Slate lists 31 questions submitted by readers to The Explainer that still haven't been answered.
My favorite:
17. Why don't they ever use “presents” in advertisements? It’s always about “gift”-giving, and “gift” ideas, never a “they'll love these as presents.”IN THE COMMENTS: My mom, Ann Althouse, answers that question:
"Gifts' is clearly the better word. Lots of crisp consonants. One short vowel.
"Presents" has a near homophone: "presence." So it can be confusing. It also has other meanings. And if people are reading the ad, their brain might pronounce it "pree-ZENTS" and that would make it hard to construct the meaning.
"Gift" also has much nicer connotations. I think of "gift of God" and a "gifted artist." There's something exalted and in touch with the divine.
14 comments:
32: where did i leave my keys?
answer to #28. The different nurses hats indicate the nursing school attended.
"Gifts' Is clearly the better word. Lots of crisp consonants. One short vowel.
"Presents" has a near homophone: "presence." So it can be confusing. It also has other meanings. And if people are reading the ad, their brain might pronounce it "pree-ZENTS" and that would make it hard to construct the meaning.
"Gift" also has much nicer connotations. I think of "gift of God" and a "gifted artist." There's something exalted and in touch with the divine.
In general, it's good to choose the Anglo-Saxon synonym over the Latinate one if their meanings are equivalent. All honor to our British heritage!
Some answers -- correct or not -- to the Slate questions:
5. Kids have dandruff more, and care about it more, than adults. You noticed it more when you were a kid, and you watched the TV shows on which dandruff shampoos were advertised.
10. People who name states often choose Latinate suffixes (defying my previous admonition). "-a" is a form of "-ia," a suffix for place names, as "Britannia," "Judea." All honor to our Roman heritage!
18. Because the first part of the statement is obviously false regardless of the truth or falsity of the second part; so the statement is naively self-deceptive at best, and perhaps hypocritical.
23. Because pharmacists are so important. Keeping people waiting is a sign of importance.
31. (A) You haven't been hanging around with the right smart people. (B)You're confusing sexual self-advertisement with beauty, as your culture teaches you to. Large breasts, blonde and/or long hair, tight clothes, and too much makeup constitute a powerful sexual magnet, but those traits are mostly acquired rather than inborn; and acquiring them requires a large investment of time and money, which implies putting a high priority on beaming one's sexuality at others -- i.e., a high price others must pay for it. But if you look at the faces of people who have made this investment, they often aren't particularly pretty underneath it all. Smart people sell something else -- their brains, not their bodies and faces. They don't have as much need, or spare career time, to doll themselves up in order to get what they want. They live in a different culture from you, and in that culture, the more blatant signs of excessive devotion to appearance are signs of inability to get what one wants by brainpower, and of proletarian esthetics, although tasteful good looks are still valuable.
Bonus -- semen question: Iris Murdoch says that even a dog turd, if viewed with full and devoted attention, can glow with the light of eternity. Why not other droppings as well?
There have been two AskMetafilter threads on why people discredit the "Some of my best friends are black" (or Jewish, or gay, etc.) argument: #1, #2.
I think the real reasons are:
1. Since it's such a cliche, and "friends" is so vague, it's easy for anyone to say this. If anyone can say it, no one can say it and expect it to be meaningful. It isn't an effective signal.
2. Most racists don't hate every single member of a certain race. Focusing on how there are "a few good ones" in the group in question just highlights the overall bias. The fact that Rush Limbaugh admits that Elton John is a great songwriter and performer, and that they appear to actually be friends, doesn't convince me that Rush Limbaugh has no anti-gay views. On the contrary, it suggests that Limbaugh finds it extraordinary and remarkable when he finds a gay person he likes. If he were totally accepting of gays, he wouldn't need to make such a big deal about Elton John in particular — he could just say, "I have no problem with gay people at all."
3. As I said in the second AskMetafilter thread, for a parent to love a child doesn't mean the parent sees the child as an equal. You can be prejudiced against someone without disliking them; you can even like them or love them. The fact that someone is married to someone of the opposite sex and loves their spouse hardly proves that this person holds no sexist views.
31. This question is using what Matthew Yglesias has called the "Law of Conservation of Virtues," which he applied to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primaries.
"People who name states often choose Latinate suffixes (defying my previous admonition). "-a" is a form of "-ia," a suffix for place names, as "Britannia," "Judea.""
Which is why we live in the United States of America and not the United States of Amerigo.
"If he were totally accepting of gays, he wouldn't need to make such a big deal about Elton John in particular — he could just say, "I have no problem with gay people at all.""
As someone who who has listened almost all of Rush Limbaugh's shows (via podcast) for the last 3+ years, I can give you some real information.
1. He made a big deal about Elton John because he loves the music. He was a radio dj in the old days, and he likes the music from the same era that I like. (We're exactly the same age.) That's why he wanted EJ to perform at his most recent wedding, and he was thrilled to get him, and thought it was really cool that EJ didn't draw political lines when it came to performing. He had nothing but positive to say about EJ and I don't think the subject of gayness even came up in connection with EJ. I don't think he ever made any kind of distinction between one gay person and this gay person or anything like that. He did distinguish him as a celebrity who didn't mind consorting with right wingers, when most celebrities feel pressure to be or to act liberal and to shun conservatives.
2. I have never heard Rush disparage people for being gay. He does mock males who are "castrati" but this refers to heterosexual and homosexual men who have lost their vigor and who are cowed by women. That's actually generally more of a heterosexual male problem.
3. Rush is opposed to same-sex marriage and to the "privacy rights" found in constitutional law and various "gay rights" positions. He pushes social conservatism. But it's notable that he does this without *ever* taking the attitude that gay people are bad or sinful or disgusting. He objects to government intrusion in people's personal life, but without thinking the courts should protect rights.
"...men who have lost their vigor and who are cowed by women."
Personally, I resent the hostility toward bovines reflected in that remark.
That's actually generally more of a heterosexual male problem.
Putting down straight men for being too much like gay men is anti-gay.
As you know, Limbaugh has anti-gay positions. He's opposed to same-sex marriage. He wants to deny equal rights to gays. I'm not saying his views are unusually hostile to gays among people who are opposed to gay rights.
I just used Limbaugh as a specific example in a comment because he was the only person who comes to mind who I've actually heard make the "some of my best friends are gay" argument. He goes out of his way to say he respects Elton John, a gay person. If Limbaugh had no problem with gay people, he wouldn't need to focus on Elton John to distract from his generally anti-gay views. If I knew of someone else who's an example of this phenomenon, I might have mentioned that person instead, but Limbaugh was the example that came to mind.
"Putting down straight men for being too much like gay men is anti-gay."
I didn't say that. I said hetero men are more likely to be cowed by women. They tend to have their central adult relationship with women and to stretch to try to please them.
"He goes out of his way to say he respects Elton John, a gay person. If Limbaugh had no problem with gay people, he wouldn't need to focus on Elton John to distract from his generally anti-gay views."
I don't relate to that as a way Rush has spoken. Maybe some Rush antagonists are saying things that have given you the impression that he said that.
"Elton John's not a gay man to me; Elton John is the premier performer of his generation."
Post a Comment