Okay, having given a fuck in two languages here you've obliquely raised the burning issue of what (normal) English-speaking people consider to be the most offensive and, as such, the most heavily tabooed, word --- and it ain't fuck. And it ain't ain't. It's the c-word. The n-word ranks right up there as well, although there are movements within each community to reclaim or reappropriate both. Which raises another issue. Not being a member of either community, it may well be presumptuous of me to say that hearing the "n-word," even uttered by Black folk and "fag" or "queer" tossed around by gays sets my teeth on edge. But I find it hard to accept the theory that continuously using what is a pejorative or slur somehow lessens the "power" it has over us. And I have yet to be convinced as well, that use of these terms by those at whom these terms, as blatant slurs, are usually directed by others, are somehow "reclaiming" them from this bigotry.
While this may be liberating for some, I can’t help but feel they are still hurtful to many others and using them may also unwittingly give license to those outside of these communities to do likewise. That bothers me — although, of course, as I said, not being part of these communities, it’s not for me to say what their members choose to call themselves or each other. I just have a problem with any negative characterization, be it racial, ethnic or related to sexual/gender orientation, whatever the intent. Overly sensitive? Generational? Perhaps.
Used casually more in both places perhaps, but still considered highly offensive (and especially by women) in several national surveys. Also, in Oz, where offensive language (used in a public place) can be a crime, it ranks near the top of words for which you may very well be charged, depending on the circumstances.
I have to say, not sure why someone would bother to write a poem if they don't like our site. Not even a good poem, as the Empress points out in a kindly way.
Regarding the Empress' claim that she does not mock entrants... weren't Loser points given to entrants/entries that were insulted by the Empress? And doesn't the Empress mock all entries that reference Lizzie Borden? Am I re-imagining those things?
That was mostly the shtick of the Czar (1993-2003) from whom people got the abuse points. In my early years I'd occasionally tease someone by name in print, but only if that person actually had other ink that week. Then I stopped even that. I do occasionally mock bad entries in the intro to the results, or on the FB page, but I never name the writer -- in fact, often I don't even look up who wrote them. (We usually go through the process of matching entry with writer only with the entries that get ink.)
The only other time I feel that I can get nasty with people is in response to being called incompetent, unfair, ignorant, stupid, "whore," etc. The more accusatory the "question," the less polite my answer.
(I don't recall picking on Lizzie Borden questions -- "Funny you should ax"? -- but I have disparaged jokes punning on "hot air" and rhymes resorting to the word "frown." among others. But come on, that's not cruelty.)
It's just a very tired joke, the idea that some weather, heat, etc., results from "hot air" from bloviating politicians.
When we ran a contest for bogus trivia about the weather, I wrote this in the intro to the results: Despite the Empress’s express warning that “jokes about ‘hot air’ and politicians almost never get ink,” some of you evidently thought that didn’t apply to your own gems such as “Expect blustery hot wind in the lead-up to the Iowa caucuses.”
The Empress is unfailingly kind in not making sport of our bad entries which is more than we deserve for flooding her inbox with dreck. I may be remembering some teasing by the Empress, but I did not recall that abuse points were the work of the Czar.
Regarding Lizzie B, my recollection is that the Empress sent a message (probably with a letter accompanying a magnet) which said that my Lizzie B entry didn't get ink because Lizzie didn't do it/was not convicted. BTW, I no longer give my memory much credence. It has become quite unreliable.
Did the poem writer say you mentioned the bad poets by name? You can mock someone with glee and disdain without mentioning their name, I suppose, and they know what they did.
True, I have mocked (with disdain, yes) the poem, not the person -- and okay, I'll accept that I might well have made someone feel bad personally, even if nobody else (including me) knew who that person was.
On the other hand, I think I'm very kind and patient with people who ask me politely for critiques, especially in craft-based contests like limericks (rather than in jokes in which we just happen to laugh more at one entry than another).
What I won't do is get into a debate over whether that's person's entry was funnier than another one. Neither side comes out of that either enlightened or happy.
As for mocking entrants, Losers can get points for "Abuse." See the link below. Russ Beland and Chuck Smith were the leading offenders back in the day. To me, the "abuse" was good-natured ribbing.
As far as the Loser Stats go, you don't get extra ink for making fun of yourself. But it can get you ink in the first place. In fact, we had a "humiliate yourself for ink" contest in 2006, whose main categories were Embarrassing Anecdote About Yourself, and Suck Up to the Empress. (Results here: http://nrars.org/inviteText/0666.html The winner (not pictured in that all-text file) was sized Fred Dawson's "Looking Down at My Feet." Fred is of very ample size, and the winning entry was a snapshot showing only a big white arc of a T-shirt.
This example of abuse ink was public, not private:
Report from Week CXXIV (457), in which you were to supply the beginnings of letters to the editor that will never see print.
But first, some important business. Several weeks ago, we held a contest to commemorate the announced retirement of Style Invitational superstar (Russell Beland, Springfield). We ran the contest results. And then, suddenly, with no explanation, we began receiving entries again from (Russell Beland, Springfield) as though nothing had happened. On the one hand, this is delightful news for his legions of groupies. On the other hand, he must be punished. The Czar is not a cruel man, but he is a firm man, and justice must prevail. Hence, it is hereby proclaimed that from this day hence, (Russell Beland, Springfield) shall be permitted to submit entries as usual excepting that his next nine (9) published entries shall be publicly credited to someone else. Mr. Beland will receive no acknowledgment of these entries other than an accounting, week by week, of the number of entries remaining in his punishment bank. The banked entries will not count toward his lifetime total, for purposes of eventual induction in The Style Invitational Hall of Fame. This order is final. It cannot be questioned and is not subject to appeal.
Russ has one entry published today, leaving him with eight to go.
How do you remember this? Anyway, I did know that abuse acknowledged in the official stats was public abuse. I was just trying to let 'someone' know that I feel that I've been abused in the past.
As for that attempt at damning with faint brays in the form of a poem (?) --- I will say that while I have not been entirely gruntled with the royal nods over the years, I have not been disgruntled either --- and certainly not to the point of conspicuously demonstrating in tortured verse why my own entries must have been consistently met with, "We are not amused!" Look at it this way: unlike Oscar voters, who until very recently (that would be as of last Monday) didn't have to actually see the movies they voted on for the past 97 years (we'll see about that...), one or both royals must read every one of often thousands of agonizing attempts at being funny. Week after soulsucking week. Now you're probably thinking, somebody has to do it. And yes, it may very well be some sort of penance as many in the know have suggested, but just consider how long you would last in their slippers --- forced to make almost continuous sighs. It may mean grasping at haws from time to time, out of sheer frustration, but then again, we're all paying to Lose.
I was having lunch in a pub and the pretty young waitress kept looking at me in that certain way. I was feeling really good right up until she said “You look just like my Dad!” And that’s the day I knew I was a geezer.
I have written aboout this before: A young woman feature reporter at The Post, someone I edited all the time and with whom I had a real rapport, once told me, unbidden, that she loved working with me because I was smart, funny, "and safe, like a gay uncle."
I never accept a seat on crowded public transportation unless I am hurting and it is offered by a man. A woman, never, because I am a jerk. Once, many years ago (I was maybe 40) I was berated on the subway by a woman who accused me of hogging seats that should go to the old or handicapped or herself. (There were empty seats available.) I apologized to her, loudly and profusely, stood up, and walked away, limping horribly. My legs were fine. It was such an excellent thing to do.
Did this in Brussels, I'd actually ruined an ankle and sat near the door in the handicapped seat. Young punk with a bandaged hand got on and berated me in a foreign language until I got off and limped away. Honest limp but I sure exaggerated it a bit.
The new pic was taken for a project but wound up not getting used. I posted it, somebody suggested I should use it for an updated profile shot and I figured why not. In it I’m holding a chicken named Noodles. The hat still gets near daily use.
One of the phrases us high school German students were most eager to learn, but the teacher somehow didn’t oblige and we had to teach ourselves, was “Fickst du, scheissekopf!”
My German class was at a University and I flunked. It was my first language class ever and by the time I focused on the verbs and not the dialogs it was too late. But I do remember in German there are two ways to "order another glass of milk .." with one in replacement and one in addition.
Far more creative insults available which, granted, don't all quite roll of the tongue as easily as "Fick dich!" -- or are perhaps as immediately gratifying. For example, ""Teletubbyzurückwinker" (a favorite --- one who waves back at the "Teletubbies" -- a simpleton), "Backpfeifengesicht" (slappable face), "Arsch mit ohren" (ass with ears), "Einzeller" (single cell organism) and "Rotzlöffel" (a brat --- literally a "snot spoon").
Always a good standby, but the address form --- the familiar "Du" used with children, friends, others with whom you're familiar, and by mutual agreement vs. the formal "Sie" (strangers, business relationships, older folks) --- can be a little tricky, depending on just how offensive you want to be. Although calling someone an asshole to begin with pretty much clarifies intent. Using the "Du" form (as you have it) with a stranger, however, would likely add a nice soupçon (ein Hauch) of appropriate disrespect.
I recall my high school French teacher pointing out that, in a lover's quarrel, the form of address could slide from "tu" to "vous" as a way of distancing and then later back to "tu" as an expression of contempt. Teach that to an A.I.!
Speaking of rolling off the tongue, an American in a small Scottish pub kept observing the waitress, even after he had ordered. She came up to him and asked what was up. "I'm fascinated by the way you roll your r's." "Must be the high heels."
once again, Tom Witte has covered himself with... ewwww.
Okay, having given a fuck in two languages here you've obliquely raised the burning issue of what (normal) English-speaking people consider to be the most offensive and, as such, the most heavily tabooed, word --- and it ain't fuck. And it ain't ain't. It's the c-word. The n-word ranks right up there as well, although there are movements within each community to reclaim or reappropriate both. Which raises another issue. Not being a member of either community, it may well be presumptuous of me to say that hearing the "n-word," even uttered by Black folk and "fag" or "queer" tossed around by gays sets my teeth on edge. But I find it hard to accept the theory that continuously using what is a pejorative or slur somehow lessens the "power" it has over us. And I have yet to be convinced as well, that use of these terms by those at whom these terms, as blatant slurs, are usually directed by others, are somehow "reclaiming" them from this bigotry.
While this may be liberating for some, I can’t help but feel they are still hurtful to many others and using them may also unwittingly give license to those outside of these communities to do likewise. That bothers me — although, of course, as I said, not being part of these communities, it’s not for me to say what their members choose to call themselves or each other. I just have a problem with any negative characterization, be it racial, ethnic or related to sexual/gender orientation, whatever the intent. Overly sensitive? Generational? Perhaps.
Dante wrote: "It was courtesy to be rude ..."
Actually the “c” word is pretty acceptable in the UK, and pretty common in Australia. It’s all cultural.
Used casually more in both places perhaps, but still considered highly offensive (and especially by women) in several national surveys. Also, in Oz, where offensive language (used in a public place) can be a crime, it ranks near the top of words for which you may very well be charged, depending on the circumstances.
Is it? You mean cow?
I like hearing the Brits say (on TV shows) "you stupid cow".
I have to say, not sure why someone would bother to write a poem if they don't like our site. Not even a good poem, as the Empress points out in a kindly way.
I really wanted Pat’s response to say Go shit on a stick.
Regarding the Empress' claim that she does not mock entrants... weren't Loser points given to entrants/entries that were insulted by the Empress? And doesn't the Empress mock all entries that reference Lizzie Borden? Am I re-imagining those things?
That was mostly the shtick of the Czar (1993-2003) from whom people got the abuse points. In my early years I'd occasionally tease someone by name in print, but only if that person actually had other ink that week. Then I stopped even that. I do occasionally mock bad entries in the intro to the results, or on the FB page, but I never name the writer -- in fact, often I don't even look up who wrote them. (We usually go through the process of matching entry with writer only with the entries that get ink.)
The only other time I feel that I can get nasty with people is in response to being called incompetent, unfair, ignorant, stupid, "whore," etc. The more accusatory the "question," the less polite my answer.
(I don't recall picking on Lizzie Borden questions -- "Funny you should ax"? -- but I have disparaged jokes punning on "hot air" and rhymes resorting to the word "frown." among others. But come on, that's not cruelty.)
I know it’s late, but, pls explain punning on “hot air.” Thx.
It's just a very tired joke, the idea that some weather, heat, etc., results from "hot air" from bloviating politicians.
When we ran a contest for bogus trivia about the weather, I wrote this in the intro to the results: Despite the Empress’s express warning that “jokes about ‘hot air’ and politicians almost never get ink,” some of you evidently thought that didn’t apply to your own gems such as “Expect blustery hot wind in the lead-up to the Iowa caucuses.”
The Empress is unfailingly kind in not making sport of our bad entries which is more than we deserve for flooding her inbox with dreck. I may be remembering some teasing by the Empress, but I did not recall that abuse points were the work of the Czar.
Regarding Lizzie B, my recollection is that the Empress sent a message (probably with a letter accompanying a magnet) which said that my Lizzie B entry didn't get ink because Lizzie didn't do it/was not convicted. BTW, I no longer give my memory much credence. It has become quite unreliable.
Did the poem writer say you mentioned the bad poets by name? You can mock someone with glee and disdain without mentioning their name, I suppose, and they know what they did.
True, I have mocked (with disdain, yes) the poem, not the person -- and okay, I'll accept that I might well have made someone feel bad personally, even if nobody else (including me) knew who that person was.
On the other hand, I think I'm very kind and patient with people who ask me politely for critiques, especially in craft-based contests like limericks (rather than in jokes in which we just happen to laugh more at one entry than another).
What I won't do is get into a debate over whether that's person's entry was funnier than another one. Neither side comes out of that either enlightened or happy.
You've always been nice to me. Then again, poetry is not my strongest inkdom.
As for mocking entrants, Losers can get points for "Abuse." See the link below. Russ Beland and Chuck Smith were the leading offenders back in the day. To me, the "abuse" was good-natured ribbing.
http://www.nrars.org/inksByType.html
it's a pretty fine line between good natured ribbing and mocking. maybe the abuse I remember was private abuse rather than public abuse.
Occasionally a loser contributed some self depreciating humor. Was that public self abuse?
As far as the Loser Stats go, you don't get extra ink for making fun of yourself. But it can get you ink in the first place. In fact, we had a "humiliate yourself for ink" contest in 2006, whose main categories were Embarrassing Anecdote About Yourself, and Suck Up to the Empress. (Results here: http://nrars.org/inviteText/0666.html The winner (not pictured in that all-text file) was sized Fred Dawson's "Looking Down at My Feet." Fred is of very ample size, and the winning entry was a snapshot showing only a big white arc of a T-shirt.
My recollection is that the abuse had to be delivered by the Czar or the Empress.
This example of abuse ink was public, not private:
Report from Week CXXIV (457), in which you were to supply the beginnings of letters to the editor that will never see print.
But first, some important business. Several weeks ago, we held a contest to commemorate the announced retirement of Style Invitational superstar (Russell Beland, Springfield). We ran the contest results. And then, suddenly, with no explanation, we began receiving entries again from (Russell Beland, Springfield) as though nothing had happened. On the one hand, this is delightful news for his legions of groupies. On the other hand, he must be punished. The Czar is not a cruel man, but he is a firm man, and justice must prevail. Hence, it is hereby proclaimed that from this day hence, (Russell Beland, Springfield) shall be permitted to submit entries as usual excepting that his next nine (9) published entries shall be publicly credited to someone else. Mr. Beland will receive no acknowledgment of these entries other than an accounting, week by week, of the number of entries remaining in his punishment bank. The banked entries will not count toward his lifetime total, for purposes of eventual induction in The Style Invitational Hall of Fame. This order is final. It cannot be questioned and is not subject to appeal.
Russ has one entry published today, leaving him with eight to go.
How do you remember this? Anyway, I did know that abuse acknowledged in the official stats was public abuse. I was just trying to let 'someone' know that I feel that I've been abused in the past.
All the past contests are available here: http://www.nrars.org/index.html
Regarding age: the author Thomas Berger told me that Groucho Marx told him that “a man’s as old as the woman he feels.”
Are we sure ChatGPT didn't write the anti-Empress protest poem?
Would it be termed cruelty to opine that ChatGPT would have produced better rhyme and meter, if not accuracy?
About the same really
As for that attempt at damning with faint brays in the form of a poem (?) --- I will say that while I have not been entirely gruntled with the royal nods over the years, I have not been disgruntled either --- and certainly not to the point of conspicuously demonstrating in tortured verse why my own entries must have been consistently met with, "We are not amused!" Look at it this way: unlike Oscar voters, who until very recently (that would be as of last Monday) didn't have to actually see the movies they voted on for the past 97 years (we'll see about that...), one or both royals must read every one of often thousands of agonizing attempts at being funny. Week after soulsucking week. Now you're probably thinking, somebody has to do it. And yes, it may very well be some sort of penance as many in the know have suggested, but just consider how long you would last in their slippers --- forced to make almost continuous sighs. It may mean grasping at haws from time to time, out of sheer frustration, but then again, we're all paying to Lose.
I was having lunch in a pub and the pretty young waitress kept looking at me in that certain way. I was feeling really good right up until she said “You look just like my Dad!” And that’s the day I knew I was a geezer.
I have written aboout this before: A young woman feature reporter at The Post, someone I edited all the time and with whom I had a real rapport, once told me, unbidden, that she loved working with me because I was smart, funny, "and safe, like a gay uncle."
(It was Laura Blumenfeld, one of the best long-feature writers I ever worked with.)
I get the "smart" and "funny," but no gay uncle would be caught dead with that stashe.
I knew I had become old when, a few years before I retired from academia (before!) a young female student held a door open for me.
I never accept a seat on crowded public transportation unless I am hurting and it is offered by a man. A woman, never, because I am a jerk. Once, many years ago (I was maybe 40) I was berated on the subway by a woman who accused me of hogging seats that should go to the old or handicapped or herself. (There were empty seats available.) I apologized to her, loudly and profusely, stood up, and walked away, limping horribly. My legs were fine. It was such an excellent thing to do.
Did this in Brussels, I'd actually ruined an ankle and sat near the door in the handicapped seat. Young punk with a bandaged hand got on and berated me in a foreign language until I got off and limped away. Honest limp but I sure exaggerated it a bit.
You and Harrison Ford after he gives up his bus seat to Lesley Ann Down pretending to be pregnant in Hanover Street.
With only 20 inking entries, that has to be one of the shortest lists of results to a short-form contest.
Am I right it thinking it was one of the least entered as well?
Nope, we got a lot of entries. You can draw whatever.conclusions you want.
I reviewed my no-inks, and can concur.
Sam, what happened to your hat? Did you lend it to Gene?
No way. It's too manly for me.
The new pic was taken for a project but wound up not getting used. I posted it, somebody suggested I should use it for an updated profile shot and I figured why not. In it I’m holding a chicken named Noodles. The hat still gets near daily use.
A Chicken names Noodles would be a great title for one of Carl Hiiassen’s comic mysteries
Sounds souper!
One of the phrases us high school German students were most eager to learn, but the teacher somehow didn’t oblige and we had to teach ourselves, was “Fickst du, scheissekopf!”
"Fick dich!" surely
" . . . up a stick!"
Could be. This was high school German, almost none of the finer details stuck.
My German class was at a University and I flunked. It was my first language class ever and by the time I focused on the verbs and not the dialogs it was too late. But I do remember in German there are two ways to "order another glass of milk .." with one in replacement and one in addition.
Far more creative insults available which, granted, don't all quite roll of the tongue as easily as "Fick dich!" -- or are perhaps as immediately gratifying. For example, ""Teletubbyzurückwinker" (a favorite --- one who waves back at the "Teletubbies" -- a simpleton), "Backpfeifengesicht" (slappable face), "Arsch mit ohren" (ass with ears), "Einzeller" (single cell organism) and "Rotzlöffel" (a brat --- literally a "snot spoon").
I like "Arsch mit ohren". I'm adding that to the repertoire. Surely that one "rolls of the tongue". Ass with ears is a lovely image.
"Du bist ein Arschloch*" is the one I remember.
(*You are an asshole)
Always a good standby, but the address form --- the familiar "Du" used with children, friends, others with whom you're familiar, and by mutual agreement vs. the formal "Sie" (strangers, business relationships, older folks) --- can be a little tricky, depending on just how offensive you want to be. Although calling someone an asshole to begin with pretty much clarifies intent. Using the "Du" form (as you have it) with a stranger, however, would likely add a nice soupçon (ein Hauch) of appropriate disrespect.
I recall my high school French teacher pointing out that, in a lover's quarrel, the form of address could slide from "tu" to "vous" as a way of distancing and then later back to "tu" as an expression of contempt. Teach that to an A.I.!
Speaking of rolling off the tongue, an American in a small Scottish pub kept observing the waitress, even after he had ordered. She came up to him and asked what was up. "I'm fascinated by the way you roll your r's." "Must be the high heels."