Maybe the difference is known articles vs. unfamiliar articles? They can quickly pick up the color of a familiar object from the parent or whatever, and label it like a name, but when confronted with a new article it seems more mysterious?
What the hell is going on with that article link?
Was it actually talking about kids younger than Hawaiian Punch? Have pedagogical methods changed on their own since the article was written? Was the article in some contrary-to-the-conventional-wisdom-for-its-own-sake publication like Slate?
Mara's big thing is "purple purple!" when looking at rainbows if she wants me to say "indigo violet." I'm not sure whether she can't remember them on her own or if she just likes ritual. Well, I know she just likes ritual, OMG. But she knows her colors well and has the whole time we've known her when she was turning 3, even when she had major speech delays. I'd have guessed it was something kids pick up early rather than late.
That said, if this thread gets boring I'd be glad to rant about how kids also recognize skin color and white foster/adoptive parents who think they can just wait until the kids are 6 or 7 before discussing it because the kids don't know are fucking idiots and no doing their jobs.
And if people actually want to read the article without googling themselves, I assume it's the one from Scientific American
Just to be on the safe side, I'll blame racism.
I definitely remember my niece having a period where she wasn't very good at identifying colours, at least unprompted (ie she was better at finding a red car than saying a car was red). I can't quite remember how old she was but I think it was between 2 and 2 1/2.
That article is annoyingly written, and the actual research question they asked (are prenomial color names more difficult to learn) seems pretty limited, but it seems logical to me that kids could learn the name of an object (which included color information, like red-stripey-cup) without necessarily being able to disambiguate the color as an abstract concept. You could maybe test this with your kids by introducing a novel word that attached to objects (the greeble cup vs. the blork cup) and seeing if they learn that just as well, although that doesn't help you learn about generalization. I guess you could get a cup with novel figures on it (like characters the kid hasn't previously been exposed to, although that wouldn't be totally trivial to arrange) and consistently calling the item the "Spuds McKenzie" cup and the "Joe Camel cup" or whatever without otherwise describing the characters and then show the kid pictures of the two characters and see how well they can disambiguate. I'm still not sure that would be terribly informative, but you might be able to get Camel to fund it.
I don't know how old I was, but my mum tells me that when I was a toddler I went through a phase where I used "yellow" to mean "different", as in "no, I want the *yellow* one", where there wasn't a yellow one. So that sounds somewhat consistent with the article and with comment 1.
But really, there's a huge difference between just two and nearly 3, and can be even huger difference in language skills of 2 year olds who are the same age. So it always seems a bit weird to read generalisations about 2 year olds, when they're all so different.
HaPu is clearly very verbal (both receptive and expressive) - I still haven't quite got over that marshmallow experiment! - so not surprising that she knows her colours better than all of those other children.
And god yes, that article was very irritatingly written.
Based on my Montessori education, I offer that assumptions that it's normal and natural to learn specific things at specific ages are full of crap.
(Autocorrect doesn't recognize "Montessori" and suggests "nontraditional".)
The other problem, of course, is that testing kids in the lab you run the risk that they are scared or confused or don't know what the hell you're asking them these weird out-of-context questions for and thus freeze up even though they know the answer pretty well. But there's not really any way around that.
The article didn't make the point clearly, but it relied on something that I do firmly believe, that most people are terrible at knowing what their babies/toddlers know and are doing on purpose. There's an awful lot of adulthropomorphizing, if I may coin an unpronounceable term.
that most people are terrible at knowing what their babies/toddlers know and are doing on purpose
Indeed. Which is why you need blind-coded lab studies with (in this case) blindfolded parents (in other cases, they just straight up ask the parents to leave the room). Which bring in all sorts of other problems, but oh well.
Oh, that's definitely true. Tri-lingual babies, anyone?
(Specifically ones that play the violin to nomadic kids without ears.)
Another point to make, along the lines of asilon's wondering about generalizing about two-year-olds: they aren't saying that kids that age don't know their colors at all, they're saying that they do worse (on average) on a lab color identification task than older kids (or adults) do, or possibly that they do worse (on average) on a color identification task than on a basic object identification task. So it's not like they know nothing about color names. They just do surprisingly poorly.
I remember thinking about the freeze-up problem you mentioned when I had Sally and Newt given an IQ test for admission into a gifted program (yes, I'm punching myself in the face) at about four. At that age, I'd think a kid's performance would be seriously dependent both on accidents of mood, and on rapport/comfort with the tester. The guy we went to was very charming and good with the kids (both of whom made the cut-off for the program, but then tanked on the interview), which you'd expect for a child psychologist, but you have to figure that not every shrink on every day is going to connect with every kid.
20: well, right. Which is why IQ tests (actually psychological tests in general) given a single time are not generally a terribly accurate measure of anything. In experiments where you're trying to find population information you get around this by having a lot of subjects (or testing one subject a lot of times), but when you're talking about giving an aptitude test that is supposed to be meaningful on an individual level it's a large, unsolved problem. With things like SAT or GRE type tests you solve it by allowing score canceling and retests, and I suppose you could have theoretically solved it by taking them to several different child psychologists who used several different IQ tests, but yeah.
(both of whom made the cut-off for the program, but then tanked on the interview)
The old "where do you see yourself in five years?" question is really hard for them.
I probably shouldn't have primed them to say "In your job."
Where do you see yourself in five years?
"Broken blade in hand, surrounded by the steaming corpses of my foes, not far from a scantily-clad princess/dancing-girl and a blood-stained sack of gems. Why?"
We don't allow corpses in our third grade program.
Recruiting for elementary school mathletics is an art, Moby.
Um, actually, Coach Tweety....
30: It's not a bad magazine, in its way, essear. You must have heard of Glenn O'Brien, at least.
I doubt this is an example, but I wish we had a word with which to dismiss those tiny-N studies designed to make the news.
The other problem, of course, is that testing kids in the lab you run the risk that they are scared or confused
Plus they eat all the damn marshmallows.
33L Chum? Chaff? Bumf? Confetti? Beer nuts? Stale mini-pretzels? Loss leaders?
33: I doubt this is an answer, but Andrew Gelman calls the statistical fallacy at the heart of most of them a "Type M [for magnitude] error".
I have no idea to what extent Mara's language development has followed a normal course since she couldn't speak at all until age 2 and only had a few dozen words when she came to us at 3. Right now, while she's speaking well and is easy to understand, she is Tautology Girl all the time ("I don't like it because I don't like it!") and makes no effort at all to make gendered pronouns work, though she's definitely aware of gender. This one I probably push more because we're gay and I don't want people to use it as evidence that she's confused. But it's always "What he doing?" "Is Mama a boy or a girl? "A girl. What SHE have in his hand?" and we're back to confusion already.
I already asked some of this on twitter, but since she's in the Why? stage we get a lot of "Why she a girl?" and I always respond, "Well, probably she was born a girl. Most people who are born girls stay girls." I'm still not sure whether that's sufficient but I'm sure there are worse versions.
"Why" questions are driving me around the bend lately followed closely by "how" questions. My favorite was "How do legs work?"
Yesterday I was carrying Hawaii down the hallway at daycare, and she said "Mommy! I'm bouncing on your penis!"
I said, "I don't have a penis."
She said, "Then I'm bouncing on your GINA!"
I said, "It's called my hip. You're bouncing on my hip."
I'm still not sure whether that's sufficient but I'm sure there are worse versions
It's probably better than "She has two X chromosomes in her DNA".
How do legs work?
I'm not sure I can answer that one to my own satisfaction.
38: aren't you very well placed to explain that they often don't?
40: Something a priori something categories something.
42: these guys have it all worked out.
Actually that's a really fascinating question. I bet I could bore the shit out of a kid answering that one.
How do legs work?
In my experience, by the removal of alcohol.
38: OMG, Lee asked me last night to explain to Mara how parachutes work. I said, "Gravity and friction and if she has any questions herself, she can ask me like four-year-olds do non-stop without adult help." Lee was pretty annoyed with me, but too bad. And then I found a fifth of bourbon, thank goodness.
I'm trying to remember the hilarious "how" Alex asked yesterday, but it's gone.
In my experience, the questions that start after the third time tucking somebody into bed are tactical not informational.
39 So should I or shouldn't I listen to 'Etta James Rocks the House'? (Absolutely awesome early sixties live album, my favorite of hers, but damn does she sound hot on a lot of those songs.)
If only "a fifth of bourbon" replaced "five dollars" more often.
[H]ow parachutes work.
"Let me put it this way: you want to have two."
50. You should certainly listen to it. Up to 11.
I'd be glad to rant about how kids also recognize skin color and white foster/adoptive parents who think they can just wait until the kids are 6 or 7 before discussing it because the kids don't know are fucking idiots and no doing their jobs.
Agreed. My white sister started this with her black daughter very early. Kraabniece is 4 now and talks about the brown-skinned and peach-skinned girls in her ballet class. (She refers to herself as brown-skinned. My sister also uses "black" and "African-American" and they have lots of books which do. It'll be interesting when Kraabniece starts using those and how it fits with identifying herself consciously as part of a subgroup.)
OT: Further to some exchanges downblog (Christ, what a world word), I think I'll delete my 72-hour-old OKC profile. I'd say it's because I don't like to surveil or to be surveilled, but it's probably more because the thought that almost every reasonably attractive woman in a 100-mile-radius felt it necessary to use the words "foodie," "positive" and "life partner" in her profile drives me into a despair the black depth of which would make Spiegel-interview-era Heidegger tell me to cheer the fuck up.
Also, where are all these age-appropriate women going dancing all the time? Don't they know I've suffered many leg, ankle and foot injuries, which creak like the House of Seven Gables?
This says bad things about my character, but I love the chance to drone on endlessly answering that kind of question. Sally and Newt have both gotten into a pre-teen question-asking phase where they ask me to pontificate about stuff (things they've seen in the news they don't understand, or at school, or whatever) and I enjoy it so much. I'm realizing that I really only had kids as a lecture audience.
Flippanter you need to get on the dating site for people who hate people.
Or are you already there?
[ music cue ]
55: It is possible that you are too sensitive for this world.
To paraphrase Mickey Rourke in Barfly, it's not that I hate people, but I seem to feel better when they're not around.
57: We're short on NY area single women these days. Although of course there may be lurkers.
I already asked some of this on twitter, but since she's in the Why? stage we get a lot of "Why she a girl?" and I always respond, "Well, probably she was born a girl. Most people who are born girls stay girls." I'm still not sure whether that's sufficient but I'm sure there are worse versions.
I like that answer.
I wonder what sot of morally compromised and ... ah, oblique at best witch woman would be attracted if one pasted quotes from the Spiegel interview into the OKC profile.
In unrelated news, I wonder if there's a new Strindberg and Helium.
Post two profiles and let the laydeez decide!
55-64: This is so much like having Ogged back and not-really-dating again that I'm actually misting up a little.
BTW, a friend linked her OKC profile so I could tell her which picture I liked best. I open the link and see "oudemia's profile." And I sat there for like 5 minutes wondering how in the hell the site had ganked my name like that (name as in it actually said "oudemia"), before it dawned on me that the site hadn't ganked my name, my friend had!
Will alameida be back this summer? Can she take flip to dances at the Maidstone Club in order to pick up chicks?
I miss the vicarious dating threads too. Please, commenters, pour out your hearts.
What hearts?
I'm working on a replacement profile here:
"Me: Too sensitive for this world; driven to darkest despair by the grotesqueries permeating all the other profiles on this site.
You: Capable of intuiting and avoiding anything that might offend my sensibilities.
Let's meet for... honestly, if you can't guess, this just isn't going to work out."
That's so awesome. Please use it, Flip.
My big stumbling block in setting up a profile is how to realistically describe my body type without recourse to nauseatingly cutesy euphemisms otoh or giving the impression that I'm significantly fatter than I actually am (about 16-18 in UK clothes sizes) oto.
A friend actually suggested that I say I was planning to lose weight which horrified me as a suggestion. Not that I amn't especially if I can get free of back pain but I think it would put off some people, and after it all might not work.
My big stumbling block in setting up a profile is how to realistically describe my body type without recourse to nauseatingly cutesy euphemisms otoh or giving the impression that I'm significantly fatter than I actually am
Bilateral symmetry, tetrapod, bipedal stance.
More seriously though, isn't that what the photo is for?
71: I believe that "A fat young man without a kind word for anyone" is available for your use.
On the OP: Generally precocious Kai showed what seemed like weak color recognition, but I can't say much about it because, once I realized that he just didn't know his colors very well, I dropped it. Colors and shit is what I pay tuition for. I reserve my teaching for shit that no one else will tell him, like how Le Corbusier was a monster. And no fruit with meat.
That's an area where social pressures/weirdness around weight has really made it hard to successfully communicate about your body-type in words -- being euphemistic is so strongly expected that it's hard to say something people will understand. Would the profile include pictures? If you have something full-length, then that should solve the problem.
69: I don't want to seem too enthusiastic.
In the States you could just compare your body type to football positions - cornerbacks short and thin, wide receivers tall and thin, linebackers solidly built, defensive linemen heavy, offensive linemen obese.
Although I suppose that would result in a lot of self-selection among your target audience.
75. I believe that Emir, pseud notwithstanding, is not actually a man.
I reserve my teaching for shit that no one else will tell him, like how Le Corbusier was a monster
Clearly he is not on unfogged.
78: I didn't mean that he was available, I meant that the phrase was available.
As I recall, he dropped a few stone, and changed his tagline accordingly.
81: For years that was the tagline for D^2's blog.
84: To quote JP Stormcrow in a recent thread:
The Valley Of I Too Found The Answer Obvious, But I Wanted To Ask Anyway, To Exploit The Ambiguity That Is, Technically, There, If You Are Being Deliberately Obtuse (Which I Usually Am) 4: WMYBSALB
Yes, he's now a slender middle aged man who's becoming distressingly mellow.
re: 56
Yeah, my Dad was always one for the mini-lectures and/or elaborate lies to children. That was quite fun if you were the sort of curious child I was as he's quite entertaining, and knows a lot of shit. I don't think my sister found it as amusing. He did make us create the solar system in the living room with saucers and fruit, and that sort of stuff.
88: Most accurate summer concert tour post ever.
He did make us create the solar system in the living room with saucers and fruit
So this is all your fault?
89: Did he tell you long, elaborate stories about his days in the Nantucket whaling fleet, which you later discovered were cribbed almost entirely from Moby Dick?
re: 91
Well, global warming I believe to be caused by the use of a 60watt bulb in the small table lamp, rather than a 40watt as the label indicates.
re: 92
Heh. No, although my grandfather used to claim he'd played in, iirc, the Australian Open. I've never quite established if that was true or an old man's bullshit.
93: "Boy! Mein Orrery ist dunkel! Mach schnell mit die halogen!"
Scots have movie-Nazi accents, right?
87: I suspected as much, but I wasn't sure how obscure I was being. You coney.
55: Flip, if you find a site catering to serious downers who definitely don't want hear anything about being positive, dancing, or walking in the fucking rain, please let me know.
re: 95
If Sean Connery is playing them, movie Nazis have Scottish accents.
86: Actually, I'm more open to fruit with meat than I used to be. What I still dislike is sweet, fruity sauces with meat. So roasted apples and root vegetables with ham? Yes! Cherry syrup with a pork chop? No!
A bit of bike touring this fall (~175 miles in 2 days) opened my palate to dried fruit more than it has been. I still don't love it, but I'm more likely to eat it if it's presented.
Me: cranky old man who doesn't wish to be completely alone.
You: not a manic fucking pixie dreamgirl, that's for sure.
not every shrink on every day is going to connect with every kid
I took my IQ testing as a fun game, and tried pretty hard because I was painfully bored in class. My sister knew the answers but didn't feel like being quizzed, so she fooled around. We ended up with a wide spread on our test results. Fortunately, our life outcomes have ended up being very similar.
a pre-teen question-asking phase where they ask me to pontificate about stuff
We had a five hour drive back from our cabin fairly often, and we'd settle into quizzing Dad about something lengthy. Our two favorites were how does a car engine work and describing the downfall of the Nixon administration. Dad had been a radio newsreader during that period, so he could spin out the details. I don't remember them especially now.
how to realistically describe my body type without recourse to nauseatingly cutesy euphemisms
I was generally fairly precise, which I'm sure sounded just like the euphemisms for obese. But I really meant the range I described.
101 would probably get you some action.
101: That's about right. I think I'll try that one. Really.
101: That's about right. I think I'll try that one. Really.
100: Thanks for the tip. I can live with sweet sauces in tiny proportion*; like a mouthful of meat and carbs with a few drops of whatever reduction. It's the big puddles that drive me mad. I don't even put that much syrup on pancakes.
* especially with gamy stuff. In fact, it occurs to me that the practice probably was quite common when most meat (even farmed) tended to be a bit gamy, and so you'd want a strong counterpoint. But with modern, mild meat (esp. pork and chicken), the sweetness just overwhelms. IMO.
104: you could probably swap out the "fucking" just by making "not" all caps.
They don't really go in for sweet sauces that much in Prague. But every menu seems to contain something with some really odd combination of meat with cream and peaches or similar.
Boy! Mein Orrery ist dunkel! Mach schnell mit die halogen!
Definite mouseover.
The story in my family is that for the IQ testing the tester didn't realize I could read upside-down, and since the answers were printed upside-down on the page, I aced the test. Sounds fishy to me, but I suppose it's possible.
I had a Czech roommate whose only culinary creation was a slab of meat with a piece of cheese melted on it. My Jewish roommate could not seem to make him understand why he never wanted any.
110: Did they also tell you that the dog only liked you because they'd tied a pork chop around your neck?
111: Sort of a Perfect Strangers situation?
It is, of course, Flippanter's love for Ed Hardy attire and posing topless next to BMWs that he doesn't own that have doomed his OKC profile.
use the words "foodie," "positive" and "life partner"
I've come to the conclusion that, personally, I have no particular interest in most activities that are generally considered "fun" (generally speaking anything that involves drinking or socializing, though I suppose there are exceptions).
I'm fine with this, but I realize this will be a problem if I ever find myself wanting to make more friends.
Meh.
Flippanter's love for Ed Hardy attire
Ed Hardy makes silk pocket squares?
re: 111
I'm hardly an expert, but a lot of traditional Czech food is the sort of labour intensive central European peasant cooking that I expect a lot of younger people (and especially men) will never have learned how to cook. Some of it is great, though, if you can be arsed making it. I have a couple of trad. Czech cookbooks, and one book of Jewish food (bought in Prague, and translated from Czech) which have some great stuff in them, but I rarely make it.
114: Hey! I have a nice body and like to show it off while rolling hard with my bros and hos! Beefcake! Beefcake! Entourage box set!
113: Ha! I never made the connection before. The whole situation was totally true to stereotype, though. Zany Eastern European meets reserved and partly neurotic Jewish person.
Beefcake! Beefcake! Entourage box set!
This is the football cheer at Flippanter U?
115: I'm fine with this, but I realize this will be a problem if I ever find myself wanting to make more friends.
You enjoy being at home by yourself doing whatever you want, right? An activity you can share with millions of new friends.
If you have something full-length, then that should solve the problem.
"Why yes, this baton is extendable."
55: Actually, I think the timeless slolenr classic would work for Flip. Just replace "Irish" with "Penn State alums".
I'm partly lying in that I have a big demand resistance thing about the whole process and am finding a million reasons why it's too hard. (low-hanging fruit alert! chance would be a fine thing, can't remember what it looks like any more, cobwebs.)
Come to NY and date Flip! I suggest starting out by having dinner at different tables, widely separated, in the same restaurant, preferably each muttering darkly to themselves.
Except for that "same restaurant" part, I think I'm already dating Flip.
Over my lifetime I've discovered that a broadened conception of enjoyment is the critical factor for getting any.
I'm partly lying in that I have a big demand resistance thing about the whole process and am finding a million reasons why it's too hard.
I've found that the hardest part of online dating is overcoming your own resistance to thinking of yourself as the sort of person who does online dating. (This may be changing as it's becoming more common and socially accepted.) There are other hard parts, but that's the biggest one.
Further (sort of) OT:
Dear gym-going fit ladies:
Do not imagine -- perish the thought! -- that I do not appreciate your peach-colored "boy shorts" that are so tight and sheer that I can read the care label when you, ah, do squats beside me.
However, you know, come on. I'm here on business.
However, you know, come on. I'm here on business.
You might reconsider that policy.
I mean, if you're also considering ditching online dating as an option.
Hey! I have a nice body and like to show it off while rolling hard with my bros and hos! Beefcake! Beefcake! Entourage box set!
He has the body of an 18 year old, but nobody knows where he keeps it and he like to show it off.
Risky strategy, that.
A gentleman does not harass or attempt to pick up ladies at the gym. Also thrifty,* clean,** reverent, floss regularly, etc.
* Wait, what?
** Clean /= tidy.
I think Flip is misunderstanding what business he should be attending to.
TCOB, Flip, TCOB.
A gentleman could perhaps converse or make chitchat with ladies at the gym.
A gentleman who had things to say about their shared activity could open a conversation about squatting. Or protein, as an interest in protein is implied by her presence in the lifting section of the gym.
Squatting and protein are, particularly when combined, not the LEAST dirty of topics.
I am haunted by the memory of overhearing some bro trying to pick up a girl at the gym with the deathless line "So, uh, which part of Israel are you from?" because of her accent, which turned out to be Italian. I think I laughed out loud.
I don't think I could open a conversation about squatting with a stranger.
"Hey, how much can you jerk? Well, I'm off to do Fran, want to join?"
There are all sorts of ways to open a conversation about squatting with a stranger.
"Nice depth. Did it take you long to train up to it?"
"Good work holding that arch. Do you find it helps to look up?"
"Nice set. Have you noticed whether squatting helps your box jumps?"
If appropriate:
"You are using the new bar/chalk/rack. You like it?"
This is all without getting into goals, or sets or reps, or recovery which could be asked about if the conversation lags.
Entourage box set!
s/b
Entourage bot sex!
1 and 3 are definitely not appropriate ways to open a conversation with a stranger.
re: Czech/Jewish cuisine: close to my dad's place in the outskirts of Prague (no tourists, an occasional hostel resident maybe, at the development boundary) there's a tavern whose menu includes as a frequent Wednesday special "Jewish pork chop."
There's a loose cluster of flavors associated with "Židovský biftek" and substituting the meat probably seemed like a natural move.
1 and 3 of my examples? I would have no trouble starting a conversation like that. In a genial tone, they're entirely appropriate.
Or, not conversing with the scantily clad squatters at the gym works fine too -- just think of them as doing their best to approach the Greek ideal of exercising naked. Not alluring, but striving for an austere classicism.
In the same vein as 155, perhaps consider the scantily clad squatters in the same way Jack Aubrey considers his own nakedness while swimming.
think of them as doing their best to approach the Greek ideal of exercising naked. Not alluring, but striving for an austere classicism.
mouseover text?
Not alluring, but striving for an austere classicism.
In peach-colored "boy shorts."*
* Why are they called that? I don't know how I know the term. Also, what are "tap pants"? Are they like "hipsters"?
I have no idea why they're called that but I know I love 'em. (TMI?)
The thing with the gym, people are all over the place. There's a range from obsessive regulars who write down how they're doing to people who are there intermittently and don't like it much.
Also, there's no way to squat with creaky knees, is there?
160.2: No. If you have weak knees, use the sit-down toilet.
The shape is supposed to look more like men's stretchy underwear (minus the unnecessary baggy bit in the front) than prior styles of women's underwear (which are cut more narrowly on the sides).
A tap pant is a non-stretchy pair of shorts in a silky material that does not have elastic around the leg openings and sort of hangs away from the body like a skirt.
Although come to think of it, you're talking about boy-shorts as an outer garment, not underpants? I've never heard of that usage.
Or, perhaps, about women doing squats in undergarments.
Much gym wear seems to approximate undergarmentry anyway.
minus the unnecessary baggy bit in the front
Moby? teo? Anybody?
159: Far, far TMI. Back in the crate.
I remember a friend on the volleyball team in college referred to their uniform shorts, that were cut pretty much like boy-short underwear, as bunhuggers. But I've never heard that term from anyone else.
165: I'm afraid she'll find a knife if I argue about it.
I know I love 'em
For yourself or on others . . .
(on preview, 166 might preempt that joke).
157: But 109 already called "definite mouseover". Is there a queue?
What I'm thinking of when I say restaurants in Prague are 'nice' places about a dozen years ago. The menus all seemed to be dominated by a meat, generally game or duck, soaking in a big puddle of pink-purple vaguely fruity syrup. It was utterly disgusting. I'm also not a fan of knedliky.
re. boy shorts - are we talking about those things that are like bike shorts except minus the padding?
Bike shorts have padding? I thought biking did that to your ass and have been avoiding it for that reason.
||
I'm being distracted by a bunch of grad students talking very loudly about Kanye West, his twitter feed, his fashion line, etc. Ah, to be a grad student again, with no cares in the world....
|>
Is there a queue?
I wouldn't know, never having had any of my suggestions adopted.
GIS is your friend
There are too damn many TLAs. I had thought that "GIS" was unambiguous but, apparently not.
Those really were the days, weren't they?
Even more TLAs than I thought.
Though I've generally seen "Ghost in the Shell" abbreviated GitS.
I should note that I can't imagine myself ever striking up a conversation with a stranger at the gym. On the other hand, I have almost as much trouble imagining myself ever going to a gym in the first place.
Well, you should keep Megan's advice in mind if you ever see someone you fancy doing squats at the laundromat.
I totally thought 172 was going to be a link to some sort of interactive map of restaurants in Prague.
Wait, don't click that link: it plays music at you.
182: I wasn't sure... and maybe one small picture would not be NFSW, but the totality of the result was definitely NSFW. Fortunately I'm in a cube next to a well-traveled aisle, so no problemo.
179: I should note that I can't imagine myself ever striking up a conversation with a stranger at the gym
Total lack of imagination.
Teo and the Stranger at the Gym: A Drama in One Act.
TEO: I believe I'm lost. Can you direct me to the laundromat?
STRANGER: Sure, back two blocks on the left.
TEO: Thank you very much.
STRANGER [to Teo's back as he walks away]: Nice buns.
This is probably out of line, in which case, I apologize, but it seems to me that Flip would have to be one of the greatest catches left out there. Employed? Gainfully, thanks. Educated? Well, actually. Witty? After a fashion, certainly. Hygienic? Indubitably! Addicted to anything truly harmful (for the purposes of this discussion, we'll leave unfogged and his Batman underoos aside)? No. Well read? By almost any standard, most definitely yes. Horribly disfigured? Perhaps?
A friend and I have long argued that a man such as the man described above, so long as said man is over the age of 30ish, should have no problem at all finding long-term companionship should he wish to do so. So, Flip, test the theory, won't you?
A friend and I have long argued that a man such as the man described above, so long as said man is over the age of 30ish, should have no problem at all finding long-term companionship should he wish to do so.
Would you like some lemon to go along with the salt you're rubbing in that particular wound of mine?
Well, I should probably add that my friend and I have also agreed that there are, in fact, many reasons why such a man might have a hard time finding companionship. But none of those reasons seem to apply to Flip. Save for one, I suppose: he lives in New York, which, in my experience, is an almost painfully lonely place. Except when it isn't, at which times it's the best.
Are you high?
Also, not presently gainfully employed, technically.
190: you're another bit of outlying data, aren't you? Maybe the theory is flawed, after all. Or maybe it's that you live in another lonely city.
Horribly disfigured? Perhaps?
No, no, I've met him and he's perfectly reasonable in appearance.
I think this may be a situation where 58 is a full explanation. (Also, everything in your post would have applied fairly well to Ogged, who also had quite a dry spell, also explained by an impressive level of finickiness.)
Would you like some lemon to go along with the salt you're rubbing in that particular wound of mine?
Results converge to those predicted by the theory over the long run.
I am, actually, a bit high, yes. Long story. But leaving that aside, I think that Flip and Josh should move to Cleveland or, if that's impossible, Philadelphia. I'm willing to bet that they'd find a special someone in no time at all.
Also, "After a fashion, certainly"?
[Sputtering.]
Not that there's anything wrong with being finicky about this sort of thing. But enough finickiness can make it difficult for anyone.
New York is full of lonely people, according to Lester Bowie, anyway.
58 does seem to be the most likely explanation. I'll just have to revise the paper before submitting it.
"[P]erfectly reasonable"?!?!
Actually, that seems pretty complimentary. Consider those exclamation points retracted.
f that's impossible, Philadelphia.
FUCK.
NO.
(I'm probably prejudiced by my time in college. But virtually everyone I met then from Philly -- and there were a lot of them -- was an asshole.)
he's perfectly reasonable in appearance
You weren't kidding about being insulting when you describe people, were you?
I figured 'devastatingly handsome' would just make you tense.
202: Cleveland it is. I know people who know people.
I would like to note that, yes, I'm aware that there are about sixteen ways in which what I've said is terribly offensive -- not the least of which is victim-blaming -- and that, again, I really do apologize. I shouldn't comment when stoned. For serious.
134: thanks for the perspective, Teo. I think I'm over that part at this stage, it's the whole profile-writing I dread. In the same way that I hate CVs and those CV-like job applications. Back when "personal statements" were all the rage a recruitment agency advised me to put one in but I just couldn't bring myself to do it.
Actually I think neb extended me permission to borrow his Catechism of Cliché method so I should do that. It'll be less novel over here, though.
I shouldn't comment when stoned. For serious.
This is crazy-talk. Fervent, committed substance abuse is about the only thing that can save this blog.
Crap, now I'm feeling guilty. I'm sorry, Flip. And Josh. And anyone else I've offended. Really, I should have kept my mouth shut.
206: victim-blaming
So anyone without a partner is a victim now? Nice.
Fur vent, comet Ted sub stain sub use.
See, Urple's got the idea.
(Although, Urple? I think you're doing just fine sober. Use any mind-altering substances you like; it can only make things better. But you're certainly pulling your weight around here, with or without chemical assistance.)
it's the whole profile-writing I dread
Does not compute. The profile-writing is the part I love: it's talking about myself! In a not-only-sanctioned-but-encouraged manner! What's not to like?
206, 209: Good God, please don't feel that way, Baron[ess] Stella d'Oro. If anything, the victim in this case* deserves more blaming/a thorough ass-kicking.
* neb, of course.
I too hate the profile-writing part.
Josh must love job interviews too. Talking about oneself!
Crap, now I'm feeling guilty. I'm sorry, Flip. And Josh. And anyone else I've offended. Really, I should have kept my mouth shut.
Don't worry, it stings far less coming from you than from a woman who's broken up with me.
No, no, in job interviews you plaster the interviewer with intelligent* questions about the institution/firm/sweatshop/abattoir/knocking-shop/firehouse/branch of Cartier. You are Rommel, the interviewer is France and your tanks are queries like "What is the product of that proposed spin-off? A CDO? In this market?"
* -seeming
218.1: I fail to believe that. I'd believe that you hate writing profiles that are actually calculated to get responses from women, but I fail to believe it as you've stated it.
218.2: I don't, in fact, mind job interviews at all. They can be fun!
Also, try to work the phrase "black swan" into the conversation. It worked pretty well the one time I managed it: laughs, knowing nods, heads shaken about Non-U.S. Politician and his/her crazy threats to expropriate foreign investments. Good times.
Warning: single-use device.
Meeting people would be easier if human beings weren't so utterly despicable.
223: Try leaving the Penn State campus once in a while, Rob.
It is true that I wouldn't mind the process of writing profiles for, say, people who aren't me, or which are clearly not designed ("calculated") to get responses. I could imagine having some fun answering the questions that one is asked, again, entirely in a facetious manner.
That is not, however, generally what one is about, when one is doing such things.
Also, while there is truth of a sort in 189 (but n.b. -- it's sexist!) "Here I am, I'm adequate and you're desperate" isn't exactly the gold standard of come-on lines. Not saying it hasn't worked for me.
And remember that there are women out there who love bacon as much as you do.
227 to 223. 226 actually managed to be moderately depressing. You, I haven't met, so horribly disfigured is still a possibility, but limiting your options to the actually desperate seems unnecessarily grim.
That is not, however, generally what one is about, when one is doing such things.
No?
I have met Halford and can attest that he has no visible deformities when clothed.
227 -- doubtful. However, my heart, shriveled though it is, is capacious enough to extend sentiment towards a woman who only loves bacon roughly 1/3 as much as I do. Yes, fairer sex, I'm adequate!
By the way, I am home-curing a pork belly in the fridge, to make my own bacon. I took a picture of it on the Iphone and have been looking at it lovingly at work.
Report back after a visit to the sauna.
No, seriously, I'm actually in a relationship RIGHT NOW SINGLE BITCHEZ and am very happy about it. But just because I have someone to sleep with doesn't mean I have to give up my misanthropy, right? That's in some relationship book somewhere?
You should tell her that you think of her primarily as "someone to sleep with".
I think if you're in a relationship you do kind of have to quitcher bitching about how hard it is to meet people. I mean, not really, you can bitch about whatever you like, but it's clearly not prohibitively hard.
Perhaps I will institute an experiment of "take relationship advice exclusively from the blog for a week." What we need is a test from which we will emerge stronger and more bonded.
Should one only bitch about things that are prohibitively hard? I bitch about things that are just, like, damned hard, all the time.
But just because I have someone to sleep with doesn't mean I have to give up my misanthropy, right?
A brief and reluctant lapse into sincerity: experience indicates that dames broads chicks ladies women worth bothering with are neither impressed nor gratified nor fulfilled by the company of a grumbling, scowling storm of disdain.
/joke about hating bacon because of hate for xkcd, the Internet and humanity
I think Halford is allowed still to maintain that meeting people would be easier if people weren't (almost) universally despicable, because the real object of complaint there is people's being despicable, and that hasn't changed, even if the practical interest of the particular consequence identified has.
You should tell her that you think of her primarily as "someone to sleep with".
Or more precisely that that is how you describe her to your imaginary internet friends adversaries sparring partners friends.
Your mom is despicable!
Sorry. That was the lingering pain from a recent bout of sincerity talking.
186: The idea of me asking a stranger for directions is even more implausible than the idea of me striking up a flirtatious conversation.
66 the site hadn't ganked my name, my friend had!
OKC-oudemia looks very different from true oudemia.
I'm going with 239. Also, I'm kidding? Not actually that misanthropic in RL.
But, to both project and perhaps be serious, the hardest portion of the man in Flippanter or Josh's or Nosflow's shoes is not the finding of someone but the finding of someone whom one genuinely desires being with. Which, if one's standards are high, is not easy, but is not a problem simply laughed away, either.
Depends what you mean by "women worth bothering with"? (Linked here before, but I love it so.)
What we need is a test from which we will emerge stronger and more bonded.
Outward Bound?
240: While for Halford to do as you suggest would be for him to restate to her precisely what he stated to us, my suggestion was not imprecise, because I had no aim of suggesting that he state to her what he stated to us, but rather, that he state to her something related to, though importantly different from, what he stated to us.
(but n.b. -- it's sexist!)
Um, dude, nice try, but that's not going to get you laid. More seriously, duh. 189 is predicated on the existence of the patriarchy, which is merely one of the aforementioned sixteen things that makes it offensive comment that shouldn't have been posted. Alas.
I could imagine having some fun answering the questions that one is asked, again, entirely in a facetious manner.
This is in fact more or less exactly how I wrote my current OkCupid profile, after I had decided not to delete it but not to actively try to seriously use it to meet people either. I didn't really expect it to get any replies, but it has.
the hardest portion of the man in Flippanter or Josh's or Nosflow's shoes is not the finding of someone but the finding of someone whom one genuinely desires being with.
Not necessarily. See 219.
239: What if Halford's successfully hooked up with the only other non-despicable person in the world?
On the one hand, who do you invite over for steaks? On the other hand , fuck you clown.
250: I do kind of wonder what would happen if I went all-out in writing a profile the way I occasionally write blog posts.
217 to 249. The feelings of a Flippanter, a Josh and/or a Halford can probably sustain a patriarchal noogie now and than.
I too dreaded the self-summary, but it so happens that when manic I have just enough writing ability to turn a cry for help into what appears to be self-deprecation built on self-confidence.
Also, I have pictures of cats.
Oh, right, of course. How about this: "the hardest portion is not the finding of "someone" but the finding of someone whom one genuinely desires being with and who feels the same way in return."
Hitting both of those two points is hard, even for the man of exquisite adequacy.
254: Anyone who responded would clearly be at least in the right ballpark for you.
257 to 251. And VW I am kidding! Don't be so sensitive! Come over here for a bro hug!
250: I know a woman who met a long-term partner with a Match profile she put up in a dyspeptic mood consisting largely of this poem. So, you know, anything could work.
Essentially, I went the facetious route because it was the only way I would ever write the damn thing. And I too intended to change it, but.
... and who feels the same way in return.
This is a category mistake. Human beings do not, however harmonious their relations, feel "the same way" about things, much less about one another. Their feelings may be compatible, congruent or, best of all, I suppose, equally devoted to wearing tight sweaters and telling me how smart and handsome I am catalytic, but I don't think people feel the same way about the same things when it comes to love/romance/related misc.
That read less sexist in my head.
I'm pretty sure that the picture is 94% of a successful profile for women and 84% for men.
Which is why I went with a stock photo of Rutger Hauer. I now have a bunch of illegitimate kids.
263, yeah, sure, but you do need someone who, to a rough approximation, "feels the same way" about touching your dong over the long term.
266: No wonder you get all the ladies, you silver-tongued devil.
I'm telling you, with a picture of Rutger Hauer you can write sentences like 266 and still have crazy sex on the reg.
250: I do kind of wonder what would happen if I went all-out in writing a profile the way I occasionally write blog posts.
Didn't you once do one as an oulipo? Maybe it wasn't the whole profile.
Didn't you once do one as an oulipo? Maybe it wasn't the whole profile.
I posted a lipogram to craigslist once.
Words like "dong" are one of the reasons I marvel that women, blessed gifts from our gracious Lord and sainted fragments of Eve that they are, can stand to be in the same room with us, much less clean our bathrooms touch us with anything less than a Hurt Locker-style explosives-disposal suit in the way.
You wouldn't get many responses, nosfow, but any you did get would be marriageable.
271: it was also a single very long sentence, I now recall.
I posted a lipogram to craigslist once.
Next time try cholesterol and blood glucose levels.
it was also a single very long sentence
Said the complainant, of her marriage to nosflow.
Blogger "wanted to play all these pervy word games in bed," sobbing witness reveals. "I don't even like Scrabble."
||
Does anything complete or adorn a person more than knowledge of ancient Greek? Perhaps not.
|>
I don't understand 272 at all. Are you suggesting that only men use crude and/or goofy terms for genitalia? Or that the silliness of the word "dong" infects the thing-in-itself and makes it untouchable? Or...
Hmmh, I'm not disfigured, hygiene is a question mark (myself or my apartment?) rather misanthropic, gainfully employed by some very generous definition of gainfully. Really not thrilled by the notion of playing the ritualized dating game. And absolutely don't want a serious relationship. Also terrified of writing a profile (the previous two sentences might have something to do with that).
263: The Flippanter is wise beyond his years experience.
277: Breasts? Peach-colored boy shorts? A modest emerald-and-pigeonsblood-ruby tiara?
278: More "that the silliness of the word 'dong' infects the thing-in-itself and makes it untouchable" incredibly annoying.
I am opposed to none of the things Flippanter lists in 282, but none of them has exactly the same quality or elicits exactly the same frisson as knowledge of ancient Greek.
272: it doesn't even have any of the dirty-word charm of "cock" or "dick" or the childish smuttiness of "willy" (for Brits) or "mickey" (for the Irish).
[T]he same frisson as knowledge of ancient Greek.
A good thing, too. You had me worrying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gWMJLUbk10
284: 272: And it confuses the hell out of our Vietnamese community.
I suspect alameida would provide a right straightener to all our nonsense add a bit of substance to this discussion.
When one encounters a woman with as many perfections as alameida, it is difficult to tell which is the crowning perfection.
Mumble ontological something for the something of your mom mumble.
271: I posted a lipogram to craigslist once.
A lipogram, right. My special power intentional writing constraint is to use incorrect but related words, sometimes in nonsensical ways.
OOT: If anyone can recommend any convenient, centrally-located hotels in Nairobi for a colleague, please e-mail me at pseud at-sign gmail dot mumble.
277 is grotesquely Eurocentric, and not even sophisticated Eurocentric, for a working knowledge of Sanskrit or Pali was a greater ornament in the 19th, and the East Asian languages perhaps more so.
Certainly Bloomsbury was impressed by Waley.
OT bleg: Do any of the lawyer types around here know especially a lot about accessibility law? Or know someone who does? Particularly, ideally, with respect to academia, California, or both? I would love an email; I have what I hope is a quick question.
296: Now do D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson!
I'm in need of entertainment friends. My son and a couple of buds are an hour or so overdue coming back from a backcountry ski/snowshoe outing. The dad of one of the guys got a text 40 minutes ago, so I'm not really worried. Just sitting at the trailhead peering into the darkness.
|| It turns out a pound of bacon is not that much food. In a related note, I really should've gone grocery shopping yesterday.
|>
I can't believe I missed Von Wafer commenting high. So awesome!
Anyhow, nosflow, is it seriously a question whether or not you should write an online dating profile in the manner of some of your more... intense posts? If you care at all about this blog, or indeed the world, you'll do it and report back.
300: Two pounds of mussels was a hell of a lot and I think would have been better after heavy drinking, but it let me share my fries with Mara.
And since no one else has chimed in on this, I'd like to vouch for Josh's awesomeness. I don't know enough to do the full Boy Scout rundown, but he seemed smart, funny, kind, handsome, sincere. As far as I know he doesn't have much Greek, but I'm fairly sure nosflow is not his type anyway.
Josh can shoot lasers, too. Not saying from where.
Without naming jurisdictions, subject matter or other identifying details, this president can report that a judicial decision reported in today's NYT regarding a matter of some longstanding controversy -- a controversy only heightened by certain foreign seismic events last year -- has, apparently, resulted in a H/omeland S/ecurity vehicle being parked outside a house down the road from the home of this president's less intolerable parent and another outside the office in town of the owner of said house.
That's some damn fine tradecraft, self.
my eyes hurt so I'm closing the computer but first skipping to the end to object to the dutch cookie's calumnious mis-representation of fippanter's wittiness. "After a fashion, certainly"? have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? flip is very witty and I demand you retract your half-hearted endorsement.
299: will you please reassure us that they've returned? [/Jew]
I bet 304 is referring to "Amish Man Held in Beard Attacks Seeks Bail Deal."
304: I don't get it. What does the Supreme Court have to do with the Japanese earthquake?
Or is seismic not meant literally?
Nah, just like a gallon of cough medicine. I do, though, have a bunch of reefer in my closet. A colleague gave it to me, thinking I might want it. But I can't find a block of time that's open enough that getting high -- for the first time since graduate school -- on Mary Jane seems like a good idea. Especially because the kids tell me this newfangled grass is stronger than what I used to smoke back in the olden days.
Can you tell that having some pot around is making me feel old?
Whee, cough medicine. I have a nasty cough this week.
How can you not find time to get super hungry and then fall asleep? It takes like 20 minutes. Or maybe that's just me.
The wacky tabacky doesn't make me sleepy. Or at least it didn't back in the day. Maybe it would now? If that's the case, if it'll cure my insomnia, I'm going to a head shop right now to buy a huge bong.
No, Halford, I said bong.
302.2: Aw, thanks! I'm touched.
See what you're missing, VW?
Catching up on the thread....
I'm pretty sure that the picture is 94% of a successful profile for women and 84% for men.
For the benefit of the lurkers, I feel the need to state that that was not, in fact, true in my case, as there was no photo. Shy Private people take heart!
Witt started things by showing off her etchings.
263...actually turned out kinda sexist once it got out of your head and onto the thread but never mind. we'll just roll with it.
296: I also know sanskrit, but I think you're being indo-european-centric and that knowing mandarin and being good at calligraphy would really be the crowning glory. and that's why my children are suffering the tortures of the damned learning mandarin right now. girl y's complaint: "mandarin is easy to talk but too hard to write. there are too many characters!" kind of hard to respond to that one.
I am honestly grateful I've never had to try the horror of online dating. it sounds dreadful.
I always practiced the unethical dating strategy of cheating on boyfriend 1 with potential boyfriend 2 (or 3, some people aren't fun to have sex with and it's important to find that out) so the instant I broke up with bf 1 I started going out with (and usually moved in with) second-string bf. there was lots of drama and angst. I feel rather badly about this now but there doesn't seem to much point in calling people to apologize.
and I don't feel much need to in the case of my longest-term bf who, while lording it over me all the time that I had cheated on him (since I got caught) was nonetheless cheating on me with some new girl literally every single time he left the country (not exaggerating). I knew this very early in our relationship when chicks called and started yelling at me in russian, but he convinced me he had changed. and then so much with the lording it over and the earning back his trust and so forth, while he's fucking chicks from the entire balkan sprachbund. christ.
thus I have never been boyfriend free since I started having sex...um...involving enthusiastic consent. and so have also never really been on a "date," except in middle school. (truthfully I felt I had a boyfriend in middle school, in the person of my photography teacher, but since that's unpleasant and sad, let's not think about it.) I can't say it has ever seemed like I was missing out on anything. no, I guess I missed out on having lots of random hookups with hot guys I met in bars. I would recommend this to flippanter were it not the case that he would find it the single most loathsome dating strategy of all time. it does seem the sort of thing one should try in one's life, much like LSD.
I knew this very early in our relationship when chicks called and started yelling at me in russian
I hope you yelled back in Sanskrit. That would have given them something to think about.
To be fair, women who speak Russian and other Slavic languages do a lot of yelling.
Well, women do a lot of yelling.
At me.
I always practiced the unethical dating strategy of cheating on boyfriend 1 with potential boyfriend 2 (or 3, some people aren't fun to have sex with and it's important to find that out) so the instant I broke up with bf 1 I started going out with (and usually moved in with) second-string bf. there was lots of drama and angst. I feel rather badly about this now but there doesn't seem to much point in calling people to apologize.
Never apologize. If anyone questions you, shout at them "I think the destructive vicious negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office. I'm appalled you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that."
325: Or the pithier "Who are you going to believe: me or your lying eyes?"
324: I realize you haven't actually asked for dating advice, but have you considered exploring the potential of a nice monastery somewhere devoted to outdoor sports as a means of attaining oneness with the All? Something along those lines must exist. Or you could found one.
327: One already lives too much like a monk. (A monk who eats Trader Joe's Brown Sugar & Maple Syrup Frosted Shredded Wheat out of the box for dinner, but still.)
I think the rules of Benedict stipulate monks get to pick their own cereal.
What did Francis say? I suspect Lady Poverty wasn't as beneficent w/r/t cereals as Trader Joe.
326: Flip, when you become a orphan I'll adopt you.