Random Thoughts

[SEWIGuy]

having different honorifics for women based on their marital status but nothing of the sort for men was sexist

gender equality

I don't think anyone on here has said anything about gender equality or sexism being the reason for 'Ms.'

Who is claiming that?

kernals12 is making the claim himself (not quoting someone else) that it's an attempt to reduce sexism.

To be fair to kernals12, I've heard things of that sort for many years, going back to the 1980s when I first saw the form "Ms." Feminists, in particular, embraced that form because they said it was unfair that the male form of address, "Mr.," doesn't say anything about your marital status while the then-prevailing only two female forms, "Mrs." and "Miss," were expressly based on marital status. Some women also didn't like "Mrs." because it is traditionally used with the husband's name. That is, the former First Lady is properly "Mrs. George W. Bush," not "Mrs. Laura Bush."

I can certainly see why someone would perceive it as a double standard and say the traditional "Mrs." and "Miss" were sexist when compared to "Mr."

Yeah, it was definitely a gender-equity thing.

[kernals12]

having different honorifics for women based on their marital status but nothing of the sort for men was sexist

gender equality

I don't think anyone on here has said anything about gender equality or sexism being the reason for 'Ms.'

Who is claiming that?

kernals12 is making the claim himself (not quoting someone else) that it's an attempt to reduce sexism.

I'm not quoting someone else because I thought it was common knowledge that "Ms." was a product of 2nd wave feminism.

But if you need citations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheila_Michaels

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms._(magazine)

[PNWRoadgeek]

There are some things in this world that are equal to the likes of MMM and P13, they are just currently above and below us and we don't have to worry about them as much. Alanland is a major example, y'know. But like I said, it's above and below the likes of us, we can deal with them just fine.

[Max Rockatansky]

There are some things in this world that are equal to the likes of MMM and P13, they are just currently above and below us and we don't have to worry about them as much.

There is always someone just like them around the corner.  Enjoy the quiet periods while you can.

[dlsterner]

There are some things in this world that are equal to the likes of MMM and P13, they are just currently above and below us and we don't have to worry about them as much.

There is always someone just like them around the corner.  Enjoy the quiet periods while you can.

Are you trying to jinx us?  <nervously looking over my shoulder>

[Max Rockatansky]

There are some things in this world that are equal to the likes of MMM and P13, they are just currently above and below us and we don't have to worry about them as much.

There is always someone just like them around the corner.  Enjoy the quiet periods while you can.

Are you trying to jinx us?  <nervously looking over my shoulder>

Let's be real, it is very much a thing that continues to be a problem in this hobby in one form or another.  Off forum I had an issue yesterday with someone verbally assailing posters on our Facebook page who liked aspects of driving on the Alaskan Way Viaduct.  The hobby is full of people who don't understand social boundaries and what appropriate behavior is.  P13 and MMM were just on one extreme end of this issue.

[kphoger]

the likes of MMM and P13

There is always someone just like them around the corner.

Prophetic voices?

[Scott5114]

the likes of MMM and P13

There is always someone just like them around the corner.

Prophetic voices?

"Interstate 73?! At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country, localized entirely within your subforum?!"
"Yes."
"May I drive it?"
"No."

[Max Rockatansky]

I still want to know if TempoNick drives a Ford Tempo.  Maybe he has a friend in the Ohio legislature that drives one to work?

[kkt]

Why isn't there a fourth or eighth Grand Alan?

Like, why! There are other Grand Alan's, but why no fourth or eighth ones?

Grand Alans are traditionally counted in Base 4.

[Big John]

Why isn't there a fourth or eighth Grand Alan?

Like, why! There are other Grand Alan's, but why no fourth or eighth ones?

Grand Alans are traditionally counted in Base 4.

You then have the 10th and 20th ones.

[kphoger]

Why isn't there a fourth or eighth Grand Alan?

Grand Alans are traditionally counted in Base 4.

You then have the 10th and 20th ones.

Yes.  That's how Base 4 works in Alanland.  It's equivalent to regular base 4, except for the secret numbers.

And, in case you're wondering:  Lower Wacker, Colfax, Figueroa, Corcoran, Merritt, and Dunes-Flamingo are counted in Base 8.  Bannister is counted in Base 16.  Those seven Grand Alans are not traditionally considered to be traditional, therefore they are not traditionally counted in the traditional Base 4.

[PNWRoadgeek]

Why isn't there a fourth or eighth Grand Alan?

Grand Alans are traditionally counted in Base 4.

You then have the 10th and 20th ones.

Yes.  That's how Base 4 works in Alanland.  It's equivalent to regular base 4, except for the secret numbers.

And, in case you're wondering:  Lower Wacker, Colfax, Figueroa, Corcoran, Merritt, and Dunes-Flamingo are counted in Base 8.  Bannister is counted in Base 16.  Those seven Grand Alans are not traditionally considered to be traditional, therefore they are not traditionally counted in the traditional Base 4.

What about Alan Watts? What does he get?

[Scott5114]

Why isn't there a fourth or eighth Grand Alan?

Grand Alans are traditionally counted in Base 4.

You then have the 10th and 20th ones.

Yes.  That's how Base 4 works in Alanland.  It's equivalent to regular base 4, except for the secret numbers.

And, in case you're wondering:  Lower Wacker, Colfax, Figueroa, Corcoran, Merritt, and Dunes-Flamingo are counted in Base 8.  Bannister is counted in Base 16.  Those seven Grand Alans are not traditionally considered to be traditional, therefore they are not traditionally counted in the traditional Base 4.

This is because Colfax debased the office.

What about Alan Watts? What does he get?

Burger King coupon

[kphoger]

What about Alan Watts? What does he get?

an Alan.Riot

[Max Rockatansky]

I've been watching the original run of Ren & Stimpy with my wife.  I'm convinced that Ren Hoek is probably one of the most evil children's cartoon character that was ever created.  He's violent, engages in acts of torture and is prone to fits of rage.  He actively sits awake in one episode debating to himself about murdering Stimpy in his sleep because he had to be nice earlier in the day.

That said, the show is still hilarious and I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did unaltered in the early 1990s.

[formulanone]

I've been watching the original run of Ren & Stimpy with my wife.  I'm convinced that Ren Hoek is probably one of the most evil children's cartoon character that was ever created.  He's violent, engages in acts of torture and is prone to fits of rage.  He actively sits awake in one episode debating to himself about murdering Stimpy in his sleep because he had to be nice earlier in the day.

That said, the show is still hilarious and I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did unaltered in the early 1990s.

We'd debated letting our kids watch it, and most episodes really aren't appropriate for kids under 12. They could watch it now but I think they'd probably think it's stupid, as lots of cartoons from the last 30 years have relied on it for inspiration (as well as The Simpsons). There's a lot of weird stuff we thought would bring up more questions than answers.

That said, I have the set of the first two seasons but haven't rewatched them in many years. I also couldn't get through more than one episode of the "Lost" episode disc because it's just disgusting and tasteless for its own sake. But most of the aired-episode jokes and gags are just silly and gross but nothing really harmful...just didn't need my five-year-old thinking hairballs were okay to eat and there's a few moments of straight-up nightmare fuel.

The art is really something else, just on the cusp of computer animation and the tireless work of making sure no character did the same thing twice was impressive on a budget. The music is fantastic, the scenes ridiculous, the nods to a TV culture that never-quite-was is a hoot. But apparently the animators didn't like the demands of John K and Nickelodeon wasn't exactly going to give in on a sudden ratings bonanza, so they all butt heads and the show suffered a decline after a few years.

Less said about John K., the better, as it turns out.

[Max Rockatansky]

I've been watching the original run of Ren & Stimpy with my wife.  I'm convinced that Ren Hoek is probably one of the most evil children's cartoon character that was ever created.  He's violent, engages in acts of torture and is prone to fits of rage.  He actively sits awake in one episode debating to himself about murdering Stimpy in his sleep because he had to be nice earlier in the day.

That said, the show is still hilarious and I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did unaltered in the early 1990s.

We'd debated letting our kids watch it, and most episodes really aren't appropriate for kids under 12. They could watch it now but I think they'd probably think it's stupid, as lots of cartoons from the last 30 years have relied on it for inspiration (as well as The Simpsons). There's a lot of weird stuff we thought would bring up more questions than answers.

That said, I have the set of the first two seasons but haven't rewatched them in many years. I also couldn't get through more than one episode of the "Lost" episode disc because it's just disgusting and tasteless for its own sake. But most of the aired-episode jokes and gags are just silly and gross but nothing really harmful...just didn't need my five-year-old thinking hairballs were okay to eat and there's a few moments of straight-up nightmare fuel.

The art is really something else, just on the cusp of computer animation and the tireless work of making sure no character did the same thing twice was impressive on a budget. The music is fantastic, the scenes ridiculous, the nods to a TV culture that never-quite-was is a hoot. But apparently the animators didn't like the demands of John K and Nickelodeon wasn't exactly going to give in on a sudden ratings bonanza, so they all butt heads and the show suffered a decline after a few years.

Less said about John K., the better, as it turns out.

I love the art style myself, there is really nothing else quite like it.  The closeups in particular can be disgusting and surreal at the same time.  My mom in particular absolutely hated Beavis and Butthead.  I never understood how she could have thought that show was so bad but Ren and Stimpy was okay?  Maybe a cartoon Chihuahua brutalizing his domestic partner doesn't seem like as visceral as characters who resemble humans making jokes about trying to score?