current dumbness? And isn't that precisely a case of "[o]utdoing himself"? I'm confused.
* I assume making a boy the bottom of the totem pole allows me to use "girl" as the original, discarded insult.
And can I get a show of hands of those who think that the words "Darwin was wrong" show up in his column by, like, accident?
I dunno - he may have a point. Brooks may be proof that the theory of evolution is seriously flawed. How else can one explain why he and an Archaeopteryx have similar intellectual capacities?
His use of the word sense of "fitness" is a parallel to the anti-evos' use of "theory": Take a word with multiple meanings - especially words used as terms of art - deliberately opt for a meaning that is incorrect/unsupportable in context and use it to bolster an otherwise idiotic argument. 'But that's what the dictionary says...' [/whine]
I have to go now and find some blood pressure medication; I should know better than to read anything involving Brooks this early in the morning, especially after spending the night before closing down a bar with a bunch of loony intellectuals...
[And no, Ben, I did not use the loony intellectuals to close down the bar. I'm just to lazy to recast that sentence. You would have loved it, as the loony intellectuals were all copy editors.]
Carp, that's "too lazy". I swear I'm not hung over, I didn't drink nearly enough, despite the willingness of males who cherish the who/whom distinction to ply me with wine...
Then you could come to wild gatherings of copy editors in Hollywood nightclubs. Wouldn't that be more fun than grad school? [It is, trust me, I've been to grad school.]
Believe me, neither do copy editors. There's nothing odder than a bunch of talkers shouting at each other over music they couldn't be paid to listen to in the normal course of events. Apparently, it didn't occur to the organisers to alert the venue that none of the attendees were there for anything but the munchies and conversation.
I hate the BMI stuff. Hate it. According to BMI I'm very close to overweight. And Ogged ... at 5'4" I'm actually quite close to you in terms of weight. 132 (current weight) is a great weight for me. I once as an adult weighed 124 and people were trying to force-feed me. But according to BMI I won't hit underweight until I get below 100 lbs. I can't even imagine myself anywhere near 100 lbs and I'm sure manourishment would be a big problem then.
For years I felt there was something wrong with me because during those damn pageants the announcer would say "And Miss Somewhere is 5'9" tall and weights 110 lbs." I'd just shake my head and think "great, I'm 5 inches shorter and 20 lbs heavier. What a loser." But you really can't tell by numbers alone.
I've finally decided to not care about revealing my weight even though "society" would suggest that by the numbers I must be fat (and thus unattractive?). The reality is that many women who are in good shape weigh more than 120 lbs. Or are at the upper limit of the BMI or just over it. And, well ... if you've seen my photos on my blog you know that I'm not a waif but I'm certainly not overweight either. (And on that note ... time to head to the gym).
I find it amusing that the NYT recently published a paean to the anorexic Olsen twins' sense of "style", complete with compliments about how well the clothing hung on their barely-there bodies. Will they now print a retraction and apologise for encouraging dangerous dieting practices?
Hell, no; they won't even apologise for David Brooks.
Ben, Ben, Ben - you disappoint me. It's "for whoever will take it up". The entire phrase is the object of the preposition.
Yeah, I realized that after writing it. I should have just gone with "for him who will ...", which is what I started writing before deciding to get rid of "him".
Let's assume that this study is correct and that, furthermore, the longer-lived heavy people are more successful in passing on their genes; in that case, they are the fittest David
"But if you have, or know someone who has, diabetes or high blood pressure, you know that those ailments are no fun, and the medication used to treat them isn't either."
I agree that insulin-dependent diabetes is a complicated disease to manage, particularly if you do it well.
However, hypertension isn't even noticeable unless it's so high that you have headaches, despite the long-term damage it can cause if ignored. Treatment is essentially a matter of finding a pill that lowers blood pressure and has side effects that you can put up with. Often, once the correct combination is found, it is available as a single daily pill.
Similarly, most type II diabetics can either take metformin or lose weight--no shots or fingersticks.
The percentage of snark and the percentage of cock jokes must be pretty extensively overlapping then. Otherwise, there's a lot more than 100% of this site.
More seriously, and snarkily, I'm not sure Brooks will every be able to top this column in which he blames just about everyone except himself for the fact that he asked, after a lavish dinner, whether the coffee was decaf.
Shamhat, I dunno: my mom has high (but not very high) blood pressure and she has to have the dose calibrated pretty often, and still gets headaches and such, which are worse if she takes a dose late, etc. I agree it's not the worst thing in the world, but Brooks ignores that and ailments like it completely.
Tim, dear Tim, you're the one revealing your hangups here: I like strong women, and mean "pull the plow" in its most complimentary "work the earth" sense. You, stuck as you are in your blue urban thin-at-all-costs mindset, can't see it as anything but an insult. You're never going to have sex again.
come now, ogged, do you think that your "pull the plow" comment can have helped you with PG? Further references to that comment only dig you deeper. For instance, I don't think "work the earth" has helped you very much.
Probably you should blame those comments on an imposter ogged.
I have been plow-pulling in the past, but am currently a bit waiflike, and I think I prefer being plow-pulling. I feel too strong a wind could carry me away right now.
Uh, liveblogging sex is not quite my thing. But I'll find some subtle way to let you know the deed has been done, 'kay? (Am assuming self-sex doesn't count here ... ;-)
FL stole my joke. But I'd like to see him bench-press with his neck. (I meant Brooks, not FL, but if he wants to....)
And BMI is good, if you're a stereotypically inactive desk jockey, but for anyone else, it's borderline useless. To get down to the low end of the BMI for my height group, I'd have to lose about 20 pounds. I'm pretty sure I'd be hospitalized after losing ten.
profgrrrl? SCMTim? ogged? Typing one-handed does NOT count. bleh!!!!
Ha! I'll bet none of you had a nooner today. [smirking, always smirking] I win.
Unless you're a guy indulging a not-that-there's-anything-wrong-with-it crossdressing fetish, you having a nooner means nothing. Women (unless morbidly obese or tragically disfigured) work a different scale than men. Me not having sex at noon is roughly equivalent to a normal woman having multiple orgasms at noon.
PG: Let me go further. On the simple scale of sexual fulfillment, my getting out of bed in morning is a significantly larger achievement than (b/c of the hair and the voice - cute, as I said) your having your way with the smooth young boy of your choice.
Meanwhile, I feel sure that the Nuggs are going to piss away to a chance to steal one in San Antonio. Somehow, this, along with Padilla and the attack on the independent judiciary, is all baa's fault.
Er, seeing as how I use my real name, let me declare that 70 is the last accidentally revealing comment I will be making on this matter. Grammer and HTML only! And snarking on the rest of yinz.
I don't have a landline at my place, so the last time my TiVo dialed in was when it was still connected, where ex and I were living. It tells me, every day, how many days it's been since it dialed in. Handy.
My bet, he was taping something while having sex. Hell, he was probably programming it to tape while having sex. Which might explain the 437 days. Women can be humorless about certain things.
Am I failing to understand some basic technological issue, or should the second comma in 80 not be there? (Or: If the TiVo isn't connected, how does it work?)
Well, yes, I would like a TiVo but I'm too broke ...
BUT I was referring to the sadness of using it to see when you last had sex, and as a marker of moving out of the place where you lived with ex. I'm just a sensitive grrrrl at heart ...
(Note, incidentally, that I am not really channelling Wolfson. If I were, I'd be coming up with an even more heartbreaking story about my love life. cf. 72)
The study says that the BMI range of 25-30 is the most desirable range. The negative returns to losing weight probably start at a BMI in that range. Not 18.4 .
Ogged has to put on about 40 pounds to get in the most desirable BMI range. He should probably get a girlfriend first.
No, a biophysicist. I just want copy editors to languish at my feet, imploring me with perfectly phrased pleas to allow them to conjugate my verbs. [The subjunctive mood is particularly hot...] There's something so satisfying about teasing prescriptive grammarians.
SCMT #60: As my having sex at noon included a male having sex at noon, someone still wins.
Is it really news to anyone that 6 feet, 135 pounds is unhealthy?
This is not necessarily so. I am about 5'11", and my weight has ranged from 130 to a max of 135 for the past 18 years or so. (37 yr. old male.) I am very healthy, and I eat a lot. I just have a high metabolism.
I think you should just ignore the fact that people know your real name Matt. You could always pretend you are another Matt Weiner. Or you could start using a thinly-disguised pseudonym to give yourself some deniability. Like Watt Meiner.
I was thinking that I have some back-up for my identity here, since someone I went to high school with comments here too. But then I thought, for all you know I could have invented the LB persona, in anticipation of my own arrival. All part of my dastardly plan to take over Unfogged. To what end, I have no idea....
I think it was sneaky the way the government changed the definition of "obese" and then started clammering that we have an obesity epidemic.
And I am six feet tall with a 31 inch inseam, meaning relatively short legs. Imagine if my lower legs were, say, two inches longer. I'd add two inches to my height, and a couple ham hocks to my weight. My BMI would drop incredibly.
So BMI without knowing body proportion and fat/muscle ratio is pretty useless, unless you want to label a bunch of people as obese.
With all that said I admit that there are a lot more truly obese people in the US than there ever used to be. I'm not excusing that. I just don't like being called one of them. :)
We were having dinner with a Uruguayan friend, whose English is okay but has holes in it, the other week, and he was telling us about a Brazilian restaurant he goes to that specializes in exotic meats. He listed snake, alligator... got stuck for a minute and came up with "the big chicken!" I offered "turkey"? He huddled with his Colombian wife, whose English has similar holes, and didn't get anywhere beyond "No, no, the really big chicken!" Finally, Mr. Breath got it: "Ostrich".
Brooks' column is one of the worst distortions of a statistical report I have seen in a while. He should personally apologize to the scientists who worked on the study.
Lord, I go off for a short nap and come back to truly trite cock jokes involving chickens.* Where's the fun in that? I mean, really, we all know "Unfogged" is merely an anagram for "Ogged Fun". So try harder, people, try harder. [C'mon, that's a set-up line if ever I wrote one...]
* Celebrity sighting on Saturday: Larry Flynt, who did things with chickens most folks don't really want to think about. Then again, he has a Rolls Royce and most folks don't, so there may be something to this chicken-love.
DE, not only have you already violated the cardinal rule of Unfogged: though shalt not have sex, and you sure as hell won't talk about it if you do, but now you're telling us about your recent celebrity sightings? What are you, malevolent?
Another thing about the Brooks thing that is retarded: obviously Darwin did not say anything about "survival of the fittest" -- that was Herbert Spencer. Duh.
The parallelism above implies that Brooks does not write columns. This raises the question of what he does in fact write. I don't think propaganda is correct, since he's not really focused enough for that. Filler is a possible answer. Perhaps "love-letters to himself," given how oddly self-centered some of his columns are, and how many of them appear to just be him stroking his own ego.
Ok, I think I'm giving too much insight into my reading habits today, but I think I read somewhere that sadists don't really make masochists happy, in any case. Sadists generally mean business, whereas masochists like the games and role-play. The best partner for a masochist is, supposedly, another masochist. One who just pretends to be a sadist.
Sadists generally mean business, whereas masochists like the games and role-play. The best partner for a masochist is, supposedly, another masochist. One who just pretends to be a sadist.
I must disagree. Masochists can also mean business and sadists can also role-play. Pairing two masochists just leads to frustration and ill feelings. Pairing two sadists just leads to confusion and bad grammar.
Is this a form of happiness where one's subjective evaluation of their present emotional state is no longer considered persuasive evidence? If so, I'd like to hear more about it.
I stand corrected on Ms. Smith. In regards to Ms. Scott I would, for the record, hit it -- but the airbrushing always makes it hard to tell what they truly look like.
Is this a form of happiness where one's subjective evaluation of their present emotional state is no longer considered persuasive evidence?
WD: Why should a subjective evaluation be trusted? Most people are far too close to their own emotional states to be at all capable of assessing them in any meaningful way. Some people even imagine that they experience fear when chained to a dungeon wall, awaiting Fran Drescher's dramatic reading of the complete works of Ann Coulter. But that's not fear, that's simply revulsion. [Except for Bill O'Reilly, who fantasises about being scrubbed with falalfel during the experience.]
And keep it consistent; "one" or "they", not both in the same sentence.
I don't know, the two can walk a blurry line sometimes. For example, me with regard to cockroaches, or, another popular example (though less true for me): spiders.
Aarggh, get the "l" out of there... Another day of being unable to type sans typo. It's the rampant sex, that's what it is. With a loofah. [Or it's the painkillers. How the hell did Rush take a handful of these a day?]
Tangentially, but apropos, given the original topic: I dated an Iranian when I was at Columbia. He kept complaining, "American girls, too skinny, no good for sex. Too many bones." There was, however, no mention of falafel or loofahs, tho' his father did offer me $$ to do the green-card marriage thing.
I'm pretty sure I can tell the difference between fear and revulsion.
Benjamin, my wayward offspring, you haven't begun to experience fear and revulsion, what with growing up in a town where the squirrels are audio-animatronic. [Which, Ogged's observation aside, is not where I am, just where my ISP has chosen to infiltrate itself.]
BW - when Ogged made his comment, my ISP was pretending it was located in Irvine.
It's a very frivolous ISP, prone to locating itself in college towns full of mini-malls. I think it's looking for a nice intellectual mainframe.
Ogged - He didn't favour the heroin-chic, sharp-edged body popular in NYC at the time. [Would you want to have sex with Ann Coulter, mattress or no?] Let's just say he would have preferred J. Lo to A. Co.
Ogged, Ogged, Ogged - I am not in Irvine. My ISP is simply in love with a computer some 50 miles away. I am about a block south of the Sunset Strip, where Vicodin is considered a girlie-drug.
To be fair, I just had some surgery and there's real pain involved here. In between passing out from doses of painkiller, I come here for solace, what with this being the Benevolent Blog of Bracing Beneficence & Mocking of Mawkish Marriage Announcements. Not to mention my need to keep track of my illegitimate issue Benjamin, lest he dangle his participles in front of a police officer.
"Dongle" is funnier than "dangle" (maybe), but I couldn't have come out and said "I have a USB dongle", when the last reference was to "dangle", could I have come out and said, now? Your attempt to recover is poor.
Your attempts to explain your errors by claiming that they aren't in fact errors, but jokes, would be much more credible if we hadn't established--with metaphysical certainty, as John McLaughlin is fond of saying--that you don't have a sense of humor.
I take it you're not talking about Mahavishnu John McLaughlin.
At any rate, your having resorted to such an obvious diversionary tactic is all the confirmation I or any reasonable person [we leave open the question: do I mean I or any other reasonable person?] could possibly need that you acknowledge that your comment 189 is dumb.
I don't think it would have been much funnier than what I did say, and saying what I did say had the advantage that in response to it you demonstrated the finitude of your mind.
The latest Irvine reference was a joke, DE, which I forgive you for not getting, given your state.
My state? My state?? Do you mean to imply that I am somehow less than at the top of my mental form simply because I am chock full o' hydrocodone and unable to walk across a room without bumping into the large purple snake that keeps slithering through and mocking my attempts to feed carrots to my bunny slippers? My effing state???
1. Brooks is a hack. We've known that for a while. (Is there anyone whose credibility crash came so soon after his rise to prominence? He's like the right wing VC - he's going to have change teams to get back the love.) Now if only our liberal media representatives would acknowledge it.
2. 6 feet tall and weigh 150. You've got to be kidding. You're not even a girl; you're like a flouncing little boy*. Cripes, Iverson's thicker than you.
3. I don't understand the following: The only important question that remains in the case of David Brooks is whether he could be any dumber. Outdoing himself doesn't count.
Doesn't "could be any dumber" make a comparison between his potential dumbness and his current dumbness? And isn't that precisely a case of "[o]utdoing himself"? I'm confused.
* I assume making a boy the bottom of the totem pole allows me to use "girl" as the original, discarded insult.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:36 AM
You're not even a girl; you're like a flouncing little boy
I could totally kick your ass, Tim.
I'm confused
Indeed. I wondered if it made sense as written. I decided that it did, in a slightly paradoxical way. Ponder.
I do, however, like the comparison to VC (and am happy that "VC" doesn't immediately make me think "venture capitalist" anymore).
Off to swim, pudge boy.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:41 AM
I decided that it did, in a slightly paradoxical way. Ponder.
Yes, ogged-san.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:44 AM
And can I get a show of hands of those who think that the words "Darwin was wrong" show up in his column by, like, accident?
I dunno - he may have a point. Brooks may be proof that the theory of evolution is seriously flawed. How else can one explain why he and an Archaeopteryx have similar intellectual capacities?
His use of the word sense of "fitness" is a parallel to the anti-evos' use of "theory": Take a word with multiple meanings - especially words used as terms of art - deliberately opt for a meaning that is incorrect/unsupportable in context and use it to bolster an otherwise idiotic argument. 'But that's what the dictionary says...' [/whine]
I have to go now and find some blood pressure medication; I should know better than to read anything involving Brooks this early in the morning, especially after spending the night before closing down a bar with a bunch of loony intellectuals...
[And no, Ben, I did not use the loony intellectuals to close down the bar. I'm just to lazy to recast that sentence. You would have loved it, as the loony intellectuals were all copy editors.]
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:46 AM
Carp, that's "too lazy". I swear I'm not hung over, I didn't drink nearly enough, despite the willingness of males who cherish the who/whom distinction to ply me with wine...
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:50 AM
I could totally edit copy.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:51 AM
Assignment, for whomever will take it up: make a joke turning on the uses of "ply" in "ply with wine" and "two-ply".
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:52 AM
I could totally edit copy.
Then you could come to wild gatherings of copy editors in Hollywood nightclubs. Wouldn't that be more fun than grad school? [It is, trust me, I've been to grad school.]
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 9:57 AM
I don't do nightclubs.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:02 AM
Ben, Ben, Ben - you disappoint me. It's "for whoever will take it up". The entire phrase is the object of the preposition.
You're gonna lose your street cred, boy.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:03 AM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:03 AM
I don't do nightclubs.
Believe me, neither do copy editors. There's nothing odder than a bunch of talkers shouting at each other over music they couldn't be paid to listen to in the normal course of events. Apparently, it didn't occur to the organisers to alert the venue that none of the attendees were there for anything but the munchies and conversation.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:06 AM
I hate the BMI stuff. Hate it. According to BMI I'm very close to overweight. And Ogged ... at 5'4" I'm actually quite close to you in terms of weight. 132 (current weight) is a great weight for me. I once as an adult weighed 124 and people were trying to force-feed me. But according to BMI I won't hit underweight until I get below 100 lbs. I can't even imagine myself anywhere near 100 lbs and I'm sure manourishment would be a big problem then.
For years I felt there was something wrong with me because during those damn pageants the announcer would say "And Miss Somewhere is 5'9" tall and weights 110 lbs." I'd just shake my head and think "great, I'm 5 inches shorter and 20 lbs heavier. What a loser." But you really can't tell by numbers alone.
I've finally decided to not care about revealing my weight even though "society" would suggest that by the numbers I must be fat (and thus unattractive?). The reality is that many women who are in good shape weigh more than 120 lbs. Or are at the upper limit of the BMI or just over it. And, well ... if you've seen my photos on my blog you know that I'm not a waif but I'm certainly not overweight either. (And on that note ... time to head to the gym).
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:08 AM
My other goal is to beat the hell out of David Brooks.
If you do that, I'll bake you chocolate chocolate chip cookies to help with that last .3. I'll even find Ogged a date.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:10 AM
I find it amusing that the NYT recently published a paean to the anorexic Olsen twins' sense of "style", complete with compliments about how well the clothing hung on their barely-there bodies. Will they now print a retraction and apologise for encouraging dangerous dieting practices?
Hell, no; they won't even apologise for David Brooks.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:16 AM
Ben, Ben, Ben - you disappoint me. It's "for whoever will take it up". The entire phrase is the object of the preposition.
Yeah, I realized that after writing it. I should have just gone with "for him who will ...", which is what I started writing before deciding to get rid of "him".
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:17 AM
Tsk, tsk, tsk... think about that contruction.
If you were really my son, I'd be forced to paddle you with a copy of Strunk and White. Or maybe the AP Style Book; it's larger.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:22 AM
"construction"
Damn, I can't type this morning...
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:22 AM
What's Strunk & White's BMI?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:22 AM
Let's assume that this study is correct and that, furthermore, the longer-lived heavy people are more successful in passing on their genes; in that case, they are the fittest David
But who's the fittest Jonathan?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:38 AM
"But if you have, or know someone who has, diabetes or high blood pressure, you know that those ailments are no fun, and the medication used to treat them isn't either."
I agree that insulin-dependent diabetes is a complicated disease to manage, particularly if you do it well.
However, hypertension isn't even noticeable unless it's so high that you have headaches, despite the long-term damage it can cause if ignored. Treatment is essentially a matter of finding a pill that lowers blood pressure and has side effects that you can put up with. Often, once the correct combination is found, it is available as a single daily pill.
Similarly, most type II diabetics can either take metformin or lose weight--no shots or fingersticks.
Posted by Shamhat | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:44 AM
But who's the fittest Jonathan?
You realise that under Brooks' theory, Goliath would be more fit and David would go down in that fight. Or was it Jonathan who would go down?
[D, get your mind out of the gutter, it's not even noon, for pity's sake...]
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:47 AM
What's Strunk & White's BMI?
Body Mauling Index? Oh, about a 35.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:50 AM
If you were really my son, I'd be forced to paddle you with a copy of Strunk and White. Or maybe the AP Style Book; it's larger.
Better go with the AP. It's common knowledge that our ben is a size queen.
Posted by Mitch Mills | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 12:03 PM
First line of the article (not the column):
Lower than 100%?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:06 PM
That's a needlessly uncharitable interpretation. The phrase "risk of death" is used all the time without mentioning a time horizon.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:13 PM
That's a needlessly pedantic criticism. This site has got to be close to 90% snark; see the sentence before this one.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:19 PM
Statistically improbable phrase: "justifiably uncharitable interpretation"
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:22 PM
And of course my interpretation of that widely-known usage was made in all seriousness.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:24 PM
The percentage of snark and the percentage of cock jokes must be pretty extensively overlapping then. Otherwise, there's a lot more than 100% of this site.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:26 PM
More seriously, and snarkily, I'm not sure Brooks will every be able to top this column in which he blames just about everyone except himself for the fact that he asked, after a lavish dinner, whether the coffee was decaf.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:47 PM
Well PG, I'm pretty sure that currently both my exes weigh more than I do. Waify is no good: Who's gonna pull the plow? Not me.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 1:59 PM
The percentage of snark and the percentage of cock jokes must be pretty extensively overlapping then
Snock jokes?
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:00 PM
I'm pretty sure that currently both my exes weigh more than I do....Who's gonna pull the plow?
I now find it substantially more incredible that you've had sex than that Wolfson has.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:01 PM
Shamhat, I dunno: my mom has high (but not very high) blood pressure and she has to have the dose calibrated pretty often, and still gets headaches and such, which are worse if she takes a dose late, etc. I agree it's not the worst thing in the world, but Brooks ignores that and ailments like it completely.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:02 PM
I now find it substantially more incredible...
You think plow-pulling girls don't need lovin'?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:04 PM
If you have sex before I do, I'll commit seppuku. (Please to note, PG).
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:07 PM
Tim, dear Tim, you're the one revealing your hangups here: I like strong women, and mean "pull the plow" in its most complimentary "work the earth" sense. You, stuck as you are in your blue urban thin-at-all-costs mindset, can't see it as anything but an insult. You're never going to have sex again.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:11 PM
Nicely played, you magnificent bastard.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:17 PM
Actually, playing on your despair is always the easy way out, but thanks anyway.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:19 PM
come now, ogged, do you think that your "pull the plow" comment can have helped you with PG? Further references to that comment only dig you deeper. For instance, I don't think "work the earth" has helped you very much.
Probably you should blame those comments on an imposter ogged.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:19 PM
SCMT, but what if *I* have sex before you do again? Is that allowed? (Oh, dear god, please say yes!)
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:20 PM
Umm, text has a point here. And I certainly don't consider myself a plow-pulling grrrrl.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:22 PM
I have been plow-pulling in the past, but am currently a bit waiflike, and I think I prefer being plow-pulling. I feel too strong a wind could carry me away right now.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:22 PM
Maybe I should go on a date with ac?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:23 PM
Clearly, I don't mind it as a term.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:24 PM
I'm already dating one person, and obsessed with another. Hands full.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:26 PM
Ain't it the way.
You know what sucks: seeing attractive women who are clearly younger than I am pushing strollers.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:27 PM
seeing attractive women who are clearly younger than I am pushing strollers
Now feeling suicidal. Thanks, ogged.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:38 PM
Yeah, but the Bulls-Wizards game is on now, and should be good.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:39 PM
I'm listening to Hubie talk about D-Wade giving people "facials". Apparently, not everyone wants a facial from Flash.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:41 PM
They were discussing the use of that term over at the bandarlog a while back. I'm shocked it's still used by basketball announcers.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:42 PM
PG:
Not only can you have sex before me, I expect you to do so. And to live-blog it.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 2:45 PM
Uh, liveblogging sex is not quite my thing. But I'll find some subtle way to let you know the deed has been done, 'kay? (Am assuming self-sex doesn't count here ... ;-)
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 3:11 PM
FL stole my joke. But I'd like to see him bench-press with his neck. (I meant Brooks, not FL, but if he wants to....)
And BMI is good, if you're a stereotypically inactive desk jockey, but for anyone else, it's borderline useless. To get down to the low end of the BMI for my height group, I'd have to lose about 20 pounds. I'm pretty sure I'd be hospitalized after losing ten.
profgrrrl? SCMTim? ogged? Typing one-handed does NOT count. bleh!!!!
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 6:16 PM
I'm not doing the one-handed typing. Just realized they all might be, in which case (and if it counted) I might not be the next one to have sex ...
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 6:33 PM
Fear not; I'm not dexterous enough to do anything like that. Ogged... well, what would be the point of being a waif, if not flexibility.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:00 PM
Ha! I'll bet none of you had a nooner today. [smirking, always smirking] I win.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:03 PM
I'm not dexterous enough to do anything like that
I am, of course, but come on people, you know I'm not my type.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:03 PM
Ha! I'll bet none of you had a nooner today. [smirking, always smirking] I win.
Unless you're a guy indulging a not-that-there's-anything-wrong-with-it crossdressing fetish, you having a nooner means nothing. Women (unless morbidly obese or tragically disfigured) work a different scale than men. Me not having sex at noon is roughly equivalent to a normal woman having multiple orgasms at noon.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:07 PM
I just couldn't imagine (no offense) typing away here and feeling the impulse to drift one hand ...
And re: 58 -- no fair! no fair!!!!!
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:09 PM
Me not having sex at noon is roughly equivalent to a normal woman having multiple orgasms at noon.
Then why am I not getting any? Grrrr.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:10 PM
Was it with a copy editor?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:15 PM
PG: Let me go further. On the simple scale of sexual fulfillment, my getting out of bed in morning is a significantly larger achievement than (b/c of the hair and the voice - cute, as I said) your having your way with the smooth young boy of your choice.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:16 PM
Not to mention the nature jammies and the bionic rack.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:21 PM
Ogged, what's the correct spelling of declasse?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:25 PM
I wouldn't know.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:26 PM
Acute accents on both 'e's. (No, I'm not still talking about pg. Pay attention.)
'déclassé'
which I got by typing
''déclassé''
I have attained full Wolfson! Should I be proud?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:30 PM
Well then, SCMT, I'm sorry to hear that you've not managed to get out of bed for weeks ... ;)
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:34 PM
weeks? Jeebus.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:35 PM
Meanwhile, I feel sure that the Nuggs are going to piss away to a chance to steal one in San Antonio. Somehow, this, along with Padilla and the attack on the independent judiciary, is all baa's fault.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:36 PM
Er, seeing as how I use my real name, let me declare that 70 is the last accidentally revealing comment I will be making on this matter. Grammer and HTML only! And snarking on the rest of yinz.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:37 PM
I don't get it, PG. No double entendre intended, though obviously applicable at the moment.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:37 PM
Tim, you getting out of bed = pg getting some. PG hasn't gotten some for weeks (apparently), ergo, you haven't gotten out of bed in weeks.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:38 PM
Hang on, my TiVo keeps track of how long I've gone without...loading menu...
437 days.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:39 PM
For the record, I've not gotten any because I (a) live in G'ville and (b) am picky picky picky.
I had a potential opportunity on one of my trips. Scratch that, on two of them. But I declined.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:40 PM
Your TiVo tracks your sex life? 'Splain.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:41 PM
PG hasn't gotten some for weeks (apparently)
Can we get a consensus agreement that women are, or at least PG is, basically evil?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:41 PM
I wonder how many batteries one would run through in 437 days ... (this being a girl thing, of course).
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:42 PM
I don't have a landline at my place, so the last time my TiVo dialed in was when it was still connected, where ex and I were living. It tells me, every day, how many days it's been since it dialed in. Handy.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:44 PM
My bet, he was taping something while having sex. Hell, he was probably programming it to tape while having sex. Which might explain the 437 days. Women can be humorless about certain things.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:45 PM
Ah, I was wrong.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:46 PM
Am I failing to understand some basic technological issue, or should the second comma in 80 not be there? (Or: If the TiVo isn't connected, how does it work?)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:47 PM
Ogged, that's making me really sad.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:47 PM
Why, PG? You wish you had a TiVo?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:48 PM
OT (or maybe relevant to future PG audioblogging): "Ogged's body" may be the most unpronounceable phrase in English.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:48 PM
(And this, children, is called the "sad puppy dog" move; let's watch....)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:49 PM
Matt, it doesn't require the phone connection to work, just a signal (in my case, via DirecTV satellite).
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:50 PM
Ogged, your variable speed on response is making me look like an ass.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:51 PM
Well, yes, I would like a TiVo but I'm too broke ...
BUT I was referring to the sadness of using it to see when you last had sex, and as a marker of moving out of the place where you lived with ex. I'm just a sensitive grrrrl at heart ...
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:51 PM
PG joins the mind too fine club!
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:53 PM
I hear you PG, but actually, I have such a horrible sense of days/weeks/months passed that I'm grateful for it.
your variable speed on response is making me look like an ass
You can't seriously blame me...
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:53 PM
The Nuggets win! Nuggets win! Nuggets win!
We will have a Democratic president again in my lifetime.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:54 PM
Wait, how did PG join the club?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 7:54 PM
not sure one can answer without joining the club oneself.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:07 PM
PG joins the mind too fine club!
What is this club????
And ogged, do you really want to keep track? Are you going for a record?
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:07 PM
I'm so confused.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:08 PM
text is trying to stop me, but:
the stock response to Wolfson's missing irony
(O, I hope 85 was ironic)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:10 PM
I'm so confused.
Well, that could explain a lot ;)
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:10 PM
It was, but I thought PG was just playing along.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:13 PM
I was playing along, silly boys.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:14 PM
YMMV, I guess.
(Note, incidentally, that I am not really channelling Wolfson. If I were, I'd be coming up with an even more heartbreaking story about my love life. cf. 72)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:15 PM
You also would have written "grammar."
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:17 PM
See also this, he says pettishly.
(eb--nah, Wolfson's also capable of deliberate misspellings for humerus affect.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:20 PM
Too troo.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 8:21 PM
The humerus affect, that's why girls like resting their heads on shoulders, right?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:07 PM
That's so affected.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 10:36 PM
The study says that the BMI range of 25-30 is the most desirable range. The negative returns to losing weight probably start at a BMI in that range. Not 18.4 .
Ogged has to put on about 40 pounds to get in the most desirable BMI range. He should probably get a girlfriend first.
Posted by joe o | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 11:23 PM
Was it with a copy editor?
No, a biophysicist. I just want copy editors to languish at my feet, imploring me with perfectly phrased pleas to allow them to conjugate my verbs. [The subjunctive mood is particularly hot...] There's something so satisfying about teasing prescriptive grammarians.
SCMT #60: As my having sex at noon included a male having sex at noon, someone still wins.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-24-05 11:30 PM
Is it really news to anyone that 6 feet, 135 pounds is unhealthy?
This is not necessarily so. I am about 5'11", and my weight has ranged from 130 to a max of 135 for the past 18 years or so. (37 yr. old male.) I am very healthy, and I eat a lot. I just have a high metabolism.
Posted by Skinny Dude | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:03 AM
Maybe you should eat more PIE (protein-intensive enrichment).
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:19 AM
I think you should just ignore the fact that people know your real name Matt. You could always pretend you are another Matt Weiner. Or you could start using a thinly-disguised pseudonym to give yourself some deniability. Like Watt Meiner.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:20 AM
You know, the person posting as "Matt Weiner" need not be named "Matt Weiner" at all. It could all be an elaborate ruse.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:26 AM
I have a great pseudonym in reserve for in case I decide I need to start pseudoblogging. Unfortunately I can't reveal it here (for obvious reasons).
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:27 AM
Don't even think about it, Wolfson.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:28 AM
I was thinking that I have some back-up for my identity here, since someone I went to high school with comments here too. But then I thought, for all you know I could have invented the LB persona, in anticipation of my own arrival. All part of my dastardly plan to take over Unfogged. To what end, I have no idea....
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:32 AM
Ah.
AC is precisely who she calims to be. And everyone should obey her implicitly. You are all becoming very sleepy...
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:53 AM
Ogged. Let's see. Brooks writes a humor column. You respond in all seriousness. And Brooks is the dumb one?
Posted by Jack | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:59 AM
Ogged has to put on about 40 pounds to get in the most desirable BMI range. He should probably get a girlfriend first.
Perhaps putting on the weight would help him get a girlfriend? Maybe the girls are intimidated that he weighs less than they do?
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:00 AM
Brooks writes a humor column.
This is the happiest-making defense of Brooks ever.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:02 AM
Perhaps putting on the weight would help him get a girlfriend
Depends where he puts it on, IYKWIM.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:07 AM
Depends where he puts it on, IYKWIM.
Just keep in mind that no woman in her right mind is interested in a 30 lb cock.
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:21 AM
Clearly you've never raised chickens professionally.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:22 AM
Thirty is a lot of pounds for a single chicken to weigh.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:25 AM
I think it was sneaky the way the government changed the definition of "obese" and then started clammering that we have an obesity epidemic.
And I am six feet tall with a 31 inch inseam, meaning relatively short legs. Imagine if my lower legs were, say, two inches longer. I'd add two inches to my height, and a couple ham hocks to my weight. My BMI would drop incredibly.
So BMI without knowing body proportion and fat/muscle ratio is pretty useless, unless you want to label a bunch of people as obese.
With all that said I admit that there are a lot more truly obese people in the US than there ever used to be. I'm not excusing that. I just don't like being called one of them. :)
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:27 AM
Actually we had roosters and chickens when I was growing up, and they never weighed that much. Birds have light bones!
Posted by profgrrrrl | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:28 AM
Thirty is a lot of pounds for a single chicken to weigh.
Precisely what would make such a cock so fascinating. Think of the breeding potential.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:28 AM
One big chicken.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:30 AM
A bunch of crushed hens, oh boy.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:30 AM
We were having dinner with a Uruguayan friend, whose English is okay but has holes in it, the other week, and he was telling us about a Brazilian restaurant he goes to that specializes in exotic meats. He listed snake, alligator... got stuck for a minute and came up with "the big chicken!" I offered "turkey"? He huddled with his Colombian wife, whose English has similar holes, and didn't get anywhere beyond "No, no, the really big chicken!" Finally, Mr. Breath got it: "Ostrich".
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:38 AM
What he meant was, the tall chicken.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:41 AM
Stupid llamas!
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:45 AM
Ah, sex and chickens. Anyone up for a viewing of Pink Flamingos?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:54 AM
"Ah, sex and chickens."
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 8:57 AM
Brooks' column is one of the worst distortions of a statistical report I have seen in a while. He should personally apologize to the scientists who worked on the study.
More on the column here.
Posted by Elyas | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 9:27 AM
Lord, I go off for a short nap and come back to truly trite cock jokes involving chickens.* Where's the fun in that? I mean, really, we all know "Unfogged" is merely an anagram for "Ogged Fun". So try harder, people, try harder. [C'mon, that's a set-up line if ever I wrote one...]
* Celebrity sighting on Saturday: Larry Flynt, who did things with chickens most folks don't really want to think about. Then again, he has a Rolls Royce and most folks don't, so there may be something to this chicken-love.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 9:28 AM
DE, not only have you already violated the cardinal rule of Unfogged: though shalt not have sex, and you sure as hell won't talk about it if you do, but now you're telling us about your recent celebrity sightings? What are you, malevolent?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 9:33 AM
Oh, and despite appearances, there's in fact no way to rearrange Unf to get "fun."
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 9:34 AM
The best part of the centerfold BMI graphic is that you can easily pick out Anna Nicole Smith =)
Posted by Ben | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 10:05 AM
Hahaha! You're right!
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 10:06 AM
Another thing about the Brooks thing that is retarded: obviously Darwin did not say anything about "survival of the fittest" -- that was Herbert Spencer. Duh.
Posted by Chris | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 10:35 AM
Chris, I really wanted to make fun of him for that, but it turns out that though Spencer coined the phrase, Darwin did use it (end of paragraph 3).
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 10:42 AM
The fourteenth amendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics.
Posted by textualist | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 11:30 AM
which is to say that Brooks writes columns like the Lochner court writes well-reasoned, long lasting precedent. Yo.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 11:40 AM
The parallelism above implies that Brooks does not write columns. This raises the question of what he does in fact write. I don't think propaganda is correct, since he's not really focused enough for that. Filler is a possible answer. Perhaps "love-letters to himself," given how oddly self-centered some of his columns are, and how many of them appear to just be him stroking his own ego.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 11:47 AM
What are you, malevolent?
No, I'm sadistic. There's a difference.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 12:26 PM
Indeed. So you want to hurt us, but not because you bear us any ill will, eh? Make yourself at home then.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 12:29 PM
there's in fact no way to rearrange Unf to get "fun"
That may be the best thing you've ever written; whether that's a matter of pride or shame I leave as an exercise.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 12:55 PM
though shalt not have sex
Thou, thou, thou. Did I mention that my bastard son Benjamin is a rank amateur?
So you want to hurt us, but not because you bear us any ill will, eh?
I want to hurt you because it will make you happy.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:07 PM
this is just what we were missing
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:09 PM
Oops. I won't even go back and change it and ask you what the hell you're talking about.
I want to hurt you because it will make you happy.
I'm pretty sure making us happy is against the rules too; bad for blogging, you understand.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:11 PM
Did I mention that my bastard son Benjamin is a rank amateur?
I saw it, but I'm mellowing out in my old age.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:12 PM
happy is against the rules too; bad for blogging
Case in point. I can't make sense of a single entry on that page. It's like they're blogging in an entirely different language or something.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:20 PM
happiness transcends language
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:21 PM
Anna Nicole Smith? BMI=19.6
Posted by rc | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:22 PM
"Anna Nicole Smith? BMI=19.6"
If Anna Nicole Smith isn't that outlier at ~ 21.5 around Y2K, who is? Unless you're talking about the current ANS...
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/pb-bmi.png
Posted by Ben | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:26 PM
Ok, I think I'm giving too much insight into my reading habits today, but I think I read somewhere that sadists don't really make masochists happy, in any case. Sadists generally mean business, whereas masochists like the games and role-play. The best partner for a masochist is, supposedly, another masochist. One who just pretends to be a sadist.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 1:34 PM
The best partner for a masochist is, supposedly, another masochist. One who just pretends to be a sadist.
There's some kind of perfect parallel here to the unfogged comments, but it's escaping me.
Posted by cw | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 2:34 PM
Wolfson has been sending out an unheard cry for help -- tacitly begging for someone, anyone to come edit his prose?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 3:41 PM
Sadists generally mean business, whereas masochists like the games and role-play. The best partner for a masochist is, supposedly, another masochist. One who just pretends to be a sadist.
I must disagree. Masochists can also mean business and sadists can also role-play. Pairing two masochists just leads to frustration and ill feelings. Pairing two sadists just leads to confusion and bad grammar.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 5:29 PM
I'm pretty sure making us happy is against the rules too
Ah, but we may have different definitions of "happy"...
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 5:30 PM
Is this a form of happiness where one's subjective evaluation of their present emotional state is no longer considered persuasive evidence? If so, I'd like to hear more about it.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 7:02 PM
According to these data, Anna Nicole Smith was Miss May 1992. BMI=21.2 was August 1999.
And, as a reminder, the 2000 election.
Posted by rc | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 11:45 PM
Which, in a tinfoil hat kinda way, sorta casts a new light on the Brooksian views on fatness.
Posted by rc | Link to this comment | 04-25-05 11:47 PM
August 99 would be Rebecca Scott, listed as 5'8" and 140 (BMI=21.3).
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 12:16 AM
who would be here.
I wouldn't hit it. But that doesn't have anything to do with the weight.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 12:45 AM
I stand corrected on Ms. Smith. In regards to Ms. Scott I would, for the record, hit it -- but the airbrushing always makes it hard to tell what they truly look like.
Posted by Ben | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:51 AM
Is this a form of happiness where one's subjective evaluation of their present emotional state is no longer considered persuasive evidence?
WD: Why should a subjective evaluation be trusted? Most people are far too close to their own emotional states to be at all capable of assessing them in any meaningful way. Some people even imagine that they experience fear when chained to a dungeon wall, awaiting Fran Drescher's dramatic reading of the complete works of Ann Coulter. But that's not fear, that's simply revulsion. [Except for Bill O'Reilly, who fantasises about being scrubbed with falalfel during the experience.]
And keep it consistent; "one" or "they", not both in the same sentence.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:56 AM
"felafel"
Or "loofah." Hard to tell from the context.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:58 AM
I'm pretty sure I can tell the difference between fear and revulsion.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:01 AM
I don't know, the two can walk a blurry line sometimes. For example, me with regard to cockroaches, or, another popular example (though less true for me): spiders.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:13 AM
"felafel"
Aarggh, get the "l" out of there... Another day of being unable to type sans typo. It's the rampant sex, that's what it is. With a loofah. [Or it's the painkillers. How the hell did Rush take a handful of these a day?]
Tangentially, but apropos, given the original topic: I dated an Iranian when I was at Columbia. He kept complaining, "American girls, too skinny, no good for sex. Too many bones." There was, however, no mention of falafel or loofahs, tho' his father did offer me $$ to do the green-card marriage thing.
I'm pretty sure I can tell the difference between fear and revulsion.
Benjamin, my wayward offspring, you haven't begun to experience fear and revulsion, what with growing up in a town where the squirrels are audio-animatronic. [Which, Ogged's observation aside, is not where I am, just where my ISP has chosen to infiltrate itself.]
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:28 AM
I didn't grow up in Cambridge.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:29 AM
too skinny, no good for sex. Too many bones
Did he understand that the mattress was a separate purchase? FOB and all.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:33 AM
BW - when Ogged made his comment, my ISP was pretending it was located in Irvine.
It's a very frivolous ISP, prone to locating itself in college towns full of mini-malls. I think it's looking for a nice intellectual mainframe.
Ogged - He didn't favour the heroin-chic, sharp-edged body popular in NYC at the time. [Would you want to have sex with Ann Coulter, mattress or no?] Let's just say he would have preferred J. Lo to A. Co.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:58 AM
J.Lo or A.Co? Good question. Naomi Campbell, or Barbara Bush?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:02 AM
Irvine is, in fact, where my formative years passed. I wouldn't have thought to call it a college town.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:03 AM
Naomi Campbell, or Barbara Bush?
I may become physically ill just from typing this, but someone has to. Younger or elder?
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:12 AM
I meant elder; I forgot about the young one.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:13 AM
Irvine is, in fact, where my formative years passed. I wouldn't have thought to call it a college town.
Neither would I; it's my ISP's delusion. It has the hots for some computer in the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae center at UCI.
I was living there when you were born, back in the days when the mini-malls were fields and the bookstores were all on campus...
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:22 AM
I meant elder
Even the massive overdose of Vicodin I just swallowed can't overcome the sheer agony that this image has caused my soul...
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:24 AM
But it was only slightly less fair a comparison than yours.
Vicodin? That shit knocks me out. Hate it. But everyone in Irvine lives on it...
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:27 AM
heroin-chic
The real thing is decidedly less attractive. (totally NSFW)
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:40 AM
Oh cripe. You mean not safe for viewing, period.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:42 AM
Ogged, Ogged, Ogged - I am not in Irvine. My ISP is simply in love with a computer some 50 miles away. I am about a block south of the Sunset Strip, where Vicodin is considered a girlie-drug.
To be fair, I just had some surgery and there's real pain involved here. In between passing out from doses of painkiller, I come here for solace, what with this being the Benevolent Blog of Bracing Beneficence & Mocking of Mawkish Marriage Announcements. Not to mention my need to keep track of my illegitimate issue Benjamin, lest he dangle his participles in front of a police officer.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:36 PM
Irvine is, in fact, where my formative years passed. I wouldn't have thought to call it a college town.
Based on the occasional Berkeley references, I'd have guessed Northern California.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:37 PM
The latest Irvine reference was a joke, DE, which I forgive you for not getting, given your state.
Can someone explain why we all find the word "dangle" funny?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:39 PM
I have a USB dangle.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:43 PM
That's a "dongle."
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:46 PM
It has to be funny, ogged.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:48 PM
"Dongle" is even funnier than "dangle."
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:49 PM
"Dongle" is funnier than "dangle" (maybe), but I couldn't have come out and said "I have a USB dongle", when the last reference was to "dangle", could I have come out and said, now? Your attempt to recover is poor.
Poor, ogged. You're poor.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:52 PM
Your attempts to explain your errors by claiming that they aren't in fact errors, but jokes, would be much more credible if we hadn't established--with metaphysical certainty, as John McLaughlin is fond of saying--that you don't have a sense of humor.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:54 PM
I take it you're not talking about Mahavishnu John McLaughlin.
At any rate, your having resorted to such an obvious diversionary tactic is all the confirmation I or any reasonable person [we leave open the question: do I mean I or any other reasonable person?] could possibly need that you acknowledge that your comment 189 is dumb.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 1:59 PM
I couldn't have come out and said "I have a USB dongle", when the last reference was to "dangle", could I have come out and said, now?
Well, you couldn't, because it would have been funny.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:02 PM
I don't think it would have been much funnier than what I did say, and saying what I did say had the advantage that in response to it you demonstrated the finitude of your mind.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:05 PM
You're really really upset that you said "dangle" when you meant "dongle," aren't you?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:09 PM
Quit trolling me, ogged.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:10 PM
One more tetchy response from you and we'll have 200 comments in this thread.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:14 PM
Ogged, I think you're a swell guy.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:15 PM
200!
(an homage)
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:17 PM
So it seems a tetchy response wasn't necessary after all!
ROLL CREDITS
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 2:18 PM
The latest Irvine reference was a joke, DE, which I forgive you for not getting, given your state.
My state? My state?? Do you mean to imply that I am somehow less than at the top of my mental form simply because I am chock full o' hydrocodone and unable to walk across a room without bumping into the large purple snake that keeps slithering through and mocking my attempts to feed carrots to my bunny slippers? My effing state???
Or did you just mean Kollyfornia?
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 3:03 PM
I, obviously, have no idea how the top of your mental form would manifest. I just hope this ain't it, is all.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 3:08 PM
Oh, that was too mean, and there you are, on the brink of death. Sorry.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 3:19 PM
You're just trying to make me suffer because I had sex.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 5:28 PM
I can't deny that, but now I'm confused: where do sex and surgery fall on the timeline of the past few days? Are they related? Are you that old?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 5:33 PM
Don't you think it's crass to keep mentioning your having had sex recently, DE? Lording it over the poor souls.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 5:37 PM
Fuck off, Oh He Of The Putative Girlfriend, we see the knife hidden in your kindness.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 5:42 PM
I didn't even catch that, since I keep forgetting that Ben
hasclaims to have a girlfriend.Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 5:45 PM
I can't deny that, but now I'm confused: where do sex and surgery fall on the timeline of the past few days? Are they related? Are you that old?
Sex on Sunday, surgery on Monday. In case I died in surgery, at least I'd go out happy.
And my legitimate son isn't even as old as Ben, whom I bore when I was just a young slip of a girl...
Don't you think it's crass to keep mentioning your having had sex recently, DE?
Just let me catch you having sex, young man, and you'll be grounded till you're thirty.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:28 PM
http://www.i5net.net/~i5pages/i5pagesnonaccount/ilosaki/pisspeepics/old.html hatslikessweatshirts
Posted by unconsciously | Link to this comment | 01-11-06 1:27 AM