If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New Yorker)   Some people LIKE the trouble-causing, time-wasting, money-scattering, frantically promiscuous, bar-cruising, tearoom peeping, street crotch-watching, bathhouse-towel-twitching, and movie house-nervous-knee single set   (newyorker.com) divider line 65
    More: Dumbass, New York State Senate, Theodore B. Olson, Justice Anthony Kennedy, civil rights movement, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, AIDS epidemic, Stonewall Inn, builder pattern  
•       •       •

10749 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jul 2011 at 11:11 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-07-11 11:13:15 AM
Dude.

Wait.

What?
 
2011-07-11 11:14:51 AM
Can someone smarter than I summarize what this windbag of an author is blathering about?
 
2011-07-11 11:16:16 AM
Apparently subbie thinks all gay men are whores?
 
2011-07-11 11:16:32 AM
Some people LIKE gay people.
 
2011-07-11 11:17:30 AM
TL DNR...
 
2011-07-11 11:18:32 AM

LandOfChocolate: Can someone smarter than I summarize what this windbag of an author is blathering about?


1.bp.blogspot.com

"Something about a new Bronze Age coming in the future or something."
 
2011-07-11 11:19:12 AM
Timko? Hardwerk? Squillaciotti? What are these people, Fraggles?
 
2011-07-11 11:19:19 AM
I wash born here, an I wash raished here, and dad gum it, I am gonna die here, an no sidewindin' bushwackin', hornswagglin' cracker croaker is gonna rouin me bishen cutter.

I want rustlers, cutthroats, murders, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con-men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglars, horse thieves, bull-dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, sh**-kickers, and Methodists!
 
2011-07-11 11:19:48 AM
Whoops, wrong thread.
 
2011-07-11 11:20:08 AM

All_Farked_Up: Apparently subbie thinks all gay men are whores?


The Marriage business and institution will change.
 
2011-07-11 11:20:25 AM
Can anyone give me a PG rated description of what "tearoom peeping" means? I'm scared to google it.
 
2011-07-11 11:21:03 AM

sigdiamond2000: LandOfChocolate: Can someone smarter than I summarize what this windbag of an author is blathering about?

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 400x250]

"Something about a new Bronze Age coming in the future or something."


What we really need is a free weapons giveaway program.
 
2011-07-11 11:21:54 AM

CygnusDarius: All_Farked_Up: Apparently subbie thinks all gay men are whores?

The Marriage business and institution will change.


Not as much as divorce changed it.
 
2011-07-11 11:22:42 AM

fireclown: Can anyone give me a PG rated description of what "tearoom peeping" means? I'm scared to google it.


I think it's similar to a Guatemalan handshake or, if you will, a Cincinnati hot plate.
 
2011-07-11 11:23:31 AM
This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.
 
2011-07-11 11:25:40 AM

fireclown: Can anyone give me a PG rated description of what "tearoom peeping" means? I'm scared to google it.


Tearoom peeping refers to fellatio in a public restroom.
 
2011-07-11 11:26:49 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: fireclown: Can anyone give me a PG rated description of what "tearoom peeping" means? I'm scared to google it.

Tearoom peeping refers to fellatio in a public restroom.


Er -- sorry, "tearoom peeping" is checking out weiners. Tearoom sex is the above. Just in case it comes up on Jeopardy...
 
2011-07-11 11:32:30 AM

wbudnick: I wash born here, an I wash raished here, and dad gum it, I am gonna die here, an no sidewindin' bushwackin', hornswagglin' cracker croaker is gonna rouin me bishen cutter.

I want rustlers, cutthroats, murders, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con-men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglars, horse thieves, bull-dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, sh**-kickers, and Methodists!


You forgot to mention goat ropers.
 
2011-07-11 11:37:37 AM

suffra: This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.


Go on....
 
2011-07-11 11:37:52 AM
Sex in a public restroom? That's pretty gross. I can barely stand to go take a leak in a public restroom. Something about the off gassing of strange people's shiat combined with my prehistoric instincts to avoid said shiat.

No. Just, no.
 
2011-07-11 11:40:41 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: thismomentinblackhistory: fireclown: Can anyone give me a PG rated description of what "tearoom peeping" means? I'm scared to google it.

Tearoom peeping refers to fellatio in a public restroom.

Er -- sorry, "tearoom peeping" is checking out weiners. Tearoom sex is the above. Just in case it comes up on Jeopardy...


my guess was the male on male version of the Deep Dish Philly Finger Pie.
 
2011-07-11 11:43:39 AM

socodog: Sex in a public restroom? That's pretty gross. I can barely stand to go take a leak in a public restroom. Something about the off gassing of strange people's shiat combined with my prehistoric instincts to avoid said shiat.

No. Just, no.


What about hitting acid in a public restroom alongside a man in a red wool shirt?.
 
2011-07-11 11:46:04 AM
what
 
2011-07-11 11:46:08 AM

All_Farked_Up: Apparently subbie thinks all gay men are whores?


No, I don't think that is what they were getting at. I think subby was saying that the author mentioned in TFA was implying that he believes that his married gay life is superior to unmarried gay people, and the subby thinks that gay people who don't choose to get married aren't as easily stereotyped as in said quote, and are just fine the way they are.

/or you know, I would be reading way too into it
 
2011-07-11 11:48:21 AM

suffra: This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.


Speaking of ether-soaked rags...

You forgot "methinks."
 
2011-07-11 11:54:24 AM

mormonapril: All_Farked_Up: Apparently subbie thinks all gay men are whores?

No, I don't think that is what they were getting at. I think subby was saying that the author mentioned in TFA was implying that he believes that his married gay life is superior to unmarried gay people, and the subby thinks that gay people who don't choose to get married aren't as easily stereotyped as in said quote, and are just fine the way they are.

/or you know, I would be reading way too into it


The author was quoting a tongue-in-cheek comment made by Randy Lloyd, a writer who was pushing for legal gay marriage in the 60s. I'm not sure what some Farkers aren't getting about this article, but it's pretty straightforward. The author's giving an interesting historical tidbit about a progressive civil rights issue that's just been resolved in NY through traditional means.
 
2011-07-11 11:57:09 AM
TFA summary: having teh ghey does not make you a liberal; being shiat on by everybody while being shut out of the system makes you a liberal (usually only about the things that affect YOU).

Being stuck with one person unless you want to commit adultery (a criminal offense for a long time, btw) and having the privilege of being maimed or killed to support the ruling class were perks that only non-pervs could obtain, back in the old days.

Once commies were no longer a believable bugaboo, idiot conservatives thought they could profit politically by making gays into the new commie (rainbow is the new pinko!), but only succeeded in making us look more like normal people, and now they are furious at us for having the unabashed temerity (look it up) to try to be treated like everybody else.
 
2011-07-11 11:59:24 AM

cmcl: Whoops, wrong thread.


Hell, made as much sense as the article...
 
2011-07-11 12:00:40 PM

fireclown: tearoom peeping


Well I know "tearoom sex" is a slang term for giving head in a public rest room, so maybe "tearoom peepers" are those who enjoy watching said tearoom sex.

justa guess.
 
2011-07-11 12:02:35 PM
TLDR
 
2011-07-11 12:03:20 PM
Too much talking and not enough NOT talking, subby
 
2011-07-11 12:03:56 PM
What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......
 
2011-07-11 12:07:13 PM

steeltormentor: What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......


nah fark it, i'm with you. I think all corporations, legal partnerships and contracts should be between a man and a woman.
 
2011-07-11 12:08:34 PM

thamike: suffra: This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.

Speaking of ether-soaked rags...

You forgot "methinks."


The article is pure NEW YORKER material. Practically the textbook example of the
long-winded, snugly self-aggrandizing snobbery that masks the ultimate provincialism
of the Upper West Side of the boro of Manhattan.
 
2011-07-11 12:10:31 PM

DjangoStonereaver: thamike: suffra: This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.

Speaking of ether-soaked rags...

You forgot "methinks."

The article is pure NEW YORKER material. Practically the textbook example of the
long-winded, snugly self-aggrandizing snobbery that masks the ultimate provincialism
of the Upper West Side of the boro of Manhattan.


except for David Sedaris and Jack Handy... i'm completely with you.

also.. i see what you did there.
 
2011-07-11 12:34:56 PM
steeltormentor: What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......

There are multiple laws, regulations and other assorted rules that confer special privileges to one's legal spouse (e.g.: inheritance, tax deductions, insurance coverage, etc...). By denying the right for gays to marry, you deny them access to these.
 
2011-07-11 12:35:13 PM
..and I want to look him straight in the eye and I want to tell him what a cheap, lying, no-good, rotten, four-flushing, low-life, snake-licking, dirt-eating, inbred, overstuffed, ignorant, blood-sucking, dog-kissing, brainless, dickless, hopeless, heartless, fat-ass, bug-eyed, stiff-legged, spotty-lipped, worm-headed sack of monkey shiat he is! Hallelujah! Holy shiat! Where's the Tylenol?

/someone had to
 
2011-07-11 12:39:44 PM
I'm not saying that was the MOST interesting article in the world, but it wasn't boring or useless, and the language was your standard grownup magazine language. Do a lot of you farkers read below grade level or something?
 
2011-07-11 12:45:55 PM

mbillips: I'm not saying that was the MOST interesting article in the world, but it wasn't boring or useless, and the language was your standard grownup magazine language. Do a lot of you farkers read below grade level or something?


It takes more than a thesaurus and a pretentious editor to write a good article. Some people are more impressed by someone's ability to explain big ideas with small words.

Or you can just watch Dennis Miller Live reruns and pat yourself on the back for "getting it."
 
2011-07-11 12:48:31 PM

mbillips: I'm not saying that was the MOST interesting article in the world, but it wasn't boring or useless, and the language was your standard grownup magazine language. Do a lot of you farkers read below grade level or something?


I subscribe to the New Yorker and I love it. Only $1.00 per week. The international/world reporting is great. Not only do you tend to get more background on whatever region or person you are reading about, the best pieces really probe their subjects to tease out new insights. You also get a short story and several poems in each issue, and the stories are usually pretty good. I have nothing bad to say about this magazine except for lengthy articles on things that truly do not interest me (modern dance). But I'm glad there is a mainstream magazine willing to write them.

Also, they have the snobbiest farking food reviewers ever.
 
2011-07-11 01:08:30 PM

suffra: mbillips: I'm not saying that was the MOST interesting article in the world, but it wasn't boring or useless, and the language was your standard grownup magazine language. Do a lot of you farkers read below grade level or something?

It takes more than a thesaurus and a pretentious editor to write a good article. Some people are more impressed by someone's ability to explain big ideas with small words.

Or you can just watch Dennis Miller Live reruns and pat yourself on the back for "getting it."


I don't see what "big words" you're talking about. Tenet? Locus? Galvanized? Redoubt? Pretty much standard English, if you ask me.
 
2011-07-11 01:19:45 PM

suffra: steeltormentor: What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......

nah fark it, i'm with you. I think all corporations, legal partnerships and contracts should be between a man and a woman.


What a concept! All corporations and businesses, i.e. legal entities, should be a marriage between a man/woman & a corporation. making it illegal for two business to act as one.

Legal entities should go to jail for criminal acts, too.
 
2011-07-11 01:47:21 PM

suffra: DjangoStonereaver: thamike: suffra: This reads like a fark commenter trying to sound smart.
Why not throw in a few whilst, thou, art, and wheretofors in there just to make sure your entire readership knows your an obnoxious farkbag who's only hope of woo'ing a woman is with an ether soaked rag.

Speaking of ether-soaked rags...

You forgot "methinks."

The article is pure NEW YORKER material. Practically the textbook example of the
long-winded, snugly self-aggrandizing snobbery that masks the ultimate provincialism
of the Upper West Side of the boro of Manhattan.

except for David Sedaris and Jack Handy... i'm completely with you.

also.. i see what you did there.


Oh, it was weak. I was never interested. Although the part of the NEW YORKER was played with gusto and verve and the DjangoStonereaver had a delightful cameo role. A puckish satire of contemporary mores. A droll spoof aimed more at the heart than the head.
 
2011-07-11 01:47:48 PM

steeltormentor: What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......


I know you're just trolling here, but there's an actual answer to this question.

If my wife is rendered incapable of making medical decisions for herself, I am, as her husband legally allowed to guide her medical care based on what I believe her desires to be.

If we were of the same sex in a civil union, I would have absolutely no say in my spouse's care and well-being, and I would have to suffer, silently, whatever the state or her blood relatives decides is best for this person that I love with all of my heart.

Oh, and when you are crafting your reply, please do mention how 'easy' it is to assign a non-relative medical power of attorney. Also you should point out that every caregiver in every hospital in every state knows how to deal with those legal documents and never overrides the decisions of a "spouse" because a blood relative wants to take things in a different direction.
 
2011-07-11 01:53:35 PM

mbillips: suffra: mbillips: I'm not saying that was the MOST interesting article in the world, but it wasn't boring or useless, and the language was your standard grownup magazine language. Do a lot of you farkers read below grade level or something?

It takes more than a thesaurus and a pretentious editor to write a good article. Some people are more impressed by someone's ability to explain big ideas with small words.

Or you can just watch Dennis Miller Live reruns and pat yourself on the back for "getting it."

I don't see what "big words" you're talking about. Tenet? Locus? Galvanized? Redoubt? Pretty much standard English, if you ask me.


I thought the article was pretty easy to understand, and gave some cool historical context on the gay marriage movement. That said, I can see why some people feel they are being patronized by New Yorker articles. In the words of Hemingway "Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions from big words? He thinks I don;t know the ten dollar words. I know them all right, but there are older and simpler and better words, and those are the ones I use."
 
2011-07-11 01:55:02 PM

reverendsaintjay: steeltormentor: What 'injustice' is incurred on someone who cannot marry their same-sex partner? You're subjugated to being merely 'single'....what an awful existence. Marriage is a legal contract.....a partnership if you will......and should remain between a man and a woman. Ready for responses......

I know you're just trolling here, but there's an actual answer to this question.

If my wife is rendered incapable of making medical decisions for herself, I am, as her husband legally allowed to guide her medical care based on what I believe her desires to be.

If we were of the same sex in a civil union, I would have absolutely no say in my spouse's care and well-being, and I would have to suffer, silently, whatever the state or her blood relatives decides is best for this person that I love with all of my heart.

Oh, and when you are crafting your reply, please do mention how 'easy' it is to assign a non-relative medical power of attorney. Also you should point out that every caregiver in every hospital in every state knows how to deal with those legal documents and never overrides the decisions of a "spouse" because a blood relative wants to take things in a different direction.


There was also a case in California recently, where a city council decided to blatantly ignore a properly signed and notarized will and seize a dead guy's property because he left it all to his same-sex partner of 25 odd years. (Trying to find the Fark thread on it, please remain on the line to retain your calling priority...) If they had been legally married, the surviving spouse would have had a lot more recourse.
 
2011-07-11 01:55:21 PM
Crap. Two typos. Big emotions come from big words. Also, I always accidentally hit the semi-colon when I'm going for an apostrophe.
 
2011-07-11 02:33:42 PM

thamike: The author was quoting a tongue-in-cheek comment made by Randy Lloyd, a writer who was pushing for legal gay marriage in the 60s. I'm not sure what some Farkers aren't getting about this article, but it's pretty straightforward. The author's giving an interesting historical tidbit about a progressive civil rights issue that's just been resolved in NY through traditional means.


That's pretty much what I got from it, too. Probably because I actually read it.

And I must say that David Remnick is a great journalist and writer. His book Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire is the best study of the fall of the Soviet Union. I should know because I've read a whole bunch of them.

I agree that much of The New Yorker is stale stuff by stuffy academics, but Remnick stands above the fray IMHO.
 
2011-07-11 02:38:10 PM
What a Guatemalan Handshake may look like
 
2011-07-11 02:41:54 PM

CitizenTed: That's pretty much what I got from it, too. Probably because I actually read it.

And I must say that David Remnick is a great journalist and writer. His book Lenin's Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire is the best study of the fall of the Soviet Union. I should know because I've read a whole bunch of them.

I agree that much of The New Yorker is stale stuff by stuffy academics, but Remnick stands above the fray IMHO.


He's a gifted columnist, that's for sure. He's a little gossipy for my tastes, but the talent is evident. And yeah, not as stuffy as some. Haven't read Lenin's Tomb, but I'll check it out. He has an entertaining command of language.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report