| | | Author | Message |
|---|
DodgeX
  
 
| | #1 posted April 22, 2002 at 12:18pm (EDT) |
This area is reserved for a (approximately) weekly tyrade on a subject that will most probably make no sense, and more likely than not will be a joke or just something silly. This is where I will come should I be lacking sleep and venturing into thought patterns that are a real waste of the human brain.
No explanation will be required though some may be given, feel free to comment or add to what I have said, or even post your own tyrade, but please keep it decent enough that I should not have to remove it from the post. Thanks for reading and sorry in advance for having wasted your time and lowered your opinion of me  but we all need to do this in some form or another!
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | DodgeX
| | #2 posted April 22, 2002 at 12:30pm (EDT) |
Ok, now I've given this some thought and decide it's time to bring this sensitive subject to into the open.
Sometimes people label others very easily, sticking them with names and labels that can make us pre-judge them and perhaps alter our feelings towads them before we even really know what it's all about. This is the case quite often in our society, but in this instance I have a specific one in mind.
"Crazy" straws, now I don't know who amongst you knows "crazy" straws first hand, but for those of you who do I think you will know where I am coming from. Who is it that labeled these straws? Sure they are twisty & bendy, they look a little wild & all, but has anyone ever bothereddoing any real testing to see if they actually have any real mental disorders? And even if they do...why stick it right in front of their name? That just seems unfair.
Myself in the experiences I have had with "crazy" straws, I have never once found any of them to be anythign other than a little over the top, and somewhat twisted, but "crazy"? Sorry but no, never once. To take something that is already a subject & disorder that is judged very harshly in our society and cruelly stick it as a label at the forefront of their title just seems very reactionary and to my eyes holds little substanial fact.
We are all a little "different" from one another, and just because there straws tend to be more random or twisty than other straws does nto give someone the right to label them as crazy. I used to have a girlfriend who was very bendy  , much more so than many of my others, and as a matter of fact I liked it. Was she "crazy"? Not at all, she had some odd habits granted, like cooking 7 course meals for her fish, readin books upside down, and even the occaisonal bout of breaking into Broadway showtoons (re: Miss Saigon, Cats, etc...) in the middle of her sleep, but hey, we all have quirks.
Anyways, I just wanted to say that I think all this labeling has to stop, and things like "crazy" straws are just one amongst te many victims in our society who have ended up labeled, we all accept it, but do any of us really know why or even question the idea that they may not be crazy at all, perhaps just a little twisted and misunderstood.
Thanks for listening, tune in again next week when I delve into the subject of public nudity and how it affects our economy, or maybe somethign else altogether.
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | Ramsey
 
| | #3 posted April 22, 2002 at 1:28pm (EDT) |
All I can say is, if those straws are crazy, then I don't wanna be sane!
Well….....I guess that's not all I can say. I really feel you were a little tough on labels, Roger, and perhaps I need to come to the defense of labels everywhere. Think about it. (Okay time's up.) Where would we be without labels? Can you imagine going to the local Blockbuster and trying to pick out a movie with no labels? Can you imagine your girlfriend’s reaction when you come home, pop your rental in the DVD player, and “Debbie Does Dallas” appears on the screen? Blockbuster doesn’t rent X-rated movies you say? Well, how the heck are they gonna know it’s X-rated without the label! Ha! Thought you had me, huh? (Of course, if your girlfriend actually likes X-rated movies, then please let me know if she has a sister.)
Anyway, the next time you start to think that labeling is a bad thing, just imagine going to the store hoping to find that new release you’ve been waiting for forever, like Unreal 2 or Morrowind or Warcraft 3, and then find out when you get home that you just installed Pools of Radiance, or even worse, Daikatana (*shudder*).
So, in conclusion, I think it’s only right that a few “crazy” straws suffer for the good of mankind.
| MysticMightyMouse
(abandoned)
| | #4 posted April 22, 2002 at 3:11pm (EDT) |
 dodge what happened to fixr's forum? It wont let me in!! Did his subscription run out?
Think you know console trivia? Click below
Click here | DodgeX
| | #5 posted April 22, 2002 at 4:16pm (EDT) |
MMMouse, it would seem his subscription did run out. I'm sure he'll rectify that soon enough.
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | elmyra42
(frozen)
| #6 posted April 22, 2002 at 8:08pm (EDT)
edited April 22, 2002 at 8:09pm (EDT) |
I'm with Ramsey-sometimes those labels can be a real lifesaver! Like when "Crazy Glue" gets called something politically correct like "Super Glue." The crazy label at least warns people that it's psychotic, and prone to attacking your fingers and gluing them together without warning! How much skin have we already lost to inadequate labels?
---------------------------------------
The trader formerly known as "Elmyra" | DodgeX
| | #7 posted April 22, 2002 at 8:22pm (EDT) |
Hey look guys...I'm all for proper labels, but it's when people start throwing around hurtful and improper labels like "crazy" straws or "crazy" glue, impying the mental disorders these items may or may not have yet without any real proof or psycological testing beforehand it can just be hurtful.
Granted I see your points about how no labels can be hurtful, God only knows how accurate Keith's example is, being that I used to a member at the "no frills video" down the street where there were no labels (obviously a "frill") and can't say how many times I came home with the wrong thing (actually it turned out not to be a videostore at all, but rather a "no frills" cheese importer, and I was bringing home blocks of Lumberger and other imprted cheeses that I was putting into my VCR, I guess a sign out front was also a "frill" anywho...) as I was saying, I see your points, but on the other hand I clearly remember going to buy a computer when I was younger from "Crazy Irving's" and went in fully expecting to purchase my PC from someone doused in insanity who would either give me a deal of the century or end up trying to sell me his tie for about a thousand bucks, but NOOOOoo just a regular guy again using phony labels implying some disorder to peddle his goods, all while being in full control of all his faculties.
So leave it to say that yes proper labeling is good, but the abuse of poor labels in the case of "crazy" straws can just be hurtful or in the case of "Crazy" Irving's you can get equally as hurt leaving the estblishment hands empty of a world class PC deal or even a $1000 tie. Think about it...
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | MysticMightyMouse
(abandoned)
| | #8 posted April 22, 2002 at 10:39pm (EDT) |
fixr inactivated his account...........what shall i do w/out my trivia!!
Think you know console trivia? Click below
Click here | Ramsey
| | #9 posted April 22, 2002 at 10:51pm (EDT) |
That's what I'm saying George, that's what I'm saying. And you ever notice after they attack your fingers that they somehow make your eyes start to itch? I don't know how many nights I've wasted at the E.R. having some 300 lb nurse with a bad attitude trying to pry my eyes open. All because of some psychotic tube of glue.
I'm really beginning to think that Roger is in on this. First he was trying to protect the straws, now the glue. Where will it end? WHERE WILL IT ALL END, ROGER??? | Ramsey
| | #10 posted April 22, 2002 at 10:53pm (EDT) |
P.S. I did like your cheese story. Any story with cheese in it has got to be good. | elmyra42
(frozen)
| | #11 posted April 23, 2002 at 1:23am (EDT) |
That's what happens; these do-gooder liberals are always protecting the criminally insane in the name of political correctness! Grrr!
...And on another note, I'm now craving Limburger cheese. And Gorgonzola. *drool* 
------------------------------------------
The trader formerly known as "Elmyra" | Yaverot
  
| | #12 posted April 27, 2002 at 10:58pm (EDT) |
Ramsey0808 wrote:
(Of course, if your girlfriend actually likes X-rated movies,
> then please let me know if she has a sister.)
After investigating the issue, unfortunately the sister doesn't like X-rated movies.
What I want to know is why the "yardstick"s from Rocky Flats Credit Union I have are 4 feet long. You're the CU for a place being cleaned up by the DoE so we don't have to worry about radiation, & you're handing out mutated yardsticks?
-
She said 'Any way you want it, in the middle of the street, on a bed of nails. If the illusion is real'. -Journey to Madness with U2 & The Cars. | Ramsey
| | #13 posted April 28, 2002 at 11:38am (EDT) |
Yaverot wrote:
> After investigating the issue, unfortunately the sister doesn't
> like X-rated movies.
Ahh, it's just as well. She probably woulda looked like Rosie O'Donnell anyway.
> What I want to know is why the "yardstick"s from Rocky Flats
> Credit Union I have are 4 feet long. You're the CU for a place
> being cleaned up by the DoE so we don't have to worry about radiation,
> & you're handing out mutated yardsticks?
Well, whatever you do, don't use the toaster they gave you for opening an account!!! | Yaverot
| | #14 posted April 28, 2002 at 11:34pm (EDT) |
They were out of toasters, is the waffle iron safe?
-
She said 'Any way you want it, in the middle of the street, on a bed of nails. If the illusion is real'. -Journey to Madness with U2 & The Cars. | Ramsey
| | #15 posted April 29, 2002 at 1:15am (EDT) |
Yaverot wrote:
> They were out of toasters, is the waffle iron safe?
Only to throw at a credit union employee when they tell you that you're earning a whopping 2% on your account. On second thought, I guess that wouldn't be too safe either, at least not for the credit union employee. | DuffMan
 
| | #16 posted April 29, 2002 at 12:52pm (EDT) |
I had hypocrisy in any shape or form. Details to come later, possibly, until then, I will be seeing this topic in my All New Replies.
~S
 | Sid_Ceaser
 
| | #17 posted May 2, 2002 at 7:55am (EDT) |
You know what I don't like? I don't like food are "single serving sizes". I mean, sure, I'm single and don't have a lady in my life and I sit around all day drooling at pictures of women on the internet and I need to get out and meet someone charming that I'll want to spend the rest of my life with *insert deep breath*, BUT, why shove it down my throat every time I try to engorge my depression with food? Oh, look, a SINGLE serving size of this, or a SINGLE serving size of that. All alone? Don't have anyone to LOVE YOU?? Here, helpless hap of a human, have a SINGLE, YOU-CAN'T-GET-ANY0NE-TO-LOVE-YOU-'CAUSE-YOU'RE-A-LOOSER serving size of soup!!!!!! AHHHHHHHH
*ahem*
sorry.
S i d C e a s e r
c l i c k s t u d i o s
| DuffMan
| | #18 posted May 2, 2002 at 9:24am (EDT) |
Oh man, I gotta save that somewhere on my hard drive! I hate the single servings, not because I am single, but because I'm always still hungry for at least one or two more bites by the time I've finished with whatever it is.
~S
| DodgeX
| | #19 posted May 13, 2002 at 9:34am (EDT) |
Ok, here's my new rant...and it's nt only a rant, but I am hoping to turn this into a movement that will correct this problem once and for all.
Now read carefully and please don't bore me with the typical answers I always get when I speak of this, not only do I get answers all the time, bt I expect MORE and BETTER from you people, since you are smarter and more insightful.
Ok, here is the basic question, but PLEASE read the additional info carefully before you give me some foolhardy answer:
Why do the call it a PAIR of pants?(same thing goes for underwear but we're talking pants here, so let's not bother with underwear now, that'll be another time)
Now read these facts before you tell me " because it has 2 legs! " because that's BS and I'll tell you why.
- a shirt has 2 sleeves but it's not called a pair of shirts.
- even when there are NO legs (ie; shorts, which have almost none, or even SHORT shorts, which have NONE) they still call it a "pair".
- no pockets = STILL a pair, so that doesn't work.
- is it because it has 2 holes? NO PANTS HAVE 3 HOLES!! (one for your waist and 2 for your legs) and they are not called a TRIO of pants.
Bottom line is there is no damn reason to call them a pair. Glasses? Ok that's fine they have 2 lenses, and without 2 lenses they are called a monocle, so that works. Shoes? Socks? We all know why that works, THERE ARE 2 OF THEM DAMMIT! Pants? NO there is one of them, and even without legs they are stilled referred to as a "pair", why not shirts? They have 2 sleeves...it's just nonsense.
Now the truth is they should be called PANT..."hey where did you by that PANT?" and in some high class ends of society they DO call it "PANT" because they are properly educated...(in a store that makes custom suits) "I will make you a nice PANT to go with that Sir."
So let's get this straight folks, enough with the silly "pair of pants" nonsense, and let's get with the program and start the evolution of the language...it's PANT DAMMIT! Now everyone let's see you get behind this!
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | DuffMan
| | #20 posted May 13, 2002 at 10:09am (EDT) |
AMEN! YOU SAID IT, BRO!
[claps hands frantically]
~S
| DodgeX
| | #21 posted May 13, 2002 at 10:15am (EDT) |
Someone with a little common sense... fight the power!
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | Sid_Ceaser
| | #22 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:05am (EDT) |
Shipment goes by truck, Cargo goes by boat.
You have a pair of panties, but just 1 bra.
S i d C e a s e r
c l i c k s t u d i o s
| DodgeX
| | #23 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:09am (EDT) |
Sid...I clearly said we'd leave underwear out of this...and besides I have on a Thong and not a pair of panties, thank you very much...it goes better with my bra
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | Ramsey
| | #24 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:44am (EDT) |
Sid_Ceaser wrote:
> Shipment goes by truck, Cargo goes by boat.
Hey, that's kinda like parking in the driveway and driving on the parkway.
Oh, and Roger, I'm sorry, but you lost ALL credibility when you started out by saying that we, your faithful readers, "are smarter and more insightful". | DodgeX
| | #25 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:49am (EDT) |
Ramsey0808 wrote:
> > Oh, and Roger, I'm sorry, but you lost ALL credibility when you
> started out by saying that we, your faithful readers, "are smarter
> and more insightful".
Well this isn't the most credible thread to begin with (excluding the fight to right the wrong of the PANT!) so I figured why not blow a little smoke up you's guys asses while I was at it.
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | Ramsey
| | #26 posted May 13, 2002 at 3:31pm (EDT) |
OK, I didn't really want to do this, but now you've forced my hand! Blow smoke up MY ass, will you? Hey buddy, that's a one-way street I'll have you know (with a DO NOT ENTER sign tattoed on my left cheek, no less)!!!
I am presenting the facts here and then I will let everyone decide for themselves. Mr. Roger Dodger comes in here with this pathetically weak complaint about the use of the phrase "pair of pants" when all the while he, not only condones the use of the phrase, but actively supports it! You have to look no farther than his forum topic named "A place to try on slacks".
In this twisted little forum topic, he has not only used the phrase "pair of slacks", but also constantly refers to slacks in the plural (as well as pantaloons and knickers!). I ask you, does this sound like someone who has dedicated himself to abolishing use of the phrase "pair of pants" or even the word "pant" in the plural? Exploring a little further, I found a dozen instances in the last few months where Roger has posted and used the word "pants", not "pant", to refer to a single (pair of) pants.
So why the sudden lashing out at this innocent little word, "pants"? Why the the hidden cameras in his slacks-changing room? Why the phobia over the word "britches"? Mark my words, there is a hidden agenda here, perhaps a Communist plot! This is a man of many mysteries and many underlying secrets. I only pray that we have not found out too late what this sinister monster is really up to!
Oh, by the way, Roger, I'm interested in the Red Alert 2 expansion...wanna trade? | DodgeX
| | #27 posted May 13, 2002 at 5:00pm (EDT) |
Hey the answer is simple...the masses (unwashed as they may be) are not always ready for such revelations, reference if you will the works of Arthur C. Clark in "Childhood's End", where time must pass before the masses are ready to behold what needs to be revelaed.
So understanding that there is a time and place for revealing such things upon the populace at large so as not to throw the cultural expanses back to the stoneage, I chose to play the way of the people at large and not tamper with what is common amongst them. So now and onlynow did I feel the need to start revealing my thoughts on the terrible unjustice laid upon us all by the "pairing" of the words pair and pants...the time has come, it's at hand, and before you I laid the horrible truth...but are YOU ready for the truth?
As for the trade...let's talk Email me.
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | teg
(abandoned)
| | #28 posted May 13, 2002 at 10:44pm (EDT) |
DodgeX wrote:
> Sid...I clearly said we'd leave underwear out of this...and besides
> I have on a Thong and not a pair of panties, thank you very much...it
> goes better with my bra
>
>
*tries to remove that thought out of his head before he goes insane*
Click image for a list of my stuff for trade
| bluerage
(abandoned)
| | #29 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:18pm (EDT) |
Ever listen to Dennis Miller?
He goes off on good rants.
-bluerage
Fat 'n American Couchwear Clothing!!!
| bluerage
(abandoned)
| | #30 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:21pm (EDT) |
Too bad I cant post them here :D
-bluerage
Fat 'n American Couchwear Clothing!!!
| MysticMightyMouse
(abandoned)
| | #31 posted May 13, 2002 at 11:26pm (EDT) |
teg wrote:
> DodgeX wrote:
> > Sid...I clearly said we'd leave underwear out of this...and
> besides
> > I have on a Thong and not a pair of panties, thank you very
> much...it
> > goes better with my bra
> >
> >
>
> *tries to remove that thought out of his head before he goes
> insane*
>
>
*follows suit*
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
- Marcus Aurelius | Ramsey
| | #32 posted May 14, 2002 at 2:03pm (EDT) |
Guess this whole bra and thong posting will put an end to those requests for your picture now!  | pernilla
(abandoned)
| | #33 posted May 14, 2002 at 3:05pm (EDT) |
No! We want pics! We want pics!
P E R N I L L A | MysticMightyMouse
(abandoned)
| | #34 posted May 14, 2002 at 3:18pm (EDT) |
pernilla wrote:
> No! We want pics! We want pics!
>
>
FULLY clothed pics mind u.
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
- Marcus Aurelius | DuffMan
| | #35 posted May 14, 2002 at 3:39pm (EDT) |
Of you and your family!
~S
| animallyson
| | #36 posted May 14, 2002 at 3:54pm (EDT) |
It's a "PAIR" of pants/ies because the item name is pluralized.
hence you cannot have "a" pants but you can have "a" shirt.
hope that clears everything up
anything that ends in "s" gets the "pair" treatment. | Ramsey
| | #37 posted May 14, 2002 at 4:28pm (EDT) |
When Roger mentioned the masses not being ready for his revelation until now, it started me thinking.
I think it's as simple as this. What do you get when you take the square root of a pair of pairs? (not for the mathematically impaired) A pair, if you care. But if you can bear to square a pair of rare pairs, then dare to pare that pair of digits down to one, you have half a pair! So there! Of course, to be fair, it's not your flair that makes people stare or glare, it's the pear in your hair shampoo that tears them up.
Ok, I got off on a little bit of a tangent there, but I'm pretty sure that's all Roger was trying to say. | DodgeX
| | #38 posted May 14, 2002 at 4:32pm (EDT) |
animallyson wrote:
> It's a "PAIR" of pants/ies because the item name is pluralized.
>
> hence you cannot have "a" pants but you can have "a" shirt.
>
> hope that clears everything up
>
> anything that ends in "s" gets the "pair" treatment.
Ally, sorry but you are working backwards...it's pluralized BECAUSE it's referred to (improperly) as a pair, and not the other way around.
And it IS the truth that in many expensive clothing stores they are referred to as a pant.
So it clears nothing up other than you are mearly falling into the trap spread by the powers that be to mislead you into the misconception regarding pants (yes pluralized because I am referring to more than one "pant"!)
DodgeX - Trade unto others as you would have others trade unto you!
click here to check out my forum and share your thoughts | pernilla
(abandoned)
| | #39 posted May 14, 2002 at 4:36pm (EDT) |
DodgeX:
>And it IS the truth that in many expensive clothing stores
>they are referred to as a pant.
But of course! It's to make the customer think the pants are cheap. "Oh, so you want a full pair? That's two times the pant price, please." Nothing to do with grammar at all, it's just greed.
P E R N I L L A | yprbest
(abandoned)
| #40 posted May 14, 2002 at 5:46pm (EDT)
edited May 18, 2002 at 12:22pm (EDT) |
The REAL issue hear is why they're called Pants in the first place!!!
They're TROUSERS! TROUSERS DAMMIT!!!
Pants = Underpants!
Gah!
*goes off into a corner and starts murmuring about the injustice of the world and foreigners ruining languages.*
*Realises that English is actually a ruined and bastardised son of Latin, French (which is itself the bastard son of Latin and Gallic), and Anglo-Saxon, and feels a little stupid*
----------
Infrequent Posting is an Artform | | |
Topic Page Hits: 3 today (15 in the last 30 days) |
Rules Help 
