Welcome...

Welcome...

Tuesday, December 31, 2002

Use this link. Does a day start at midnight or at 12:01AM? It matters with years...why not minutes to days. Any thoughts?

On the Edge of a Brand New Year...

Where to begin
At the start you'd think
Maybe in the middle
Not too late I think

G'day Ochies. Or is it Ochieros? I can never keep that straight. On this another day when the Sun did not rise on the West and the Axis of Evil keeps spinning round, can you say that you have not had fun today?
Have you told your housepet that you love them. Like plants, housepets respond well to singing. Especially when you ad lib their name into every possible nook & crannie in the lyrics.
Take stock! Heck...make stock! I felt bad because I butchered a whole chicken to make Fried Chick'n and I never bothered to put my scraps in the freezer for stock. On the same note, I would have been executed in severvely drastic and inhumane ways by the Fremen for the way I wash my dishes.

Moor madness! It's all the rage in Spain. Well...it used to be if you open to page 87 of your World History textbooks. The Teacher's Edition cannot help you as well as you assume it will. More madness please. Perhaps some madcap behaviour. Why are retard joke still funny? This is a cruel world we live in...make no bones about it. When someone complains that this is an unfair world you say "yer dern tootin'!" and tell 'em why. Never change your perspective...just open it. You're probably not looking in a wide enough scope but I can only speak for myself. And do...at every opportunity.

* ^ ) I'm keeping an eye out for you. Nobody said that.

When you ask someone "How are you?" I hope you're always prepared for the worst. You never know what'll happen when you open your mouth. I mean...you asked, right?

Does the day of the highest amount of spousal abuse in countries other than the USA correspond with major Sporting events such as Championships, et al. It's around the corner so if you're really looking for something nice to do, you could donate something to a Woman's Shelter. Super Bowl Sunday is upon us.

See you next year, Ochieros. A Whole New Year...a Whole New Bag O'Shennanigans! ^_~

Still thinking impure thoughts of rolling donuts,

Rev. Sully!

Monday, December 30, 2002

WAH!!!

Here's something only Ocho fans can enjoy.

(_|_) My ass.
Isn't lovely. Isn't it wonderful.

8====> (____|____) This is a fucking HUGE ASS!!! Get it! WAH!!!

Wait...there's more. I'd like to know what does North Korea really want. And I've figured it out. M*A*S*H re-runs. No really. It's true.
Then there is the lack of courtesy for the elderly. I mean it's a reflex when I laugh when the elderly fall down...it's downright mean and nasty and rude when other people do it. Can we just get along. Someday we'll be that old.
I saw an old lady fall once. And I had to laugh. I mean it was like slow motion. WHAP! Felled like a tree. Fell on her face. I think I stopped laughing when I saw the blood. Out loud that is.

We're starting a campaign (we mean the Royal Rev. Sully!) to get Chris Rock cannonized as the Saint of Common Sense.
We're passing the hat later and having a benefit luncheon with a guest speaker. I'm thinking the homeless guy in Harvard Square who didn't realize that he already sold me a copy of Spare Change yesterday.

Now in the world of Sport, the Patriots are Patsies. There I said it. Argue if you want but it won't change the fact if they only won one bloody more game there would be none of this bleeding heart crap from the Foxboro Faithful. It was a fluke that throws a monkey wrench into the unhappiness of being a New England Sports fan. Regardless of what you read on that bathroom wall in the Esso in North Pigfuckbridge, MON, New Zealand, the Bruins are the real deal. Hockey is God's Sport. He told me so in a vivid vision at the Public House last Tuesday. On the 8th day He was bored and made the ice. All those objecting to the masculine thrid person "He" in the God-talk need to get in line with the Romance Language Unions first. One your form has been made in triplicate, we will then send your complaint via pnumatic tube to the local Town Dump.

I knew I recognized those Raelian freaks from the cloned baby story. Little Eve shoud have a shelf life of 8 days but we'll never trully know because they've already replaced her with Manny Lewis, TV's Webster. No one will know the difference. It worked for the government covering up the disappearence of Valentine Michael Smith. Wait...that was a book. Why didn't the aliens from "V" just get genetic samples and clone themselves some food? I mean..."V" couldn't fly today under this type of media scrutiny.

I was at a Target in Everett, MA, USA last week wherein the checkout counter girl had more hair on her arms than I do on my body. Who decides what is fashionable in body hair??? Let me know then let her know.

Is it really New Years? I mean that for real with all the calendar changes in the past 2,000 years...how do we know for sure? And then there's all the competition. You heard it here first...control the calendar...control the world. MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Has anyone seen my houseboy, Cho-Cho? He needs to get his ass home and clean up this mess.

Ciao my fellow Ochos!

Rev. Sully!

Sunday, December 29, 2002

So!
Any New Year's Resolutions? Or can you think of the stupidest New Years Res you've heard out of somone's mouth.

Wednesday, December 25, 2002

Christmas feces....hidey ho!

Monday, December 23, 2002

Thanks Sully... glad you could make it! Happy holidays everyone. Hope you get what you're wishing for... major downfall or otherwise!

Monday, December 16, 2002

Here's to Matt for being a congenital...I mean congenial host! HUZZAH! Good party!
And it is the second major downfall of men is that we accept that attitude.
^_~

WAH!

Friday, December 13, 2002

Yes - we ladies of leisure are rarely home. Instead we spend our time frollicking on beaches and what not.

From a female perspective - you are right blow jobs win over all as the major downfall of the Male species.

Mingia!
If you were home when I called, you wouldn't miss these things. ;)

If I have to pick, I'd go with the blow jobs downfall myself. Not gossiping doesn't get us in nearly as much trouble as that does.
I think the major downfall of the Male species is our need for blow jobs.

Long Duk Dong: MALLIED!

Jake Ryan: Married?

Long Duk Dong: Yah! Sam get married. To oily beau-hunk.

I'm very happy for them and proud of them.

Thursday, December 12, 2002

Wait - ENGAGED??? Did I miss something.
Well, I certainly didn't see that coming!
You guys really need to start doing a better job of keeping me up to date on the IMPORTANT gossip happening on that side of the world. I think that is one of the major downfalling of the Male species.
Well...I just might.

Wednesday, December 11, 2002

Cool... let me know if you need any assistance.
I get to plan the Bachelor Party!!!
Congrats to James and Laura... they just got engaged! Woo hoo!

Tuesday, December 10, 2002

And the world keeps turning...

Thursday, December 05, 2002

>Size matters not.

Size? No. Mass and density? Yes... most definately.

Wednesday, December 04, 2002

>Based on what? as far as I know, orbital/gravitational calculations are based on the actual position of massive bodies, not on where they appear to be. (I may be wrong about that)

Based on the Ask Jeeves query. That's it. I'm an eijit on these things regurgitating what I read like a good Christian at Sunday School.
^_~

The larger the density of an object, the larger the gravitational pull (as a black hole, very small but truly dense and gravitationally attractive). Size matters not.
I think I should have a greater gravitational attraction than most due to my being dense. It's why chicks dig me.
^_~

>A gravitron (if they exist) is assumed to have the same velocity as the speed of light.

Based on what? as far as I know, orbital/gravitational calculations are based on the actual position of massive bodies, not on where they appear to be. (I may be wrong about that)

I like Einstien's model, which is analogous to the following illustration, but in an additional dimension. (ie. 4th dimensional warping of 3 dimensional space as opposed to 3rd dimensional warping of 2 dimensional space):
If you have an unbelieveably large piece of fabric stretched tight, and place a marble on it, it will distort the surface of the fabric, but stay put assuming the "plane" is level. If you also put a large ball on the fabric, it and the marble will roll toward each other as a result of the distortions they cause, at a rate and direction (in a thoretically perfect scenario) similar to what you would expect from bodies of similar scale in a vacuum.

Tuesday, December 03, 2002

More Gravity reference.

^_~

Funny about the dog though.

Well having a large mass in an area of space/time sure helps things stick (WAH!) but what caused all this coalesion in the first palce. Attractive forces, repulsive forces...hmmm. I guess that's the spirit of the question.

Also I'd ask the aliens how to MacGuyver a laser pointer into a Lightsaber. OK...that's sounds silly now but wait until I'm Jedi Massa Mack-Daddy.

What is the Speed of Gravity? Can gravity be even measured in speed? A gravitron (if they exist) is assumed to have the same velocity as the speed of light.
Very interesting indeed. Would it depend on the mass versus attraction? All in a vacuum of course. Acceleration.
Hmmm...makes me wish I wasn't an eijit when it comes to this kind of stuff.
Maybe we should ask the Rent-A-Geniuses. They exist in Somerville. "Knowlwdge for Hire".

If Alpha Centauri blew up then would it take a little over 4 years to have a grave effect on our solar system? Well...besides the big flash in the sky.

I think I would ask an alien if they believe in God. And to elaborate. Perhaps a "Babel Fish" type thing exists in their knowledge that can really help in the "kiss my ass and disprove the Big Kahuna finally" argument.
I think gravity being a byproduct of mass warping space is a more elegant and plausable solution, don't you? If gravity is the result of a "graviton" particle interaction, then wouldn't it stand to reason that there would be a delay in gravitational effect? If Alpha Centauri were to collapse into a red dwarf, would our system feel the effects instantaneously, or would we have to wait for the gravitons to travel here? If the latter, what is the speed of gravity?

Sunday, December 01, 2002

>Dogs and cats (although I believe they have souls) seem not to take any joy and/or humor in their flatulence.

You haven't met Clark dog, have you? He clearly thinks farts are a riot... he'll go out of his way to get up, go into Jon's room, climb up on the bed, fart on his head, then run back into the other room and pretend he's sleeping (with tail wagging and one eye open). He also gets that, "What? It wasn't me!" expression everytime he farts audibly. Fart humor may well be beneath the dignity of house cats.

Quantum gravity (which I tend to doubt the existance of in favor of Einstien's model) isn't the same thing at all. UFT is a single theorem that would simultaneously and elegantly explain the existance and interaction of gravitation, electromagnetics, and the weak and strong nuclear forces.

Wednesday, November 27, 2002

When did that become as theological question? I have no idea! It's just the question I would ask God if given the opportunity. Yes I think God can only answer that. Excuse me Allmighty, but why did you program us humans to chuckle and find humor in base bodily functions. Is it the cost of a soul? Dogs and cats (although I believe they have souls) seem not to take any joy and/or humor in their flatulence. And I know not if the other "senient" lifeforms such as whales and dolphin enjoy/find humor in their olfactory emminations as much as humans do. Do Chimps? They love to jerk off and play. They might find farting funny too.
I know why farts are funny. I make jokes. I make farts. Therefore farts are funny. ^_^ I want to know why that seems to bind all independent cultures that farts are funny. I mean farting is pretty much universally funny/gross. Smiling and crying are also. Just very human things.

I also guess that these aliens should understand us when we ask these questions, right? No mucky-muckying around with languages, semantics, etc. They're asking us to ask us anything (or using their human "contact").

Would asking show proof of quantuum gravity be the same as your question Preacher Matt?

Tuesday, November 26, 2002

Out of curiosity though, when did that become a theological question? You sound as if only God could answer it.

I still think I'd go with "Please explain either a workable unified field theory, or why such a theory cannot work."

Monday, November 25, 2002

Oh, c'mon... you know why farts are funny.
Enuff. This sucks. ^_~

Back to MADNESS!!!

I'm reading a Carl Sagan book. The Demon Haunted World: Science As Candle In The Dark. And where to get it. It's basically a Skeptic's Bible. I'd advertise it as so. Non-Fiction, critical thinking on scientific ideas and topics and most importantly psedo-science and it's damages. Also science as American Culture.
About alien abduction stories and their eerie counterparts in history as demons, incubi, succubi, etc.
And how he used to get letters from alien abduction "survivors". They would say they were in contact with the extraterrestrials and for Carl to ask them any question.
Sagan asked for a short answer to Fermat's Last Theorum.
Sagan would even mail the problem itself. He never heard back. But in the footnote of this page, Carl Sagan muses that it would be a wonderful idea if someone or group came up with a book "10 Things To Ask An Alien."

So smarty panteseses:
What would you ask an alien? No not How To Serve Man. That's not funny.
I'm working on one. Don't answer right away (unless you have a dooozie! already) and please don't immediately put in your default "One Question To Ask GOD".
Mine would be "Why are farts so universally funny?". Aliens are not God and I doubt they could answer that anyhoo.



Since you weren't aware you were/could insulting someone with rude and vulgar language I guess then it's alright huh?

I don't think anyone saying "you suck" is unaware they're using insulting language, but it is possible to intend insult without intending to call someone a fellator (is that a word?).

Just because its usage is frequent doesn't mean its original context has magically dropped away.

Thanks for the example the other night, dude. I hope you don't take offense that I called you that... I mean, it used to mean a foppish city boy, but it's been frequently used without that intent enough that now it's just a throwaway mode of address, like "man" or "pal". Why can words like that change over time, but not "suck"? After all, you CAN still use dude in it's original context, or we wouldn't have folks vacationing at "dude ranches", just as you CAN still use suck to mean provide suction or give head. It just isn't NECESSARILY so.
[11/22/2002 9:48:01 AM | Preacher Matt]
Why would sucking be negative?
Here are some unpleasant things that are famous for sucking: leeches, mosquitos, black flies, assorted other parasites, toilet plungers, and chest wounds. It's also an undesirable/childlike behavior as with thumbs. Get your mind out of the gutter, pervert. :)


I'm sorry but that just doesn't cut the mustard well enough. I could see if someone is being childish and you say to them "you suck" inferring they're sucking their thumb but that's not the case in its general usage and you could wind up getting in a fist fight. It's not set up like that. What is needed to understand "suck" in it's vulgar usage (that is what we are talking about here, not it's practical usage or intended or literal usage but its vulgar usage) is a sense of cultural literacy. And even popular cultural literacy.
"Suck" by nature is not a negative word. It is an action, a verb. It desribes motion, vaccuum, usually properties of fluids.
It is the culture and the assumption that makes it a dirtier word and phrase. Why is "suck" a questionable thing to say in its vulgar context? Just because its usage is frequent doesn't mean its original context has magically dropped away. Also you bring up the point that people might not even know they're meaning fellatio or do not have it in mind when they use the vulgar "suck". That is part of the problem here. Or should I say the problem with declining speech. Since you weren't aware you were/could insulting someone with rude and vulgar language I guess then it's alright huh?

Calling me a pervert can only help if I was a Democratic President and you're the Republican lobby.
^_~

Friday, November 22, 2002

I already conceeded that "this sucks" was *possibly* originally a specific reference to fellatio, and had negative connotations for all of the reasons you describe. As it's usage became more frequent however, I think that the meaning dropped by the wayside, and only the negative connotations remained. I don't think the typical person saying something sucks has fellatio in mind any more than the average kid knows "ring around the rosy" is a song about the plague. If you can say the word and only mean the negative implications (which again, is now a dictionary-accepted slang usage) without it ever occurring to you what it might mean if taken literally, I don't think you can really say it "means" what it's literal meaning is.

Why would sucking be negative?
Here are some unpleasant things that are famous for sucking: leeches, mosquitos, black flies, assorted other parasites, toilet plungers, and chest wounds. It's also an undesirable/childlike behavior as with thumbs. Get your mind out of the gutter, pervert. :)

Aside from fellatio/sexual sucking (and even that can be percieved as a negative, as you've pointed out) or nursing (which is actually suckling), when is sucking GOOD? Okay... maybe crazy straws, but I'll submit that most things that suck have negative connotations.

Thursday, November 21, 2002

[11/21/2002 8:57:45 AM | Preacher Matt]
Sucks is definately vulgar English, all I'm contesting is the idea that "This sucks" necessarily means "This gives fellatio". That it has origins there and that it is vulgar doesn't mean that that must be either it's intent or interpreted meaning. As the dictionary said, it can simply mean that something ain't good or desireable.


And I will simply agree to disagree with you. We cannot change each other's minds nor will I be able to produce anything beyond my speculation, opinion and observances of the usage of this particular piece of vulgarity.
I just wonder how something can be considered not good or not desirable by applying the action of "sucking" to it. The first thing is fellatio. It is considered sodomy to the Judeo-Christian ethic. There can be something not good or not desirable when juxtaposed to this paradigm. Then comes the homophobic angle when introduced into my idea of the sport arena. When men are taunting other men with this vulgarity, it is even more sinister than before because unless you are progressive thinking, chances are that homophobic inculcation is part of your life. It was part of mine. I had to unlearn it.
So from the Judeo-Christian angle of sodomy, fellatio is wrong (or sinful). We can include homosexual behavior as part of that. Things that are "wrong" to a social "norm". Things that are "undesirable" to a social "norm". What makes a word "vulgar" is the intention and assumptive. "Vulgar" meaning more than simply "common" as its Latin counterpart. The kind of "vulgar" that people get often confused with "profanity". For "sucks" to be truly American vulgarity, the assumptive must mean fellatio for it to have a negative connotation.
What other reasons would sucking have that would be negative in this realm (besides Dr. Hooey's observation of sharing the F* gerund's plosive)?

Why would sucking be negative?
Again I ask:
Sucks what?
"Most of the vulgar language and images used in today's media would not be acceptable 40 years ago in the same visual and audio media. The common culture has changed (for the better?) and language follows suit but still does it completely rationalize usage of questionable phrases and words?"

Sucks is definately vulgar English, all I'm contesting is the idea that "This sucks" necessarily means "This gives fellatio". That it has origins there and that it is vulgar doesn't mean that that must be either it's intent or interpreted meaning. As the dictionary said, it can simply mean that something ain't good or desireable.

Oh, and welcome back to the world of the living. :)
I hear there will be a Star Wars: The Clone Wars cartoon coming soon to the American Cartoon Network. I hear that the production company that gave us the Powerpuff Girls and Samurai Jack will be doing it.
I haven't seen anything on Star Wars dot com as of yet.

Wednesday, November 20, 2002

Just found this on theforce.net...

Typewriter: $50
Paper: $6
Monkey: $1,000
Shackles used to chain monkey to typewriter: $15
Seeing the look on your fans' faces when you announce the title of the new Star Wars movie: Priceless.
"Most of the vulgar language and images used in today's media would not be acceptable 40 years ago in the same visual and audio media. The common culture has changed (for the better?) and language follows suit but still does it completely rationalize usage of questionable phrases and words?"

I concur.

I know I'm coming in late on the discussion here but I've been a little busy.

- K1W1 -

Friday, November 15, 2002

Like one of the development managers here is fond of telling me, "That's not a bug... it's a feature."
What? No Millie's not fixed. Millie's broken! There was nothing wrong with him. How can they call it 'fixed'?

Thursday, November 14, 2002

Wednesday, November 13, 2002

.
.
Winner of the Quickest No-Prize is Dan Lyon:
"The US. But that does not mean that we can just go around and attack other countries just because they have natural resources that we crave. And if we feel it is absolutely necessary to do so for other reasons, we need to be eloquent in our reasoning and make sure at least reasonable allies understand why we are doing it."
Original question of Who Won the Cold War?

Who won the Cold War? Or better put, did the US beat the USSR in the Cold War? Hmmm.

Wednesday, November 06, 2002

oui
Semantics in an argument about semantic. Somewhat fitting, n'est pas?
; ^ )

Tuesday, November 05, 2002

>Assumed in the context, run on foot in an athletic matter.

Oh, please. Not run how... run what. Even if it's to run a race, there's a world of difference between running the race (participating by running on ffot in an athletic manner) and running the race (organizing, promoting, and officiating). It is about context, and in the sucking context in question, "This race sucks" only means that the race is objectionable. If you want suck to have fellatio assumed in context, try "Suck me."

Monday, November 04, 2002

Preacher Matt wrote:
Basicly, I don't think there is, or needs be "an assumed thing to suck upon". It sucks... it doesn't suck on something. As they have different meanings, those are essentially different words, like run (jog) and run (operate). If someone says they like to run, there isn't a necessary assumption about what they like to run... it's simply a different usage.


Run what? Assumed in the context, run on foot in an athletic matter. Context, it's all about context. Although when someone says something/one sucks, one doesn't assume any variety of North American Chiefly nor to siphon.


>It's just as dirty as it ever has been.
Preacher Matt wrote:
Then why does the average person find it more offensive to say that something "sucks dick" than to say it "sucks"?


Because the one
a.) looses the assumptive which takes all the joke and fun out of it. And
2.) because it's not said in the media that way. Basically by saying "sucks", the one can swear without swearing*.

I do not agree that "sucks" is victim of lingual evolution. I believe that "sucks" is a result of declining standards. A$$hole can now be said on NYPD Blue. Will it be long until it matriculates (or trickles-down, I guess it's the one's P.O.V. of lingual standards) into the "acceptable" vernacular? Where 8 year olders say it (I might have already but I knew *if I said "that sucks" in front of my mom I would have gotten cuffed)?

Most of the vulgar language and images used in today's media would not be acceptable 40 years ago in the same visual and audio media. The common culture has changed (for the better?) and language follows suit but still does it completely rationalize usage of questionable phrases and words?


>The Sports Arena argument cements the existing underlying homophobic feeling that puts the "negative" in the phrase.
Preacher Matt wrote:
I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, I'm just saying the making sense doesn't make it true. It's good conjecture, but it's only conjecture.


I believe "conjecture" does not convey the spirit of it; conjecture has very negative hues to it. More in the vein of "postulate". I say postulate because the fellatio is taken for granted in "sucks". That is established. The homophobic overtones are merely observation; not guesswork.


Preacher Matt wrote:
I don't think it's proper to assume that when someone says "sucks" meaning "is objectionable or inadequate" that they mean "fellates".


Again, the negative quality of "sucking" stems from the unfortunate happenstance of having to be forced to perform fellatio on the person/idea. The objectionable and/or inadequate can also be shared with it's identical cousin "that blows". No one is fellating but it is the assumed part that the fellation is the negative part. Fellatio is only negative to the prude or when it is man-on-man**.

**not saying it is negative or bad but merely illuminating obvious attitudes.


>The Sports Arena argument cements the existing underlying homophobic feeling that puts the "negative" in the phrase.

I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, I'm just saying the making sense doesn't make it true. It's good conjecture, but it's only conjecture.

>It's just as dirty as it ever has been.

Then why does the average person find it more offensive to say that something "sucks dick" than to say it "sucks"?

>you are wrong to say I was " calling something objectionable or inadequate is belittling to gays". I never said it, you cannot quote me nor is it right of you to be that assumptive about my opinion about this.

You'll kindly note I didn't use quotes. My intent was simply to show that there is an accepted meaning of suck that is distinctly different from fellatio, neither to make assumptions about your intent nor put words in your mouth. Perhaps I should have enclosed "objectionable or inadequate" in parenthesis. There is no mention of fellation in the "objectionable or inadequate" definition, and so I don't think it's proper to assume that when someone says "sucks" meaning "is objectionable or inadequate" that they mean "fellates".

Basicly, I don't think there is, or needs be "an assumed thing to suck upon". It sucks... it doesn't suck on something. As they have different meanings, those are essentially different words, like run (jog) and run (operate). If someone says they like to run, there isn't a necessary assumption about what they like to run... it's simply a different usage. If the origin of sucks is as you suggest, and I'll accept that it's a strong possibility, I believe it no longer necessarily holds that meaning, and I think that persisting in holding it true to it's literal origins serves only to revitalize such homophobic connotations as it may once have had. The history of our language is not the same as it's present, and sucks now has an accepted (albiet slang) usage that has nothing to do with the act of sucking on anything.

It might once very well have literally meant sucks, but that was then. I don't believe that meaning is still valid without specifying the object that is sucked. I think the ship of my evolving opinion on the matter may have found harbor here. I await the storm of your rebuttal. :)
Preacher Matt wrote:
I'm not sold on your "arena chant" origin assertion, and I'll persist in not emphasizing the alleged homoerotic nature of things that suck.


Then does the negativity that stems from "sucking" come from a puritanistical attitude? That fellatio is sodomy and therefore against God's words or that fellatio is morally wrong? Why the negativity over fellatio? The Sports Arena idea hits it on the head. The Sports Arena argument cements the existing underlying homophobic feeling that puts the "negative" in the phrase.

Preacher Matt wrote:
Frankly, I think doing so is more damaging than using a phrase that has been linguistically white washed, and that really sucks ass (which is honestly, now that I think of it, the first "dirty" meaning of the phrase I was familiar with... shit eating, not cock sucking).


It has not been linguistically white washed. It's just as dirty as it ever has been. It's our perceptions of what is acceptably vulgar versus what is obscene that have changed.

Preacher Matt wrote:
Furthermore, I checked the unabridged Webster's Dictionary, and found separate and distinct suck entries for "slang : to be objectionable or inadequate" and for "slang : to fellate". Does this not imply separate and distinct meanings? There were over 15 definitions of suck... why do you insist that calling something objectionable or inadequate is belittling to gays?


http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=Suck

I never included "objectionable or inadequate" into my argument therefore you are wrong to say I was " calling something objectionable or inadequate is belittling to gays". I never said it, you cannot quote me nor is it right of you to be that assumptive about my opinion about this.
I say it's not right to be assumptive over my opinion because even including "objectionable or inadequate", how does that distract from my argument. It only supports it seeing that the negativity behind "sucks" stems from fellatio. You agreed that "sucks" and "blows" are interchangeable. I believe you think the assumed thing to "suck" upon in the negativity of the phrase is penis.
Again…if something sucks and is "objectionable and inadequate", sucks what in particular. And why does sucking whatever you answer make it negative?
What act of fellatio is negative then?

Cheers!
^_^


Friday, November 01, 2002

I'm not sold on your "arena chant" origin assertion, and I'll persist in not emphasizing the alleged homoerotic nature of things that suck. Frankly, I think doing so is more damaging than using a phrase that has been linguisticly white washed, and that really sucks ass (which is honestly, now that I think of it, the first "dirty" meaning of the phrase I was familiar with... shit eating, not cock sucking).

Furthermore, I checked the unabridged Webster's Dictionary, and found seperate and distinct suck entries for "slang : to be objectionable or inadequate" and for "slang : to fellate". Does this not imply seperate and distinct meanings? There were over 15 definitions of suck... why do you insist that calling something objectionable or inadequate is belittling to gays?
Preacher,
I'm so sorry but that is such a cop out. You are excusing inappropiate language because "everyone else is doing it". The word hasn't lost its original meaning and evolved, our cultural attitudes of what is shocking has devolved. I do agree it no longer has the emotive value as before but that does not negate that it is a foul thing to say still but it is still culturally acceptable.
This is the circumlocution I mentioned before that makes anything justified. The word has not evolved. It has many meanings in individual context and in the context that we are discussing, it comes from a real and unoutrageous homophobic arena chant that has matriculated into the mainstream. I will not concede the word has evolved past its original meaning. It has become a generic insult yes. So has this example.
Tangent time: an episode of the New Twilight Zone, an Elvis impersonator ends up in the past and meets Elvis before he becomes famous. Elvis mistakes the timelost stranger as his long dead twin brother Arron. The two bond and the timelost man has an argument with Elvis wherein he calls Elvis a "dumb son-of-a-bitch". Elvis charges him and says "what did you say about my Momma!!!"
Elvis dies in the conflict leaving the impersonator to become Elvis.
SOB is still a horrible thing to say but is culturally acceptable. But this about calling someone an SOB for a second...

My point of this is: watch what you say to people. They might not get the joke. Suck what???

Thursday, October 31, 2002

>Sucks/blows when directed man on man is homophobic.

I call bullshit on you. By conceeding that it is meaningfull regardless of the gender relationship of the speaker and target (if indeed the target is not, as is often the case, an asexual situation or object), I think you must also concede that the word has evolved beyond the original meaning, and therefore has become a generic insult on it's own which no longer literally implies fellatio. If it did, I fail to see how saying "Having to get up early for work (gives me head).", "Dodge Neons (engage in oral sex with me)", or "Your girlfriend (brings you to climax orally), you should dump the bitch." is meaningful. Why, if "sucks" can instead be said to have the (perhaps new) meaning of "is unplesant", must it be taken to mean "is a fag" when applied to a male? If that were true, why would, "You suck dick." be more offensive to a homophobe than, "You suck."? Etymology aside, the word evolved, and no longer holds that meaning so much as the emotive value once associated with it.

At worst, the meaning is as dated as the shock value, so that the use of "sucks" might best be construed as meaning, "Yankees (are loathsome, socially and spiritually reprehensibe, abhorable deviants worthy only of being held in a regard comparable to the largely outdated but long standing public perception of homosexuals)." That ain't gay bashing, and "Yankees suck." is a lot easier to say.
Stimulating discourse, all, either way the wind blows... or sucks.

I'd like to contribute the slightly less controversial notion that "suck" as a negative term is not one whose roots lie in homophobia, but is really just a lighter more socially-acceptable variation of "fuck". About as close to that particularly pernicious perjorative as you can get in prime-time television, "suck" gives you all the thrill of "fuck" (the homonymic shock, the satisfying ending plosive, the associations with salacious horizontal knick-knack snacking) without the full force of the beginning lip-flip and impact as a well-loved and strenuously utilized epithet. And you can't tell me that the word "fuck" hasn't been adopted to color speech with negative connotations. What suck gives you that fuck also does is the implication of the core animalistic crudeness of sex, the rutting, the insertions and lingual acrobatics, the sticky sweaty awkward delicious baseness of the act, and the ability to bring that into everyday conversation. Though can you imagine saying things like "This Fucks!" "What a fucky movie!!"? Kinda sits different, but that's only because "suck" as a "fuck" substitute has over time taken on a life of it's own. I think you'd find that "suck" or "sucks" as a verb predates other variations such as "sucky", "suckage" or "sucktacular". And "suck" as a verb is probably a relatively recent adaptation, I would argue within the last 25 years, when it has become much more common to create more abstracted verbs such as "to party" and "to philosophize" To paraphrase Decartes - "I suck, therefore I am".

Sucky movie fits with sucks/blows.
Sucker is slang for a lollipop. An unweaned domestic animal. Or a piston in a syringe. Or some indescriminently attracted to something "I'm a sucker for pizza, or a sucker for BJs". A spihon. Any number of North American Cheifly. A person often used as an intensive "he's a mean sucker".
I'm finding myself nodding my head as I read about Preacher's "bites" comments.
Is "sucks" gay-bashing? I'll stand by my statement but I do know that's taking to the extreme though. It could be a bit more greyer allowing latitude but that would conceed saying it sucks is OK unless it's directed at a homosexual? Sucks/blows when directed man on man is homophobic.
And we all know that if your'e under 15 years old. Everything sucks and everything's gay. I mean...where's the tolerance???

Also, if "suck" as a slang term is rooted in homophobia, how do you account for the adjective form, as in "that's a sucky movie", or the noun form "sucker" used in the context of one who is easily duped?
>Bites can be considered a cleaner version of "sucks" for those who know what sucks truly means.

I think of bites not as "cleaner" but as "more negative". While there are indisputably positive connotations to sucking, not so with the biter. I think of "this sucks" and "this blows" as equivalent, but "this bites" is worse in my book... especially if it bites "the big one". You never hear about sucking the big one.

I don't think it's gay bashing because I think the term (the etymology of which is sadly literal) only applies to willful attacks on gays, wether verbal or physical. While I agree that the term likely has homophobic roots, I don't think it's modern and pervasive usage really has that intent. It's not like saying, "You eat corn the long way."
Dear Preacher Matt,
Although I've respect your views and have been a fan of your books for a long time now I do wonder that although we agree that "this/that sucks" represents fellatio, you didn't address it's roots or its etymology. Especially in the Sport Arena where male fans yelling "you suck" at male atheletes does infer homosexual behaviour (not becoming of an athelete either). I do stand beside my original argument that "you suck" is gay-bashing because it does infer that men performing fellatio on other men is bad and negative. Why would it "suck" then? I find nothing wrong with the act and art of fellatio and encourage it at every level.
BTW: How cool is Jango skating?
I will retool my original sense for wind though. Sucking wind means that you're spent from an exerting activity and and breathing in heavily. Therefore sucking wind. Sucking eggs...not too sure but I think it's a lame replacement for the phallus..or perhaps testes which are "eggs" in their own allegorical sense.


Dear Rev Kiwi,
Bites? Donkey dick of course! Wheah did you grow up? In a Third World nation thousands of miles away from true civilization?
; ^ )
"Bite me" can refer to a numerous amount of body part (all which you can probably define, point out and show where their insertions are) but again it refers to genetalia. Bite my pinky does not have the same dramatic effect as bite my dinky. The assumed "where" in Bite Me must be below the belt for it to have any dramatic effect.
Also Bites can be considered a cleaner version of "sucks" for those who know what sucks truly means.

They basically showed that the name Hannah was very prominant in the mid-west (?) while the name Madison was prominant in the North-east (?) - or something like that (note: Darryl Hannah played Madison in "splash"). Then they noted that there was a variable frequency of popular names in certain states especially in Florida - when they overlayed the result of the voting poles from last election the similarities were scary - I would love to see the full report - I'll have to check channel 3's newsite and see if they have it posted - but I think it would have come from ABC.

PS - Dear Sully, what about the term "to bite", "bite me" and "that bites" - what exactly am I refering to here? signed Eagerly Aware, Sucksville, Trashtalkingland.

Wednesday, October 30, 2002

No... I haven't seen it. How did it line up... # of females was roughly equal to number of votes for Bush? For Gore? Was it electoral, or popular?
In other news....
I saw this thing on the news a couple of nights ago (actually I missed haf of it - that's why I'm bringing it up) that compared the frequency of female names throughout the United States with last years election polls - the images were almost identical. Has anyone else heard or seen this? And what does that mean?
Kiwi: Could that not also be a reference for the term indicating immaturity, or being a 'mamas boy'?

I don't remember ever hearing anyone say someone sucked because they were a mama's boy or immature. It almost always means that they are describing a person or situation as unpleasant.

I don't think it constitutes gay bashing, but I'll agree with it being a fellatio reference by default. Any time I've heard it used in a way not meant to imply that, it was specifically stated, as in, "This sucks ass", "He's sucking wind", or "That sucks eggs."

I don't know that it's necessarily homophobic though, so much as intended to be vulgar and a shocking. (okay, the shock wore off). It no more means cock sucking in the literal sense than "fuck you" means that you wish someone to have sex.
Calling someone a cocksucker is another matter.

Kiwi: What about the more innocent version of 'sucking' on the mothers teat? Could that not also be a reference for the term indicating immaturity, or being a 'mamas boy'? This term also fits the criteria - although more unlikely it is possible.
I might have to check Cecil's file on hits one - perhaps he has written something about it.

Sully!: Of course anyone can rationalize anything to fit anything. But circumlocution in this matter only leads to naivete on the part of the "doubter". There is a direct tangible and homophobic correlation in regards to "that sucks".
As a "Cuss" word, "that sucks" has no innocent meaning unless the arguer is wanting to be naive or justify their use of an objectionable phrase with a ruse. There could be a whole host of things to "suck" on; eggs, toes, wind, et al. to replace penis in that thought but they are not the assumed items to be sucked upon when mentioning "that/they sucks".
I guess the most fitting example of how "that/they suck" is clearly assumed to be about penis is when Boston denizens cry "Yankees Suck" at sporting events. The Yankees are a team of men. Telling them they "suck" infers homosexual activity (unbecoming of men and negative). Using that as an "anchor", see how easily it all comes together. Unless the arguer wants to be obtuse of course.
And it is awful that people in general especially children find that term acceptable. Of course someone will argue against assuming that "suck" does not refer to just penis...why admit homophobia? Bottom Line: saying something sucks is gay-bashing.

Tuesday, October 29, 2002

Kiwi: Doesn't that suck.

Sully!: As I respond to this always...suck what in particular. I have a Theory behind this so you can answer and I'll elaborate. If I haven't already told you...

Kiwi: Yes, well - can we just skip to the part where you are elaborating....

Sully!: The etymology of the term "sucks" usually can be attributed to something like a sportsteam. When the fans chant "You suck" to the other team, it comes from a homosexual bashing sense as in "you suck penis". The inferred in "you suck" always means penis is the object to be suckled upon in that reference.
With the ever degradation of language fashioning itself more and more to the vulgar in pop culture and with the loosening of language standards in everyday life (vis-a-vis television creating what is acceptable vernacular et al.)
You suck. That sucks. It sucks. (_insert_name_here_) sucks. All refer to the male genitalia.
Now, then comes the argument of assumption. And justifying usage because one argues that the usage does not infer penis. Using Occam's Razor and Common Sense, cut away the fat of the argument and again refer to how "you suck, that sucks" started. One cannot rightfully say that sucks means "sucking the life or soul" out of one when the start of it comes from a more sinister place.
So next time someone says "That sucks". Ask them "sucks what". Call them on their naivete if they argue.

Friday, October 25, 2002

Your sentance got four peppers. I've never seen that before!!!
Eudora Pro's Pepper system ranks 1, 2 and 3. "Idiot" gets you three. Three is the worst obviously.

Wednesday, October 23, 2002

What does it mean to get peppers on one's Eudora? Sounds unpleasant.

Does that email program rate the content of your messages or something? If so, it would be fun to write a short letter that would trip all it's warning flags. Maybe about a farmer who was trying to carry two faggots with his ass so he could build a new henhouse where chicks could get laid, but whose efforts were retarded by a pussy cat that kept trying to eat his cock, or something like that.
[10/22/2002 6:40:31 PM | Preacher Matt]
Seriously though... I agree with your ideas about language evolving/devolving, but I really don't think it's fair to cast nouns as part of that. At least, I don't think it's fair to use words for nouns that didn't exist, like "telephone", although new words for old ideas like "dweeb" are right in line with the notion


Or the evolution of nouns. Nouns change over time. Faggot meant bundle of sticks not too long ago. Queer meant "funny in an odd way". Nouns that didn't exist are one thing, nouns that have changed their popular or cultural meaning are different.
Diet long ago meant a legislative assembly in some countries. And its modern usage of "usual food" or "situation of losing weight" comes from the same Latin/Greek root diaita (Grk.)/dieta (Lat.) which meant "Daily routine, way of living".
So if you were to say to "I'm dieting" to a Holy Roman Emperor, he'd wouldn't guess you were trying to lose weight.
How about holocaust. Used to be a sacrifice (consumed by fire) but since the mid-20th century it has taken on various meanings of massive destruction, rioting, the effects of war, mass slaughter. So when Odysseus says to you "Hey, come on by, we're having a holocaust, it'll be really fun". Don't freak. But when goose stepping Nazis say it: run.
How about retard. To cause or proceed slowly or slackening of tempo will get someone 3 peppers on their Eudora.
[10/22/2002 12:53:14 PM | Preacher Matt]
Just wondering how you see dirty media tactics as reflecting a bias, if they are uncovering the truth. Isn't that just ambitious investigative journalism? Was there a real breach of ethics?


The bias lies in the Publishing house. Once a reporter tempers reporting with opinion they become a columnist.
Also there is the Editor of a paper too who filters. There are the wishes and interests of the advertisers. All these run against the grain of Free Press but nothing in the world is free...it all matters who pays.

Tuesday, October 22, 2002

Leah said:
I believe that more than any other country American news
broadcasters are "allowed" to be biased. It happens continuously in the
newspapers not only in the states but to an even greater extent in the UK
and even here - for some reason though this (at least in NZ) doesn't happen
to such a great degree in the average evening news coverage. In fact when
recently one of our news reporters played some dirty tactics on our PM to
uncover some information regarding GE in our most recent election, he was
SEVERELY reprimanded. In the States however not only is this attitude
welcomed but it is encouraged.

To me that doesn't seem right - especially in a "free thinking" country.


Just wondering how you see dirty media tactics as reflecting a bias, if they are uncovering the truth. Isn't that just ambitious investigative journalism? Was there a real breach of ethics?
Seriously though... I agree with your ideas about language evolving/devolving, but I really don't think it's fair to cast nouns as part of that. At least, I don't think it's fair to use words for nouns that didn't exist, like "telephone", although new words for old ideas like "dweeb" are right in line with the notion.
I'll give you something soft to bite on...
Get him something soft to bite on STAT!!!

Monday, October 21, 2002

So like, I'm reading what Sully said, you know, and I'm like, "oh, my God, that example is so totally bu-fu!", which is like wierd, you know, because his point was just SO very. I was like, "The stuff about all the irony, or whatever, you know, and the grammar stuff? That's totally bitchin', but he should totally bag the example, cuz using modern stuff like malls and charge cards is just super-super grodey... grodey to the max!" Fer sure.

Anyway, I’m, like, freaking out totally... only a total dweeb would even, like, be talking about all this 18th century stuff, you know? Barf me out, totally! I thought this was about totally tubular verbage, you know... not a bunch of creepy old dead guys. That's just so... you know? Gag me!

Friday, October 18, 2002

I think it lends hand to confusion if one either chooses to be confused by refusing to accept that language is quasi-organic or if they are culturally illiterate enough not to understand additions. Take an 18th century person, how confused would they be by this sentance: "So I like drove to the Mall but hit red lights the entire way and it took me probably like 20 minutes and they didn't even have the TV I wanted so I logged on an charged it onto my card at their website." Blase example but...
Language is not a static thing...it cannot be.

Is the evolution of language lending to confusion ironic?
Does it fit any of these?
Irony is an implied discrepancy between what is said and what is meant.
Three kinds of irony:

1.verbal irony is when an author says one thing and means something else.
2. dramatic irony is when an audience perceives something that a character in the literature does not know.
3. irony of situation is a discrepency between the expected result and actual results.

Would it be #3? Your expected result is that language becomes streamlined & better over time and it becomes worse? I think that's opinion, not irony. But that's the trouble with irony. Opinion matters in what is irony and what is not.
You guys should've come to my pathology lectures - Ken had a LOT to say about the degradation of the English language and how it's all the "damn Yankees" fault ("collectively, not individually")

PS - the evolving, adapting, and adjusting manner of language only leads to one thing --- confusion.

Huh - isn't that ironic?

Wednesday, October 16, 2002

>"Isn't it ironic that a short story about an unsinkable sealiner was published only years before the Titanic sank?".
Is the latter ironic? Yes and no. Prophetic, perhaps. Situational, definately. Ironic, sure...it's not hard to consider the latter irony.
Irony is not an all-encompassing term to slap on every queer event.

Yes and no? I'm failing to see the yes part. It doesn't even seem like situational irony to me. Using the Titanic movie as an example though, the "lucky" kid who won the tickets skipping happily through the streets... that's what I consider situational irony. I don't think synchronicity has fuckall to do with it.

Friday, October 11, 2002

It's obvious it's not coming ouit as fluidly or as elegantly as I hoped it would.
It's an idea...a way of percieving. Trying to see it with new eyes. OK. With situational irony there is the happenstance of something "funny" happening. Or percieving.
Isn't it ironic when...
In a non-Alanis way BTW. But when something appears to be ironic to the One, if it makes sense to Another could be as a synchronicity. Something interrelated and "funny". But I digress. I still feel irony is misused in situational (non-literal, literal meaning prose or poetry) ways all the time. Things are attributed to irony when they should be reclassified as something else and then the annoying notion that almost everything situational can be rationalized as ironic when it's not truly ironic.
But when I say "secular synchonicity", I mean that a synchonicity smacks of Divine fingerprints. That too could be up for debate but that real situation irony has the same feel to it. I think I'm saying it all wrong but it's the best I can do for now. Wish I knew classical Greek...that's the best language for philospohical and theological discussion for really classifying things.
In English there is one word for love...in Greek, storge, philia, eros, agape, etc. Each has a flavor to suit the compartmentalized item that shares a feeling but isn't the same.
I feel the same goes for situational irony. "Isn't it ironic that..." and then it's explained and there is a connection to the item and action adding a sense of "mystery", "queerness" or "oddness" to that "funny" feeling.
Is Twain's use of irony in "Jumping Frog of Calerveras County" by having the story translated into French and retranslated lieterally back into English the same irony as "Isn't it ironic that a short story about an unsinkable sealiner was published only years before the Titanic sank?".
Is the latter ironic? Yes and no. Prophetic, perhaps. Situational, definately. Ironic, sure...it's not hard to consider the latter irony.
Irony is not an all-encompassing term to slap on every queer event.

Thursday, October 10, 2002

Uhh... I reread your post Sully, but I can't for the life of me figure out what your theory is.
I enjoyed that article. Purdy's observance of Love Story was excellent. Thank you.
I'll bite.

Yes, yes... the Alannis-listening masses may well never understand what the word means, but their use of it as a device is unquestionably pervasive. You don't have to go too far these days to find an example of irony, especially in it's meaner form: sarcasm. Given that the enlightend folks on Ocho either already know what it is or can damn well look it up, what do you think of the notion, laid out here, that irony is in fact a sort of modern literary cancer, eating away at our capacity for earnest expression and replacing it with cynicism and reflexive mockery?

In much the same way that violence on television desensitizes us and shapes our thoughts, does our custom of ironic communication likewise erode our capacity to be honest with ourselves? I'm thinking not, but it's an interesting position.
THE GOOD WORD!

I got a theory. And a new definition. For years I've been struggling with the dilution of our language. It can't be helped...language is not static. It is as an organism...evolving, adapting, adjusting.
My battles over irony have been quite fufilling and entertaining but I still refuse to see irony when it is actually situational but I respect others P.O.V.'s because I hope they respect mine.
Althought I stand firm by Websters 1.1 definition in regards to true irony. Just because a situation can be funny, odd or otherwise interrelated with something else does not necessarily make it ironic. But I can see how irony recently includes a feeling of secular synchronicity. I say this because irony is used sometimes when other words clearly define the situation and mood better. When an instance seems ironic, it has a peculiarity about it that transcends the mundane but yet doesn't really invoke anything Divine at the same time.
Any takers?

Tuesday, October 08, 2002

>What is the ugliest part of your body?

My toe... definately my right big toe. I had the nail surgically removed (with pliers) and it just... wasn't quite right after that.

>How do you make love stay?

Epoxy.

>Who is best fit to represent the human race to an alien society?

Pretty much anyone other than Michael Jackson.

>Why does gas cost less per gallon than water?

Water's also free... they charge that much for it because people are fuckin' retards and will pay for bottled tap water instead of getting it from the tap.

>Who thought we'd WANT hot in-flight meals? What do you like to eat on an airplane?

Someone who's spent more than 10 hours on a plane, no doubt. Pussy... same as everywhere else.

>What one sure-fire trick to pick up women do YOU KNOW PERSONALLY that you have NEVER seen described in Maxim Magazine? (Feel free to include more than one and BE SPECIFIC!!)

Yeah... like there's anything sure-fire about women.

>What bit of your culture are you most excited to show to your kids? If not your kids, then somebody's kids? Whose kids?

I'm looking forward to introducing them to the wide world of Yankee ingenuity. If not my kids, than my friends' kids.

>I didn't know you had kids?...

Yeah, well there's probably a lot you don't know. :)
Exactly!

Myrmidion!
That's a link underneath, Myrmidons was Kiwi's word of the day. She used it correctly. The link can answer all questions.

Monday, October 07, 2002

ACHILLES

Okay... I'm here. We can start now!

How 'bout this one:

There once was a sailor named Waylon
who stood on the deck with a rail on
"It's a mast!" He declared as his member he bared,
"..and it's perfect for hanging a sail on!"

What's a myrmidon?

Sunday, October 06, 2002

Myrmidons of Jubal? Not bad...can I change to White Trash Achillues?

I just made this up:

Myrmidons of Jubal
Nero & Pedro
Channel Ocho Productions 2002

Oh the Myrmidons played Frisbee
On the shores of Troy
Achilles sat there pouting
And crying like a boy

Pat got up and left the room
And got a cup of wine
Old Phoenix he was snoring
in the corner by the fire.

The line was broke, a sign went up
It seemed Old Heck broke out
And the Armour of Achiiles
Pat put on and rode on mount

Pat came back, the suit did not
Old Heck now wore and strode
Achilles got a new suit from his mom
And gods of old.

What happened to the flower girl
Where did you see her go
Miss Brysies we truly miss
Her daddy sits in snow
Oh flower girl how can this be
This tale of grief and woe
The blind poets and muses sing
Where did you see her go

Where did you see her go
Where did you see her go
Where did you see her go
Where did you see her go

cha cha boom!


Hello Kiwi! Don't bee two confus'ed.
This is the station for meditation...
Channel Ocho...me gusta mucho
It's better to tune in than to fade away...
The Nero & Pedro purveyors, the holders of the sacred fleece codpiece, aficiandos of organized chaos...
The Doctor is in & see the Rev about sin.
Check it at the door...you don't need it anymore.
Kick off yer shoes and help us sing the blues.
The World's an ugly place to ugly people only!
So much to talk about...so much going on.
Pluck an idea from the sky and maybe someone like I will reply.

I just made this up:
There once was a man in a Trailer
Who was having problems with his member
He thought he would flip
When it started to drip
He said never ever sleep with a sailor...

Austin...are you usuing protection? BWAH!

Saturday, October 05, 2002

Friday, October 04, 2002

What is the ugliest part of your body?

My mind...I thought we covered that.

How do you make love stay?

Chicken wire & 2 X 4s.

Who is best fit to represent the human race to an alien society?

Traci Lords or Britney Spears

Why does gas cost less per gallon than water?

Because you can't drink gas in the desert?

Who thought we'd WANT hot in-flight meals? What do you like to eat on an airplane?

Whatever the stewardess is wearing...rorw.

What one sure-fire trick to pick up women do YOU KNOW PERSONALLY that you have NEVER seen described in Maxim Magazine? (Feel free to include more than one and BE SPECIFIC!!)

Treat them like crap. They'll come back for more.
Ignore them. They'll think you got mystique.
Go Big early. Avoid the "last-call" rush to the fat chicks.
Tie cherry stems with your tongue and make sure they know it was you that did it. That will get their attention.


What bit of your culture are you most excited to show to your kids? If not your kids, then somebody's kids? Whose kids?

Anything but pop culture. They can be culturally illiterate about TV, Radio, Media for all I care. It made me into a short attention spanned quasi-retard. I'd show them every culture except for American culture...they'll get enough of that on their own. But what would American Culture be beyond MultiMedia and Maya?...

;)
Have you seen the lil fishies...swimming in my stool. If I didn't eat the fishie I would be a fool...never having pools...to swim around in! Fishies swim twice! Once as fish...then they are converted into yummies. Then they are born again as Brown Dolphins and swim once more into the sea.
The Brown Dolphinm swims again!
The Brown Dolphin knows no pain!
Unless it hits a vein in vain...
And in the Gulf Stream it ends up in Spain.
WADDUP?

I love little fishies!! I love little fishies!!


They should make sushi ice cream!!


What is the ugliest part of your body?


How do you make love stay?



Who is best fit to represent the human race to an alien society?



Why does gas cost less per gallon than water?



Who thought we'd WANT hot in-flight meals? What do you like to eat on an airplane?


What one sure-fire trick to pick up women do YOU KNOW PERSONALLY that you have NEVER seen described in Maxim Magazine? (Feel free to include more than one and BE SPECIFIC!!)


What bit of your culture are you most excited to show to your kids? If not your kids, then somebody's kids? Whose kids?


I didn't know you had kids?...


A little get-to-know ya quizzie poo excuse to talk about yerself!! Pass it on to all of your friends or your VAGINA WILL FALL OFF. I swear to god, it's gross. Just pass it on...

xoxo




[10/4/2002 6:57:12 AM | Rev Sully!]
Welcome to Channel Ocho. Home of Nero & Pedro. Oh...no one here...yet!
Welcome to Channel Ocho. Home of Nero & Pedro. Oh...no one here...yet!