Both you and the overweight people you know would be better off if, instead of being just as not-nice to them and suffering your conscience, you were actually nicer to them.
No, I'm pretty sure it's your defective sense of humor.
As I've said in comments somewhere, I spent two years in Samoa being freakishly ugly. You're right, it is interesting.
I'm starting a bold new era of personal responsibility.
Samoans over twenty-five are often fat. Under that age, Samoan men are almost cartoonishly beautiful (in a broad-shouldered rippling with cut muscle superhero kind of way), and Samoan women are sturdy and muscular, often quite attractive if curvier and more heavily built than Americans find appealing.
Samoans (at least those living in Samoa) generally find skinny, freckly white chicks somewhere between risible and revolting. Back here in the States I do okay for myself, but really ugly is an interesting place to spend a couple of years.
"I did okay for myself," surely.
I'm reminded of a friend, a straight-laced Nebraska girl, who was contemplating posing nude for an art class, and, being a phenomenologist, she was talking about the very different experience of her body that it would be. These experiences are more available than we generally think; being ugly sound like a really interesting one. (Also, in the States, people think I'm "fit," in Iran, they think I must be ill--even when you laugh things like that off, it makes a difference to how you feel, enter a room, see others seeing you, etc.)
Straight-laced Nebraskan phenomenologists are hot, but you have one too many subjects in your first sentence there.
I bet it was just another joke I'm not getting, though.
I was speaking in terms of getting checked out, dude -- what were you thinking? The actually dating people successfully thing never did go all that well until I got fixed up with Mr. Breath. Seething misanthropy will do terrible things to your relationship potential.
LB:
Is that my seething misanthropy or your prior seething misanthropy?
Is there anyone here who doesn't seethe with misanthropy?
(It was down at the sock hop that misanthropy & I last seethed, all night long.)
Is there anyone here who doesn't seethe with misanthropy?
Is this serious? I kinda like people, though I don't like to be around them.
Tim, it's her seething misanthropy.
I was talking about my current and lifelong seething misanthropy -- I overcome it for a select few, but I'm not all that fond of people in general.
I wish I loved the human race,
I wish I loved its silly face,
I wish I liked the way it walks
I wish I liked the way it talks,
And when I'm introduced to one
I wish I thought "What jolly fun"!
My misanthropy is more despondent or contemptuous than seething.
Should I really continue in my assigned role of second-strike nitpicker? I suppose I must.
Ben, you pick on a perfectly grammatical* sentence while ignoring "straight-laced" (admittedly an eggcorn)? For shame.
*Form of sentence: Sentence1 + 'and' + Sentence2.
Subject of Sentence1: 'I'.
Subject of Sentence2: 'she'.
Probably getting too much direct sunlight.
Is this serious? I kinda like people, though I don't like to be around them.
Conflicted, again.
Shit, you're right, Matt; I meant to check before I posted that, and forgot.
Tim, not conflicted, just complicated.
Ogged contains multitudes.
At The Mineshaft.
I thought "straight" was a mistake for "strait", but couldn't be bothered to check. Too bad since I'm very fond of the word "strait" and, when bemoaning my lack of acquaintanceship, like saying that I move in straitened circles.
I'm reminded of a friend, a straight-laced Nebraska girl, who was contemplating posing nude for an art class, and, being a phenomenologist, she was talking about the very different experience of her body that it would be.
Subject of "I'm reminded of a friend, a straight-laced Nebraska girl": I
Subject of the rest: who (was contemplating and was talking)
"I saw a guy who was eating and he was farting", that's not odd? I find that odd.
It's awkward, but not incorrect, I think. Should have been something like "...being a phenomenologist, considering the very different...."
WTF is supposed to be odd or awkward about "I saw a guy who was eating, and he was farting"? (Which is the analogous construction, since Ogged included the comma before 'and'.) Anaphora across clauses is just ducky. You can have anaphora across sentences--nay, even to another speaker's utterance!
Ogged, I like the original sentence a lot better than the proposed revision. In the revision 'considering' is too far away from its subject. The problem with the original was that it had too many commas--though that was kind of cute--but that's the fault of the appositive clause more than anything, I think. Also maybe the proliferation of 'ing's.
The problem is, I don't know. I give up.
It is true that the "being a phenomenologist" phrase threw me. I say this not to defend myself, for my act was indefensible, but to defent myself.
I'm with Weiner. The only thing wrong with the original is an oversupply of commas, and that's style, not grammar.
I apologize for the commas. This conversational tone has its pitfalls, and unconsciously indicating spoken pauses is one.
The problem is, I don't know. I give up.
"And where were you on that miraculous day, Daddy?"
"Sitting in front of a computer, feeling a bit guilty about what I should really be doing, and listening to the Smiths."
Wow.
I'm with Weiner
This should be a t-shirt.
I'm late to the party, but does this suggest that blogging is for stupid people?
clicking links and posting to the blog are about the right speed
does this suggest that blogging is for stupid people?
No, it really is about speed. If it takes me a lot longer to write a post, or if I miss a chance to respond to a comment, that's all invisible. (And, oddly, although staring at the screen is one of the things that really screws up my eyes--improved vision notwithstanding--it's not so bad when I'm actually doing it; just when I try to look at something else subsequently.)
blinking or closing your eyes periodically, and looking away every now and then, is supposed to help with that, ogged. Your eyes dry out more easily when you're looking at a monitor, or something.
I can't decide what "the opposite of what I think I am" is. I used to be one way, thought I managed to change, and now seem to be reverting to the first way again. But the middle period was sufficiently long that I had come to look on it as the real me.
And I've been slightly depressed about the boa/loveless marriage issue all day.
Yeah, I do that stuff, but there really is just something wrong with my eyes. Interior oblique amblyopia, or some such, the doctor called it.
Well, ac, if you've done both, you've already done both.
And I've been slightly depressed about the boa/loveless marriage issue all day.
You and me both. SomeCallMeTim is, like, the heir of Ibsen or something.
I suspect that whatever system I'm in is not binary.
Ogged, every comma in that sentence was grammatically necessary, I think. And I feel bad for making you apologize about style. It's a comment! I see my role as responding to grammatical aggression with overwhelming force, kinda like the U.S. avenging Saddam's gassing of whatever village that was a few years after the fact.
Yeah, you need all those commas. I still think it would read better without that "she", though.
You could lose the one after "and", couldn't you? But I'm certainly not going to bust anyone's chops for typos or over-comma-ing after the way I've been typing all day.
I think the one after 'and' is necessary to set off the appositive "being a phenomenologist," but I could be wrong.
But without the she, wouldn't it no longer be clear who - "I" or "she" - the phenomenologist was?
No, we can presuppose that Ogged has never had any experience of her body whatsoever.
Looking it over again, I see that "being a phenomenologist" goes with the "who" which goes with the "girl" which goes with the "friend" and not the "I" so it has to be "she" who is the phenomenologist.
But your answer is much funnier.
Nice, Weiner. Although I did blame you for what's happened to this thread. We started with a perfectly good post that must have taken our man a day and a night to write. It had such lovely departure points as "Ogged is stupid," "Ogged is blind," "Ogged, let us commiserate" and even deep questions about the nature of identity. And it turned into a grammar circle jerk. I'd blame you, but I think, "we can presuppose that Ogged has never had any experience of her body whatsoever" was worth a 25 comment setup.
"we can presuppose that Ogged has never had any experience of her body whatsoever" was worth a 25 comment setup.
I wholeheartedly concur. That was a Swiss fuckin watch, wasn't it Joe D?
Cripes... that should say "wasn't it, Joe D?"