Stephen A. Meigs seems like he has severe Asperger's syndrome. I don't think he's a scary pedophile; many of the great philosophers were probably people like him.
He's just theorizing about why it is that some people have sex, while other people don't. He has a quite interesting way of hypothesizing why it is that those emotional and irrational humans behave the way they do.
Also, if I ever get a poem published in an anthology, I'll borrow his introduction: "Like a good poem generally should, it deals with the idealistic case, assuming laws are reasonable, etc."
I don't think you can properly diagnose him without reading his entire treatise on morality, Ned.
I read the first sentence of this stuff and I just can't stand to keep going.
You've read his stuff about sperm and age of consent and whatnot and you think it's "quite interesting" in a significant sense?
Not a significant sense. But he does follow certain ideas to their logical conclusions instead of getting muddled in what he thinks will actually convince people that he's right.
I think Ned's point is that it's "quite interesting" in a non-significant sense.
Crap, pwned. I need to go do something else for a while.
Actually, I based #5 on the excerpts from his book. His blog appears to be random nonsense on the level of "Time Cube", only with concepts like "intraejaculate sperm selection" and "female lust chemicals" in the place of "educated singularity stupid" and "four corner stage life".
I think we have a new candidate for the John Derbyshire "Should stick to writing things that have been edited, even if only by himself" category.
From October 2004:
"Here it is shortly before the election, and my choices disappoint me. I can take the party arguing that unselfishness is stupid (the Republicans) or I can choose the party arguing that stupidity is unselfish (the Democrats). I sit back and observe that the end result of the campaign will be to further encourage people to view stupidity and unselfishness as indiscriminately the same."
That's pretty interesting, I think.
Of course, his next post was this.
One more post: How the heck did you find this guy? None of his blog posts have even 1 comment on them. Not even any spam comments. Not even a trackback from Christopher Hitchens, his favorite journalist.
Sex is dirty! And yet I want to have sex! Those dirty whores, tempting me!
Maybe if I fuck a twelve-year old, she'll be innocent and not make me feel guilty.
I don't think he'll actually fuck a twelve-year-old unless he's absolutely sure her parents are okay with it. And not just him paying them for it...he needs their moral approval. He doesn't want to be sneaky or deceptive ("a bad male").
He is really really creepy, but I don't think he's dangerous. I wonder what people who were in college with him thought. (UNC-CH for Math, class of 1987. Spent 7 years at UM-Ann Arbor for doctoral math after that.)
You don't think someone like that is capable of rationalizing some theory that the parents approve, since after all, they let their kid talk to him or something?
"On the whole, I liked Michigan better than North Carolina, though--probably from lingering effects of slavery, southerners tend to be a little less civilized than Yankees."
14: Don't try to imply that Meigs is John Emerson. I found a passage that makes him sound more like bitchphd:
"Fast candor is good in that it enables a female to know a male’s intentions before she has wasted much time upon him, just as it is good to scare girls sooner than later when there is not choice. "
One more post: How the heck did you find this guy?
He commented on Megan's post that ogged mentioned in the Remedy thread.
Honestly, though...I really do like his poetry. It's unpredictable. It's very difficult to write a poem that's unpredictable. It's almost impossible if you're not insane in some way. I've found very few poets who are unpredictable enough for my taste.
16: Oh, I thought maybe he had sent his book to an academic press you know of, or something.
That blog is one of the saddest and loneliest things I've ever read.
19- But is it sadder than that S den Be/ste thing about real women/female persons?
His was the comment that prompted her "this blog is pro-sodomy" response, right?
15 is gross, and I reject it and all its works.
That blog is one of the saddest and loneliest things I've ever read.
I forgot to mention that, but yes.
I know a guy with Asperger's syndrome, he's an adjunct astronomy professor, and he's always saying things like "I haven't had a girlfriend for 20 years, and I don't want another one unless she is (list of twenty-five quite specific attributes). Any other woman would be too unpredictable."
Because he's really smart, the underlying message is not "God damnit, why aren't women the way I want them to be. My only option is rape or prostitution" but "I am aware that there is zero chance I will ever get married for love, but I do have fantasies". This Meigs guy is definitely less reasonable.
I think the Monday guy has Asperger's. Mild though. I brought it up to him. He said many other people have suggested it.
ben, you have darkened my view of humanity.
Honestly, though...I really do like his poetry.
there's no accounting for taste.
Hey, has it been noted yet that Mr. Meigs is 'Postropher's state-mate?
someone I went out with twice. I referred to him in the "remedy" thread, and in the Ask the Mineshaft post about agreeing to see people when you weren't sure you were seriously interested.
Gary says I might be Aspergerish, and I couldn't write a poem like that. That was astonishing stuff, not even interesting word-salad. But I can't hang, I am busy watching Sharpe and searching for the post of funny metaphors and similes I read yesterday. The only one I remember:
"When I see you, I hear bells as if a garbage truck were driving by." Now that's poetry.
According to this most dubious test, I most likely have Asperger's. I scored 32. And I know I definitely couldn't write a poem like that. And even if I could, I would know well enough not to post it in a public place.
The Aspergersy Monday guy sent me a poem he wrote. It wasn't fabulous, but it wasn't embarrassing either.
Hey, Simon Baron-Cohen. That's Ali G's cousin.
Oh, I don't doubt that he's mentally ill in some other way. But it seems like when he really puts his thoughts together and edits his work, as in his "book", what he comes up with reminds me of the Asperger's way of thinking in its extremely curious and objective, yet uncomprehending, views of other humans.
I scored a 37 and will probably remember that you scored a 32.
T's 35: And weirdly, the very subject of w-lfs-n's entry has a post on Sasha Cohen and I was totally confused because I was expecting it to be about Borat and it ended up being about a figure skater.
You don't think someone like that is capable of rationalizing some theory that the parents approve, since after all, they let their kid talk to him or something?
YES.
I have two daughters. And you people wonder why I own guns.
Sorry, that T was me. I got a 13. Although if I enjoy the company of others so much, why am I taking internet quizzes on a Friday night, hmmm?
Sorry, that T was me. I got a 13. Although if I enjoy the company of others so much, why am I taking internet quizzes on a Friday night, hmmm?
It's Saturday night, Tia. You totally don't have Asperger's.
Simon Baron-Cohen
Simon Cohen
Sacha Baron Cohen
Sasha Cohen
Cohen Simon-Sasha
I was thinking...that if someone went over to Meigs' blog and told him he was being discussed here...he would leave lots of comments here.
Wouldn't it be interesting to see what that would be like? You can always ban him, after all.
If you choose to do that, delete this comment, I guess.
I dunno. To my mind anyone who spends this much time justifying why seducing a young girl would be a praiseworthy act probably imagines himself performing the seduction, and so whether he's mentally ill or just a creep, I'm not too inclined to think his motives are just academic.
I got bored with the Asperger's test halfway through.
I got 11, but only because I like pretending. Meigs seems to have a fairly rich fantasy life, by the way. doesn't that tend to disqualify him for Asperger's?
From what I understand of Asperger's, yes. On the other hand, 'Asperger's' seems to suffer the same kind of colloquial usage as 'depressed' and 'eating disorder', where 'geeky & shy around girls' is enough to say colloquially that someone has Asperger's.
Asperger's, Asperger's, Asperger's. The ADHD of the MENSA set. (And borderline pedos, it seems.) I expect to see it as a defense in criminal cases soon, if it hasn't happened already. Even worse are the people who say they have "mild" Asperger's. Shorthand for "I'm socially incompetent but enough of an ass to see it as your problem."
I scored a 37 but I don't have any form of Asperger's nor am I socially incompetent. While I'm not a fan of social events, I'm very easy going and can get along with anybody. So, I doubt the validity of the test.
Score: 10. I'm like the anti-autistic, or something.
Asperger's was brought up as a partial defense in the trial of Billy Cottrell, the Caltech physics grad student who helped torch lots of Hummers.
It didn't work; he's in the federal pen.
The undergrads who roped him into it (or were his accomplices) are still on the lam.
for the record, my date was neither geeky nor (obviously) shy around girls. He does seem to have a lot of trouble understanding implicit communication, human motivation, and why people get offended by shit he says. he has a very "rational" way of approaching things, and he's annoyed by the fact that other people aren't that way, although he's aware he has to accept it.
I got a 23 on the test. My mom recently learned about Asperger's and has been wondering if I have it ever since. Obviously, I don't.
52: Mr. Monday sounds like he might be the real thing.
For a second there I thought "the real thing" = "a keeper".
I got a 24, but I was annoyed that there was no intermediate choice.
otoh, he was an empathetic lover. is that a counterindicator?
The ability to get a woman over the age of 16 into bed without resort to drugs is a counterindicator, Tia
I got a 24. Earlier in my life I probably would have scored higher, and a few of the questions made me pause because I wasn't sure what the answer would be now. Maybe an intermediate option would have been good for dealing with that.
And I remember some article I read on Asperger's - maybe the only article I've read on Asperger's - quoting a number of people with multiple divorces. So unless none of those marriages were consummated, all of you using "ability to get laid" as a counterindicator may want to rethink your criteria.
I think the fact that I want to send poor old Billy Cottrell a cake is a counterindicator.
Appropriate sex is much, much funner for girls if they aren’t scared while having it
That takes the cake.
Hey, didn't Kaczynski do his doctoral work at Ann Arbor, too?
68: I believe so. As well as an undergrad at Harvard and a post-doc at Berkeley.
Wikipedia notes that Kaczynski has recently written a letter to the NYRB.
I suppose he has a lot of free time.
Kaczynski's letter to the editor is more coherent than Stephen A. Meigs's writing. Makes you wonder if Meigs is really so safe and harmless.
Kaczynski was always pretty coherent. He's a smart dude.
The ability to get a woman over the age of 16 into bed without resort to drugs is a counterindicator, Tia
Are girls under the age of 16 easier to get into bed?
Probably, since they're smaller and all.
Why isn't Stephen Meigs's name being go/ogl/epr/o/ofe/d? When he finds this thread he's gonna be all sad.
I knew that he had been smart, but I guess I'd always assumed that his schizophrenia had made him incoherent. At least on the level of Meigs.
But looking at his manifesto it looks like he was always more coherent than Meigs.
78 to 74
77: To say nothing of T/e/d Kac/zyn/ski.
Probably, since they're smaller and all.
Hunh. You must be pretty easy then, eh, w-lfs-n?
Hunh. You must be pretty easy then, eh, w-lfs-n?
If you wanted to try your luck, I bet you wouldn't have much trouble.
It would be awesome if Ted Kaczynski showed up and left a comment.
20. That's surprisingly low, given my self-image.
It would be awesome if Ted Kaczynski showed up and left a comment.
Word.
Holy shit, that latest blog entry. An excerpt. And uh, someone put a comment with a link to unfogged on that entry.
"Though obviously the girl’s opinion of me matters most, I like the idea (at least in a world with reasonable laws) of not having sex with a girl until her mother is so comfortable with it she can just nonchalantly walk right into the room her daughter and I are having sex in, and as she refills our water glasses or drops off a snack by our bed, feel really good about her decision as she looks at the clean benevolence of me while I am having sex with her daughter."
I got an 8 on the dubious test. Should I worry about ADHD, is there a test for that, what's happening in the room next door?
I wonder, though, about writers and this test. Fiction, it seems, takes a lot of concentration, solitude and long chunks of undisturbed time. On the other hand, it also takes the imagination to come up with characters, observation to make them seem plausible and something else to drive the plot. So they'd score high on some parts of the test but not on the others, while leading lives that to outsiders might appear fairly Aspergery. Is there a different, characteristic syndrome for fiction writers? (Apart from alcoholism, of course.)
Everybody's quoting that line about the voyeur mother, but I am finding this sentence from the next paragraph far freakier/more deserving of censure: "When at the dinner table, for instance, [the father] should look at [the daughter] before and during the relationship, and reassure/protect her according to the extent she looks like she possess/lacks the same snow-like innocence of untouched youth."
(And the structure of that sentence is a little confusing -- the slashes are not a parallel construction. Meigs is not saying, "He should reassure her if she possesses snow-like innocence and protect her if she lacks it", anyway i don't think so -- my reading is, "He should reassure her and protect her if she possesses snow-like innocence and do neither if she lacks it." Not that I think the first reading would be defensible, just nonsensical. Meigs appears to believe that fathers should gradually estrange themselves from their daughters as they mature, eventually having no interaction with them at all. Well anyway, there's 10 minutes of my life I will never have back.)
I was going to say that I didn't really think ability to get laid was a counterindicator for Asperger's. I don't know that much about it, but I think you can learn social skills in a kind of procedural, methodical way, and I think he'd done something like that, and was interested in doing it further. It was, for the record, kind of sweet the way, by the second morning, he sat around patiently listening to my lectures on the connotation, implication, and context of human utterance. He wasn't an asshole, exactly.
Wasn't Meigs the guy next to Hannibal Lecter who gave Clarice Starling that lovely token of his esteem in the Baltimore mental hospital?
I got a 21. I only appear Aspergerish because I get very anxious in social situations, which is an entirely different disorder (although also a well publicized one.) However, I probably don't have social anxiety disorder, because really, everything makes me anxious.
One of the indicators for autism and Asperger's is an inability to engage in pretend play or imagine what it's like to be someone else. Hence all the questions about enjoying fiction; high functioning autistics may be capable of reading the words but they'll have a hard time grasping the subtext, enjoying it, or seeing the point. Social skills can be learned methodically, but it shows when the person doesn't understand metaphor at all.
Temple Grandin, who is autistic and studies animals (PhD in something or other biology), has said that understanding human interaction is very difficult because she misses all the subconsious cues that everyone else picks up. She said that she could get by in everyday life, but that sex was impossible because there were too many emotional cues.
One of my friends used to work with autistic and Asperger's kids, and they needed a lot of therapy just to hope that they would be able to hold down a job and live on their own. I'm kind of with goneril on this; while Asperger's is a real condition, I'm not sure the Wired/Silicon Valley set, when they say they have mild Asperger's, mean much more than 'I've heard they tend to be savants, and that would be cool, and I'm bad with social skills.'
But says the incontrovertible font of wisdom and truth, Wikipedia:
It is worth noting that because it is classified as a spectrum disorder, some people with Asperger syndrome are nearly normal in their ability to read and use facial expressions and other subtle forms of communication. However, this ability does not come naturally to most people with Asperger syndrome. Such people must learn social skills intellectually, possibly delaying social development until later in life.
and
Asperger Syndrome is often camouflaged, and many people with the disorder often blend in with those that do not have Asperger syndrome. The effects of Asperger syndrome also depends on the individual as some deal with the characteristics differently than others with Asperger syndrome.
Also
Traditionally, Kannerian autism is characterized by significant cognitive and communicative deficiencies, including delays in or lack of language. Often it is clear that these people do not function normally. On the other hand, a person with Asperger's will not show delays in language. It is a more subtle condition, and affected people often appear only to be eccentric.
I guess it just depends on what comes of giving it a label and calling it a disorder, y'know? More treatment to help the person gain social skills, or alternately, learning to be comfortable with what you have? Okay. Ability to get out of any serious social faux pas with, "Well, I'm on the Asperger's spectrum?" Not so cool.
Eventually, "being an asshole" will itself become a medical condition, which would be a good thing if there were only a treatment for it.
I don't think anyone should be able to get out of anything, but I also think that if AS is structuring someone's behavior, the label might help their intimates to figure out what's going on, and to know how react constructively to things they don't like. But I don't think you can self-diagnose it, either, so if tech geeks are really walking around saying they have AS w/o going to a doctor, they're [insert word in that funny language with the numbers for letters for "losers"].
It's in the Wiki article, too:
A Wired magazine article called The Geek Syndrome[19] suggested that Asperger syndrome is more common in the Silicon Valley, a haven for computer scientists and mathematicians. It created an enduring notion popularized in the media and self-help books that "Geek Syndrome" equals Asperger syndrome and caused an explosion of self-diagnoses in part because it was printed alongside Simon Baron-Cohen's 50-question Autism Spectrum Quotient Test[20]. Like some people with Asperger syndrome, "geeks" may exhibit an extreme professional or casual interest in computers, science, engineering, and related fields and may be introverted or prioritize work over other aspects of life. However, no determination has yet been made of whether the "Geek Syndrome" personality type has a direct relation to autism or is simply a "variant normal" type that is not part of the autistic spectrum.
"being an asshole" will itself become a medical condition
And you'll trade in your psychiatrist for a proctologist.
98 makes me laugh, as Dr. Helpy-Chalk's allzuseltene contributions over here regularly do.
I actually meant 98 semi seriously. I think this is where psychology is heading, which is something I think about a lot as an ethicist.
The real threat to the folk conception of morality will come when "lazy" becomes a medical condition.
Since I linked to it, I want to stress that that test is so obviously not an indicator of anything. Most of the questions are different formulations of "are you an introvert or an extrovert"? And it says that 80% of Aspergersites scored over 32; but no doubt 95% of them scored more than 5. So does that mean that people scoring 6 are likely to have it?
I have a high-functioning autistic brother and can certainly accept that Asperger's doesn't just mean "asshole who isn't good at social situations," though the label conveniently gives those people an excuse.
104: I think about this a lot, too.
I once described to a friend how, if I had some bureaucratic errand to run, or in general, something to do that wasn't part of my routine, it would take me the first part of the day to psych myself up to do it, and then after I had done it, it would take me the rest of the day to wind down from it.
He said, "Kudos, that's a good phenomenological description of a lazy person."
Aww, kitty. I love kittens more than anything.
Taking the Aspberger test, again:Yes, I am frequently fascinated by dates. there is almost a crystalline sugar quality to the dried ones. Figs simply freak me out. Never ever mention pomegranates.
37
Actually, the most promising way to medicalize assholery is not through autism spectrum disorders, but sociopathy spectrum disorders. Robert Hare is a psychologist who developed a test used to diagnose sociopaths for police departments. He is now attempting to popularize the idea that low-level sociopaths tend to cluster in certain professions, like the stock market. If you heard chatter about workplace sociopaths, it is derivitive of his work.
Unsurprisingly, there are popular "Is my boss a sociopath" quizes out there. Fast company did one. But there are not "Am I a sociopath?" quizes, to my knowledge.
I had some bureaucratic errand to run, or in general, something to do that wasn't part of my routine, it would take me the first part of the day to psych myself up to do it, and then after I had done it, it would take me the rest of the day to wind down from it.
I had some period where I was like this, but it was because nothing else about my life was very demanding at the time. When your job is hard or you have five kids or something like that, you have to do lots of stuff you don't particularly want to do anyway, so doing one more annoying thing is that much easier.
108: That's a good observation. I know a self-described sociopath, and he's a rare record dealer. Which is like the stock market in that it involves speculation, buying and selling. I've often told him that when he gets out of that biz, he would probably do well in the stock market.
I bet a lot of assholery is just excess aggression. Sociopathy would do it, but isn't necessary if there's aggression. Or is it the case that a quite aggressive and yet very empathetic person would simply appear as very assertive, but not really assholish?
One of the indicators for autism and Asperger's is an inability to engage in pretend play or imagine what it's like to be someone else. Hence all the questions about enjoying fiction
When I was a kid, I could never play with robots or action figures or whatever like my friends could. But I read more fiction than most or all of them. Then again, all the way through high school my favorite subject was math.
111: "Asshole," like a lot of folk psychological categories probably covers many distinct disorders. The category "asshole" might best be divided into "stone cold psycho," "macho douche bag" and "pestering dweeb.”
Now that I think about it, "heartless prick" might be a better name for assholes with *low level* sociopathy spectrum disorders than "stone cold psycho"
I should also add "self-absorbed bastard" to my provisional typology of assholes, as a category that encompases but extends past heartless pricks.
Don't forget "smirking dickweed."
And 'fatuous prat'? Or is that getting too far from prototypical assholery?
Fatuous prat is a little too far.
I think being an asshole implies some sort of arrogance, so I wouldn't include "pestering dweeb" in the assholery spectrum. That would more likely be a subcategory of cluelessness, which is a different disorder.
I think Ned is right -- we need to get clear about our concepts. Assholishness does seem to require arrogance.
Asshole Admits to Being Asshole in Supreme Asshole Move"
119, 120: I agree. I initially included Pestering Dweeb in the asshole typology because some people were including self identified Asburger's types as assholes.
122: A self-identified Assburger would probably be suffering from some sort of self-loathing.
In all seriousness, what difference does it make if asshole (or whatever) becomes a diagnosable "condition"? Either way, the onus is on the person who is autistic/assholish/whatever to learn the social skills or compensatory mechanisms that will make it possible to get along with others. And either way, the others who care for the autistic/assholish person have to learn how to shrug off certain behaviors, retain firm boundaries over others, and decide what is and isn't acceptable.
I'm oversimplifying a bit, but Rob's comment about the morality of the distinction got me thinking. It seems the primary thing that's achieved by shifting X behavior into the category of "syndrome" is that it implicitly removes the judgmental aspect. And then I thought, what good does judgment do, really? Why would we want to retain it? I mean, isn't a lot of assholish or self-destructive behavior in part a preemptive reaction to presumed judgment by others?
Maybe I need more coffee.
B: I agree completely. The medicalization of morality, which began in earnest when alcoholism became a disease, is actually a very humane process that has positive outcomes on people's lives. Nevertheless, it has a hell of a lot of detractors, both academic and popular, who wish to stick with the a pure "blame and shame" method for regulating behavior.
This is not to say that blame and shame shoudl disappear entirely in the medical model. I hope to see a kind of convergence of clinical psyciatry and virtue ethics.
Well, I honestly wonder: what are the advantages (if any) in a blame/shame model of behavior? Are we inclined to be snarky about the proliferation of syndromes because there is actually some advantage to the blame/shame thing, or is it just assholish of us to do so? Or is the problem in a misapprehension of what a medicalized model means--that it somehow removes the idea of human agency and self-control from the picture entirely? And if so, then how would we better understand it?
I have some sense of the answers to these questions, but they're not things I've thought about very deeply.
The reason the medicalization of morality is dangerous is that it can make the person unrepentant.
Seeing certain behavior as the result of a disease and "blaming and shaming" a person for said behavior are not mutually exclusive.
Both 128 and 127 are certainly true, but re. 127, I honestly wonder if "repentance" is a good thing. I am thinking of how awful it makes me feel to have, for instance, my mother constantly beating herself up over the shitty things she does, and how doing so actually just makes her feel worse and therefore more likely to continue to do shitty things, and how much I really wish she would just fucking quit the self-blaming and deal with the problem in a practical way. I think the shame/blame model is as likely to keep people from repentance because shame feels like crap, and so folks construct some pretty elaborate rationalizations and defenses and ways to blame others. I wonder if it might not be a lot easier to deal with the interpersonal problems of irritating behavior by thinking of it in more practical, dispassionate ways, e.g., as being about management and the limits of what is and isn't tolerable.
Seeing certain behavior as the result of a disease and "blaming and shaming" a person for said behavior are not mutually exclusive.
This is part of the secret to success of AA. Perhaps one day we will see "Assholes Anonymous": "Hello, my name is Rob, and I am an asshole."
I have a relative who did unconscionable things to me when I was 25, right after my father had died and I was very weak and hardly able to protect myself. And I would have felt better if the person's monstrous ego was held in check by something. So that's where that thought was coming from.
Scene from an Assholes Anonymous meeting.
"Hello, my name is Rob, and I am an asshole."
Rest of the room: "Fuck you, Rob."
Rob: "Fuck you, everyone. I'm unrepentant but I want to stop being an asshole so everyone will stop blaming me for their stupidity."
To 129: a lot of clinical psychiatry also thinks repentence isn't worth much. This is especially true in cognitive behavioral therapy, rational emotional therapy, and the like. "Moving on" becomes much more important than repentence and forgiveness.
I like this a lot, because it avoids the "sorry, but" phenomenon. Most people who seek forgiveness always have to say "but" after they apologize, and follow the but with their half assed rationalization of their action. (Caroline [my 3 year old] on kicking her brother: "Sorry, but I just wanted to put my foots there.")
The person had been in therapy for years. Was probably aware that she has narcissistic personality disorder. Seemed to make her worse.
I wonder if it might not be a lot easier to deal with the interpersonal problems of irritating behavior by thinking of it in more practical, dispassionate ways, e.g., as being about management and the limits of what is and isn't tolerable.
I think part of the problem with shifting to this sort of model is that it would be a pretty dramatic shift. Blame and shame (really, probably "blame" and "guilt") is a model that's been deployed for a very long time, and it's worked well enough to get us to this point. There's just a lot of intellectual capital that's been expended in creating the blame and shame model, and people are going to be reasonably reluctant to throw it away without evidence that the other model offers specific benefits.
Sorry about your relative's behavior, ac.
Thanks, Tim.
The really annoying part was that other people around me were saying, "She can't help it, she's sick." Which is not the most supportive backing to get. I'm still really close to the people who told her to back the fuck off. Much more helpful, in the circumstances.
The problem isn't shame per se, it's the inappropriateness of the level of shame. It's bad to beat oneself up repeatedly for past actions; but if one has treated another shittily, I don't think the correct response is to say, "oh well, nothing I can do about it now. What's done is done. Gotta move forward."
"I think part of the problem with shifting to this sort of model"
Problem, or difficulty?
Shame is a very weak motivator of human behavior. It's not quite as weak as pure will, but much less strong than various compulsions that may result from addiction or anger.
One of the more intersting features of the medicalization of morality is that "sick" has actually become a term of moral disapproval. This actually might be the right thing to do, because it makes "she's sick" and "she should fuck off" more compatible, although the details of how to merge the two attitudes are still murky.
I'm also sorry to hear about your relative, ac. I'd also tell the sick witch to fuck off.
pdf: If you really thought shame was a weak motivator, you would prove it by posting naked pictures of yourself to the internet.
138: I'm not sure I'm seeing the distinction you're drawing. If you are asking whether I think that it would be a good thing to move to the new model, but it will be difficult to convince people, as distinct from problems arising from adopting the new model, then I think the answer is, "Both."
In that case the "she's sick" people were different from the "back the fuck off" people. The former were trying to understand why she was doing the things she was doing, the latter didn't think about the causes too much and just moved to protect me.
Not to make it all about this example, but it was just the most concrete experience I have had of the consequences of shifting moral frames.
The thing is, it is very useful to know why someone is doing something to get them to stop. In fact, it is necessary to genuinely empathize with people to really help them shut down shitty behavior. You do need this element.
Here's a different example, if we need one. Here in upstate New York, the villages have been playing "Sex Offender NIMBY" with a guy who was convicted of molesting a nine year old and a thirteen year old. Every time he moves someplace, he appears on the registry of level three sex offenders, and everyone makes his life living hell, until he moves to the next village.
He just moved to Potsdam, and immediately flyers appeared all over the place with his name, picture, an dthe words "level three sex offender." His landlord has already started eviction proceedings.
While I would not be thrilled to have this guy live next door to me (and my children), it seems pointless to keep shoving him from place to place. A more sensible attitude would be to figure out what kind of life would make him least likely to molest anyone again, and put him in that kind of situation.
A more sensible attitude would be to figure out what kind of life would make him least likely to molest anyone again, and put him in that kind of situation.
In Iowa the solution was to forbid them from living virtually anywhere, thus forcing sex offenders into an underground network where their whereabouts could no longer be followed by the authorities, as noted in the New York Times. Somehow I think castration would be more humane.
The really annoying part was that other people around me were saying, "She can't help it, she's sick." Which is not the most supportive backing to get. I'm still really close to the people who told her to back the fuck off. Much more helpful, in the circumstances.
Yeah, I think that's the problem with the idea that a medical model = an excuse, which I think comes from still caring about the shame/blame thing. That is, the idea is to avoid blaming because it's unfair. As opposed to realizing that illness doesn't absolve one from protecting others from the consequences of one's illness (don't throw up on people, don't expose them to your germs, don't treat them badly), that failures to do so require a genuine apology, and most importantly, that people who are hurt deserve sympathy.
Rob's comparison to childrearing makes a good analogy, I think. One of the things I think it's important to teach (and model) for kids is the genuine apology: "I'm sorry I yelled at you, PK, I shouldn't do that" as opposed to "I'm sorry I yelled, but you made me really mad." Another thing is the lesson that, if one kid bites another on the playground, you deal with the kid who is bitten first, you separate them if necessary, and then you explain to the biting kid that biting is not okay. Explaining that "he's really to young to understand" doesn't help the situation at all.
I actually did some work in sex offender rights. Surprisingly, it did not make me feel wrong or icky. Once I realized that legislators were passing sex offender-related laws (because easy way to increase one's positive political profile) without thinking about the consequences for actual people, it wasn't hard at all to defend their constitutional rights. Of course, one of the major things I worked on wasn't for the benefit of sex offenders, but for people who are unfairly classified as sex offenders under Illinois law; if anyone over 18 is convicted of murder of a victim under 18, the convict gets labelled a sexual predator for registry purposes. So you had some 19-year-old who killed a 17-year-old in a gang drive-by having to follow the sex offender laws for the rest of his life. It was total bullshit.
There are a bunch of other pretty interesting/infuriating quirks to sex offender laws too, like how (at least in Illinois), if you are up for parole, but you don't have an "approved" place to live, they'll release you, then when you get to the gate, they tell you you've violate your parole and put you back into prison. Agh.
And also, ac, I'm sorry your relative was an asshole. Narcissists kind of suck.
145: A lot of the villages around here have been doing things like that. I think if he wanted to move to ogdensburg he would be allowed to pitch a tent in the median strip of the highway that runs by down. Except its a two lane road without a median strip.
I was told by a philosopher who was researching the state's right to mandate invasive bodily procedures that castration is a surprisingly ineffective way to prevent recidivism in sex offenders. Often castrated people can still get erections, and they still have whatever demented issue drove them to offend in the first place.
You all are ridiculous. Why can't you just see a person who has carefully thought out opinions about morality that differ from more conformist opinions? It's like you've become so used to calling a horse a zebra that now that you've seen a zebra you feel obliged to call him a zebraform horse. As for my poetry maybe being good, well, I make a special point to include poetry on my web site, partly because I figure that few people will bother taking the time to study my intricate opinions and reasonings more carefully unless they can appreciate me in a medium that is more quickly comprehensible than one that requires careful thought. As for you, Clown__ , and your interpretation of my poem (regarding how fathers should play a role in monitoring their daughters), hey, why don't you just say black is white, up is down, and whenever someone says one thing they mean the opposite? Ya' wannabe Bozo.
By which, of course, I mean "narcissm sucks."
150: Because said "carefully thought-out opinions" have really unsavory and offensive implications. Duh.
differ from more conformist
Heh. That's a, um, mild way to put it.
Perhaps we could medicalize repentance -- that would be cool -- turn the doctor's office into a confessional.
Hey check it out! Mr. Meigs likes me!
I think the concept of confession and forgiveness is really psychically and morally healthy, actually. It's one of the things the Catholic Church got right.
154 gets it exactly right. Let's indeed not. Quoth the Deignan, nevermore.
That's nice that you're all taking my word for it that her acts were unconscionable. They were, though. She's crazily, notoriously litigious. It did suck!
The full-on apology is hard. Whenever you're going over an argument you think about the ways the other person contributed to your behavior. But it's true, you have to take it all on yourself. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.
But how can we not?! Have you all lost your zest for life? Stephen writes,
What I imagine happens is that as a result of a love chemical secreted during sex, a well-loved partner tends to have his gametes’ chromosomes painted with an epigenetic chemical that sticks somewhat to his DNA in such a manner that this epigenetic chemical painted on his chromosomes can be passed on to future generations. It follows that over time, the parts of chromosomes that are often in specially well-loved individuals will become more thickly painted with epigenetic love chemical.
Stephen, seriously, for your project to work, you need to show (among other things) that "goodness" is heritable. Imagining an epigenetic love chemical isn't going to get you there.
specially well-loved individuals will become more thickly painted with epigenetic love chemical.
What an awesome hint for a game of hangman.
B _ _ _ _ _ _
The full-on apology is hard.
"full" and "hard" should be replaced here.
Well, to some extent "goodness" is hereditable, inasmuch as empathy is a component of goodness, and presumably empathetic parents teach empathy to their children, and so on down through the generations. Though of course that's not actually genetics.
The biggest problem with Stephen's theories is that they hold women responsible for not only the behavior, but the very thoughts of men. The second problem is his clear sense that sexual desire is shameful and bad (which is probably a big part of where he came up with the first part). Both of those lead to elaborate rationalizations that amount to seeing other people as means to an end, rather than as autonomous individuals in their own rights, and frankly that thought process is incredibly unhealthy and dangerous.
I don't know where you get the idea, BitchPhD, that I believe sexual desire is bad. Nor where you get the idea that I view women as responsible for men's thoughts. In fact, I consider female lust chemical to be very important. Upon being absorbed by the male it allows intraejaculate sperm selection to be meaningful. Also, female lust is what I think most responsible for the little bit of thinking for themselves that people do. If anything, I glorify female lust. And I criticize those (like selfish females) who (to denigrate the former) conflate fucking pleasure with sodomizing pleasure because they are no matter what too greedy to be willing to have children with any man unless they can get all the resources out of him.
150: It's like you've become so used to calling a horse a zebra that now that you've seen a zebra you feel obliged to call him a zebraform horse.
I feel compelled to point out that the zebra is, indeed, a type of horse. Taxonomy tells us nothing about the appropriateness of grown men preferring sex with twelve-year-olds for their greater moral purity, however, so go right ahead on that one.
rob:
If you really thought shame was a weak motivator, you would prove it by posting naked pictures of yourself to the internet.
Ever try shaming a sociopath into behaving with empathy? Shaming an alcoholic into being dry? A gambling addict into not gambling? It's quite weak compared to many other motivators, but in the absence of other motivators going against it, of course it's going to be effective. Thus, no nudie pics for you, sorry.
OK, the child fucking would be weird enough by itself. But pseudo-scientific biological nonsense babble? Usually pseudo-science is relegated to New Age-type things like auras and NLP or quantum mechanics. But isn't human reproduction a bit mundane and well-understood to be going around spouting nonsense about?
pdf: oh I agree with you about the ineffectiveness shame in all of the cases you name. What's remarkable to me is how effective shame is for most people most of the time.
I should turn my challenge into a thought experiement to make things clearer (and less combative). Suppose you knew that there would be no reprocussions from posting naked pictures of yourself on the internet. You wouldn't get fired; no one would even mention it. Still, the whole world would see your heinie. Would you do it? Probably not.
Ah yes, those selfish females. And that female lust chemical that the male absorbs. Nope, nothing troubling in this theory whatsoever.
I feel compelled to point out that the zebra is, indeed, a type of horse.
Figures.
Taxonomy tells us nothing about the appropriateness of grown men preferring sex with twelve-year-olds for their greater moral purity, however, so go right ahead on that one.
Indeed, so one has to think about it carefully. But before thinking about a question carefully, it behooves one to think about the right question. I never asserted anywhere that I prefer twelve-year olds for their greater moral purity. Not that an innocent twelve-year old isn't more wise and ready for sex than a screwed-up woman (especially, I have been thinking of late, if the latter has sufficient advanced degrees to somehow allow her to feel good about herself), but not every woman is screwed-up. Not every woman is into sodomy. Females can get wiser as they age. I assert as everywhere that my attraction toward youth qua youth in females results from the effect female youth likely has upon intraejaculate sperm selection. E.g., the histology of the adolescent cervix is quite different from that of an adult female. Obviously-non-deceptive males who don't make females feel the need to wait before deciding on sex tend to have qualities females especially want (or the females would wait to see if something better comes along). It follows that intraejaculate sperm selection is something girls would want and benefit from when having sex with virtuous males (who tend to be obviously non-deceptive), and that girls lose out by postponing such sex.
Let's play botticelli! My name starts with N
Ah yes, those selfish females.
I'm not saying all females are selfish, just some females. Just like I believe some males are selfish. Sodomizers, in particular, I think tend to be very selfish, and they are all males.
shorter version:
It's because the chemicals in their cervixes made him do it, obv. But we needn't fear, because he's virtuous and nondeceptive. In fact, it's good for them. Otherwise they wouldn't have such chemicals.
Of course the chemicals have been postulated for the sake of argument. What's the problem there?
175- Are you the assassinated father of a novelist?
I don't understand what "intraejaculate sperm selection" means, or when it is supposed to occur. Or who does the selecting.
I am not Nicholas Kristof? but should be last name? if its not him, you get a question.
Peggy Noonan. I get a question!
Are you currently alive?
Not that an innocent twelve-year old isn't more wise and ready for sex than a screwed-up woman (especially, I have been thinking of late, if the latter has sufficient advanced degrees to somehow allow her to feel good about herself)
The temperature rises as we get closer to the molten core of misogyny that powers this nonsense.
Remember when people were talking about odd phobias, and one of them was watching embarrassment? And people were talking about how their own personal phobia or neurosis, whatever, was how crushingly painful it was to watch embarrassment?
I never thought I'd get that feeling (sort of 2 inches below my diaphragm, and maybe a few inches in) reading comment threads here.
Rob, that's a neat thought experiment, but I think a bit confusing. Are we supposed to assume a world where the taboo exists, but due to my particular circumstances I won't suffer any major consequences? But, assuming that *everyone* sees the pics, and the taboo exists, it would surely be impossible to avoid all consequences, even if they were just strange looks from others. So I wouldn't if there were still a taboo against nudity.
But if there were no taboo against nudity, then there wouldn't be any reason to feel shame about posting nude pictures of myself, or really much interest at all. (I'm not exactly what you call the chisled type.)
Are you the Marquis de Lafayette's wife? (I seem to be stuck on 1789).
189- Play botticelli, you'll feel better.
I don't understand what "intraejaculate sperm selection" means, or when it is supposed to occur. Or who does the selecting.
There's a theory about interejaculate sperm selection, along the lines that different men's ejaculate can compete within the female to fertilize the egg. Google "kamikaze sperm". However, evidence for this is mixed. A related POV sees female hormones as being able to intervene in this process.
Did your husband change the religion of your native land, only to see it changed back shortly thereafter?
bitch, dude, that's a second order question.
Btw, I have no clue if I'm playing this game correctly, feel free to let me know if I'm not.
See? So what's a first-order question? And at what point do you get to switch to second-order?
I hate games like this.
first you have to think of a person whose name starts with N, and give me clues about that person, and if you stump me, you get to ask me if I'm Russian.
Rob, the problem with the nude pictures of ass question is that a lot of people *do* post such pictures, even with the possibility of losing one's job still in place.
Did you deliver Babylon from Assyria?
crap. Did you sing a song covered by the Smashing Pumpkins roughly 20 yrs later?
204: Under their real names (or an easily-identifiable pseudonym) and not for pay?
203: I was! But I guess the question was still too general. Jesus. This game expects me to actually know shit. And how does the questionee do it--lots and lots of googling, or are you only allowed to play if you have an encyclopedia in your head?
207: Well, along with pictures of their faces, which is about as identifiable as you can get.
205: not nebuchadnezzar
206: text gets a question
210: Wrong answer. Correct answer is, the Venerable Robert Nutter. I get a second-order question. Did you hold some kind of political office, whether by birth or election?
Stevie Nicks! (Landslide)
Are you European?
Okay, trying again. Did you have a scar on your forehead from an assassination attempt, like Harry Potter?
If you couldn't google, I couldn't paly. In fact, I wish I had an assistant googler.
213: no, I'm not a politician.
214: yes I am European.
I don't understand what "intraejaculate sperm selection" means, or when it is supposed to occur. Or who does the selecting.
When a man has sex, he puts a very large number of sperm into the female. These sperm compete with one another. Intraejaculate sperm competition is the sort of sperm competition that occurs when just one male is involved ("intra-" meaning "within"). In a young female, those sperm especially adapted to fertilizing young females are more likely to fertilize the ovum than sperm not well adapted to fertilizing young females. Intraejaculate sperm competition is also I think what makes female bisexuality important. If a man's sperm goes back-and-forth between females (as the coronal ridge of the penis facilitates), that selects for sperm able to survive the changes of environment involved when having such sex simultaneously with several females. These would obviously be the studly sperm.
It is important to note that insofar as intraejaculate sperm competition in descendants is concerned, females basically don't have an advantage or disadvantage in being fertilized by especially virile sperm except to the extent such virility is associated with desirable diploid traits. Indeed, in the ejaculates of sons, sperm more related to her will have to compete with sperm more related to her mate, which makes it disadvantageous for her in that generation to have been fertilized by strong sperm; but then in future generations, she gets an advantage (that decays like a geometric series) from having been fertilized by strong sperm, and the total advantage (if second-order effects are ignored, as is appropriate if the advantage is small) exactly cancels the disadvantage, just like the reflections from a quarter-wave-length coating cancel on the anti-reflective coatings on eyeglasses, etc.
Ordinarily (a case of meiotric drive), genes that code for useful haploid traits don't tend to be associated with useful diploid traits because the mere fact that a gene can survive notwithstanding it is less useful haploidly suggests it is more useful diploidly. This is why ordinarily, a female benefits by sperm success being random, and why sperm development is apparently ordinarily mostly under diploid regulation (effectively making intraejaculate sperm competition meaningless). But it stands to reason a female would want meaningful intraejaculate sperm competition when it would be supposed to select positively for useful diploid traits, which is what I believe female lust (by degrading cytoplasm bridges between developing sperm cells) and absence of (sperm mixing, sperm-success-randomizing) female orgasm allows.
If you ruled the world, would you free all your sons?
213: to answer more comprehensively, never held office, by birth or election.
"it stands to reason"
Key indicator of 'just-so' stories of evolution.
Didn't take long for him to turn up here, though, did it?
Did you participate in the Spanish civil war?
(Also, can you bold the 2nd order answers?)
Are you the firstborn of a trio of French painters active in the 17th century?
Did you play the clarinet and have the nickname "Yellow"?
Was your great-grandfather killed at the battle of Gettysburg?
Come on, we're waiting. If you had Aspergers you'd be doing this a lot faster.
Did you build the Tower of Babel?
(Sorry, I've been looking at slides all day.)
Of course she cries "holy hell!" at everyone else. Mine she tackles right away.
227: not Antoine le Nain.
Gonerill, Bitch and text get second order questions.
mcmc takes a suspicious amount of time in answering a suspiciously large amount of questions correctly.
239: not a philosopher
241: never performed at la Scala
Did you teach economists a lot about light?
Are your paintings of cold and aloof beauties hanging on an 80's yuppie's wall?
Richard Nixon.
2nd order: Are you an artist?
248: oh. well, you get a second order question then.
Are you a McGill graduate in the Basketball Hall of Fame?
251: yes, at least that was my understanding.
I'm almost certain you're not supposed to use google except to verify info you already know (or think you know).
Are you a McGill graduate in the Basketball Hall of Fame?
No one's supposed to google? That's insane.
Aha! No wonder! Stop googling.
Is all we know that this person is European and dead (and not a philosopher)? My 2nd order: Have you written a book?
I'm not sure how well this will work, given the complicating Google factor: let's try it out, at least for the first time, with both questioners and answerer forswearing use of Google (unless you're the answerer and you want to clarify some detail about your mystery person for the sake of the questioners). This is the honor system, people!
249: dunno. take a 2nd order question. who aren't I?
I go back to thinking this is an incredibly stupid game.
wowie zowie -- this is the greatest thread ever. 224 -- He got here quickly because somebody linked the site in comment to his latest post, the one that fantasizes about his young partner's mother watching them get it on.
what makes female bisexuality important. If a man's sperm goes back-and-forth between females
Awesome -- a rationalization for mff threesomes! (As long as there is no sodomy -- we would not want our digestive tracts to be coated with addictive lust chemicals.)
256: L gets a second order. In fact, we might just as well all go to second order questions, 'cuz without goole I am nothing. I think the only ones I knew wer nefertiti and nebuchadnezzar. although who knows, maybe stress will bring out the best in me.
I am male.
The La Scala person was Birgit Nilsson, by the way.
Did you publish using the combination of your surname prefaced by two lower-case initials, without spaces?
From 249: Patrick Nagel.
Are you a musician?
273: 2nd order question
clue: someone has already come frighteningly close in a first order question.
did people, due to the subject matter of your most famous book (in America at least) suspect you of having similar proclivities to our esteemed guest on this thread?
I should hav bolded that.
not a musician
bpNicholl.
Did you die in the 19th century?
(Sorry to interrupt, but) Hey, Armsmasher: remember when it was the art blogs that used to get all riled about what a tool Lee Siegel is? Good times, man, good times.
279: no, I did not die in the 19th century.
Is there a street named after you in St. Petersburg?
Should have said no based on the misspelling.
Wait, that was the first question, wasn't it?
I submit that in the future we should leave the google rules up to the questionee, to be declared at the beginning of the game.
Do russians consider themselves to be european? no matter. valiant job, mcmc.
287: no, the first question was Nabokov's father.
I meant: the question that came frightening close was the first question.
I'd like to do one, if anyone wants to keep playing. I would foreswear googling.
Did you have your portrait painted by Van Eyck?
Did you fluff your most famous line?
I'll start, but may not finish. I might decide to take a nap instead.
you get a second order, ac. Here is where I reveal my vast ignorance.
Some dude named Arnolfini. 2nd order: are you alive?
Were you the model of the middle style?
280: I know! I feel a Gary Farber-esque impulse to tell the entire liberal blogosphere that I blogged about Siegel's toolishness back when he was the TV/art critic.
You'd think that even the liberal New Republic would have shied away from Siegel's thinly veiled attack on Ezra Klein, since, after all, even the liberal New Republic has published him.
304 was Asperger. Damn. Thought I had it.
Are you male?
(I'll do all caps for 2nd orders)
309: I'm not Lady Asquith?
310: Hmm. I'm not Lady Asquith?
306: no, Attilla. they wanted to be sure.
2nd order: are you real or imaginary?
Were you the British Prime Minister during the Home Rule crisis?
Please find some other thread to pollute with your botticelliings.
too bad for Hans.
315 gets a second order (gonerill)
has your prime minister's hat had a cookie named after it?
327: I can't even think of a cookie starting with A right now. second order.
That was a put-on Meigs, wasn't it? If he really showed up here, I am kicking him out of Asperbergers Anonymouse. That is one of our rules:anyone who shows up for meetings is instantly banned.
Are you a clubby friend of a fictional detective?
you are not Ahasuerus. but the cookie is named after Haman.
2nd order: are you a writer?
you know, IRC chat would be vastly more efficient for this kind of thing.
Freddy Arbuthnot, from the Peter Wimsey mysteries. Let me think for a bit on that second-order question.
2nd order: do you fit into the "pre-1800" distribution requirement?
I should say: I FIT INTO THE PRE-1800 DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT.
Oh goodness. My female lust chemical done missed the whole thread!
re: blame/shame. I think intent is too tied up in our concept of law & morality to get rid of it, and most of my moral intuitions say it belongs there. I want to exempt the mentally retarded & ill from the full penalty of the law, and I also want there to be a bright line where I'm allowed to hold people responsible. We have a flawed but basically sound model now: if you're impaired enough that you don't know what you're doing, you don't bear nearly as much of a penalty as someone who chose to do it out of an informed will. Sometimes it seems that a disease does eliminate moral responsibility, and I don't think you can have the framework on the fringes without having it wholesale.
If blame/shame + exemptions goes*, then I guess we're left with a sort of consequentialist system, where we just punished based on the harm done, which we'll all think is fine until the state executes its first (or, Texan nineteenth) mentally handicapped inmate. (Since I think the likelihood that we'll swing to an open, forgiving, blameless happy society is very very small, and we'd be back to a Biblical blame & shame for your behavior + the disease.)
I wish I understood Botticelli.
it would have been more fitting. But I know none of his biography, only that he founded a syndrome. So I couldn't have answered any questions.
For instance, Asperger might have been burried in three coffins. I can't very well say.
I think you are allowed to Google to confirm facts about the answer...
My first undergraduate paper was about how Aristophanes was a lot like Mel Brooks.
Aha. I knew it had to be someone Greek, and I've vaguely heard of the Frogs. What an astonishingly difficult game. Does anyone who isn't in academic circles ever play it?
Tia's friends, I guess. I've only played it here.
But text, how much do you know about Aristophanes, really? I mean, how did he take his eggs?
Probably not. I only guessed Aristophanes because of your guess of Aristotle, bphd. I know nothing about him other than that he wrote Greek comedy and that "Frogs" was one of them.
Anyway, I'm sure he didn't let the eggs sog into the toast, because that's gross.
So, we have FL, ac, eb, JL, TD, and NL. We might be able to count JM and wd at a stretch. We only have 670 two-letter handles left! Reserve yours now!
Sure, NL. But I've got to go be productive now, I'm afraid.
Well, we can slow down, and if it peters out, c'est la vie. The letter is K.
Yeah, I think I'm gonna go for that nap, if I can talk Mr. B. into keeping PK off my back for a while. Sorry, NL.
No worries. I'll check in periodically. Maybe Multiple Miggs will play with me.
did you break off three engagements for no very clear reason?
Are you a famous defense attorney?
Hm, I don't believe so. But I don't know who did. 2nd order!
Did you seek to re-establish an empire in central Europe?
369: that's if you assume only letters are valid; if you declare 2-char handles can include numbers, like, T2, then there are 1290 left.
377 -- no, I was thinking of William Kunstler. I believe M. Kockran spells his name otherwise.
2nd order: are you a writer?
And a new first-order -- did you replace the 510?
Do you frequently ask babies who loves them?
Wow, I'm ignorant. 378, second order!
380, no
381 I am not a writer
Then you must not be the Kaiser. (378) -- 2nd order: are you from the americas?
(382) Then you must not be the Unfogged Happy Fun Kitty. 2nd order: are you a woman?
I call foolsies on 386. They didn't call him "Mr. Kaiser."
Okey -- NL, if you don't like "Kaiser", don't answer the question about the americas.
387: Then you must not be Kojak.
Are you a politician?
I was irritated by "Kaiser" as well. But I should have gotten it; K is a rare letter.
I am a man.
Did you carry a message about the pedigree of a white stallion?
stallion- don't believe so. but who did? (these are great questions.)
Foolsies on 388 -- the kitty replaced the 500.
Goddamn, I should have gotten the Kojak. Damn my ignorance of non-Airwolf/Knight Rider/etc. old television.
What do you do when you the answer to a second-order question is actually unclear, but admitting that it's unclear will basically be a huge hint?
395 You are not Kim. Oh. You decide if that's fair. I just remembered he has a last name.
OK, my roommate says I should revise:
Americas: sort of
that's not really such a huge hint as all that.
2nd order: Did your political career take place in the twentieth century
political career was pre-twentieth century
roommate: "this is kind of obscure. but not much more so than aristophanes."
Did you make a movie as a way to justify to your old friends why you sold them out to HUAC?
I'm not Kazan! (and I'm not the victim of a shutout.)
Is one of the characters you portrayed a poet named Percy Dovetonsils?
I'm not Kovacs, however, I resorted to Google to find out. Second order!
Did you write innovative music inspired by folk songs?
Have you been known to conquer barbarian lands after being exiled from antediluvian Atlantis?
411 gets a second order; once I say I don't know it's closed.
Kodaly.
Did your political career take place in the United States?
414: Not that I know of, so I guess you're not Kull.
Were you born in Europe?
398 -- rats! damn! I coulda sworn is was the 510! [slinks away]
Do you have a bridge named after you in new york state?
417: political career did not take place in the United States
Was your nemesis described as froglike, and your Achilles heel a daughter in a Swiss sanatorium?
Did you found a Jewish sub-denomination?
423: Nuts. I thought that was, rather oddly, your Kristofferson.
Are you either of the title characters of the world's longest-running comic strip?
420: so you're not Kosciusko.
were you born in europe?
428 to 424: So you aren't Karla. (John LeCarre, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Smiley's People and so forth.)
Was your political career as a member of a hereditary aristocracy?
Mordecai Kaplan.
Did you live in the nineteenth century?
434 has to win it. Damn, I should have guessed.
431: Sadly, no, which means you're probably not one of the Katzenjammer Kids either.
Were you a head of state?
(Kamehameha)
I particularly enjoyed saying no to the United States question.
"The Americas" was kind of tough, too.
Do people want to keep playing? I have one.
btw, I think it would have been totally legit to say no to "the Americas."
Sorry, have postponed errands long enough...
I just started reading the blog about an hour ago, after having been off all weekend. I took the Asberger's test and got an 8. I think that has more to do with the valuing of slightly versus strongly, but still. I thought of myself as lonely and unsocial when I was younger, and I may actually have been. I think forty years ago I would have given different answers to a number of those questions. Anybody else have a similar feelings, that their answer now might not always have been their answer?
I cannot possibly read all these comments because I am becks style but I just feel that I should note it because people who do are always so celebrated and that's all I want--to be celebrated.
ok, I just read 129, and I want to say that's just how my first boyfriend was. he was like, damn, i treat you shitty. now i feel guilty. you are the cause of me feeling guilty. so I will treat you even more shittily.
I've heard there was a secret chord...
graham's stereo is so awesome.
Becks-style Tia pwns.
And yes, I would have given different answers to the survey had I taken it in a different week, let alone with fewer years of experience. (When I hate my dissertation, the whole world is DOOMED.)
Thanks for the celebration, CA and Cala.
I just read this entire thread. Why would I read multiple games of Botticelli which are already over? I'm not sure. But, if, for example, Kalishnikov is a Russian hero, my understanding of the rules of Botticelli is that it is irrelevant that Kerensky was the Russian hero Cala was thinking of. And it seemed like you guys weren't playing that way.
To be completely fair, I was being a bit precious by saying Kalashnikov. But you're absolutely correct.
and that's all I want--to be celebrated.
Or something that rhymes with celebrated, at least.
Most imitated,
Grammy nominated,
Hotel accommodated,
Cheerleader prom dated,
488: secretly fellated, of course.
Oh crap, "secretly" s/b "hiddenly".
As a matter of fact, just forget the whole comment.
Double crap, I was right the first time.
It must have sucked to be fellated
When fellajack and fellabobby were assassinated.
I'm sure being fellated sucked less than being fellajack or fellabobby.
When two people press their buttocks together, that's assassination.
Twenny twenny twenny four hours to go,
I wanna be fellated
Nothin to do I got nowhere to go
I wanna be fellated
No, "assassination" is more like "Hands Across America" reaches second base.
My new watch chain is ridiculous.
Also, dentist to me: "Ever had four fillings in one day before? I hope you never have to do that again". Yeah, me too. (One filling he just did for the hell of it, seriously.)
Hmmm, maybe we can call posting while still obviously under the effects of anaesthesia "w-lfs-n style".
I had three fillings this afternoon, and was so numb for a while my tongue was cramping because I was straining with it trying to feels its position in my mouth. As it wore off, it felt like I had pins and needles across the bottom half of my face for two fucking hours.
Does getting a filling really hurt? I've never had one.
felt like I had pins and needles across the bottom half of my face
I had both my baby incisors pulled, after my adult ones completely came in behind them. (The roots had not degraded at all.) It didn't hurt so much.
I think I will be able to avoid having my wisdom teeth pulled. After I got my orthodonture removed, my orthodontist said I should go ahead and get them pulled, and recommended an oral surgeon. I think that's a racket.
pdf, for what it's worth, my orthodontist recommended it for years and so did my dentist, until this year's checkup, where he finally formally unrecommended it. (This, after the wisdom teeth have been erupted for about four years.) Have you had an X-ray done? If there's room enough, you can probably wait and see.
504: No. Chopper and Ben are just whiners.
It didn't hurt, but holding one's mouth open for a few hours at maximum aperture isn't very enjoyable. Jaw cramps are no fun.
It's true, the blowjob jaw cramp is the anti-sexy. However, since the dentist's office is not supposed to be anything other than tedious, it's not as much of an issue there.
I had cavities filled on two of my wisdom teeth because the dentist thought I was likely to keep the teeth. They were the most painful fillings I've ever had; they had to up the anesthetic in the middle of the process. I guess the problem with fillings in those teeth is that they get close to the jawbone.
A couple years later I had all four wisdom teeth pulled. It took less than 30 minutes, no jaw cramp, I could eat, gingerly, ordinary food that night. OTOH, this is a better illustration.
I'm currently in the process of not having my wisdom teeth pulled just yet. All four are in, none of them hurt, but the dentist swears I should have it done. I'm waffling.
Also, w-lfs-n pwns for dropping Peter H. Cropes. Gods yes. Nailed it. I can find very little lyrical difference between that 'doing the girl while the mom brings us snacks' business and this.
And finally, if I didn't already have a ridiculous pseudonym, I would so adopt 'Selfish Sodomite.' Awesome. As a fellow Tar Heel, I can only say that this pretty much mops the floor with all my fancy-pants 'hey, we're not all freakjobs' business on Friday. Oh well, so much for that one.
I love the last sentence of this post.
"they had to up the anesthetic in the middle of the process"
When I was getting my teeth pulled, they administered local anaesthetic three times on one tooth, and four times on the other one. Like I said, it didn't hurt too much.
