Maybe the silliness worked back then to bring in a laugh and gather ratings, but is sure is bizarre to see in retrospect.
So much better to chose to portray women as silly drits and stupid sexualized little girls than cover them with cloth and silence them.
Whoever can't see that neither of those behaviors or choices is respectful or honoring, while holding up the value of a human fetus, is missing the boat.
Back then, we were allowed to have fun. Stupid fun sometimes. Silly fun.
But we were allowed to have it.
I think one thing that will strike many people about the Choom Years was how deadly dull and serious (at least in the minds of the Lefties) they were and how everything was the Ultimate Battle of Lefty Good and Eeeevvviiillll. A little silliness is welcome now and again.
The jokes weren't especially topical, but they don't hold up. There were some knock outs among the girls, but the only one I recognized was Lily Tomlin. Looks aren't everything. She has had a better life and a more successful career than Judy Carne. But looks aren't nothing either. Goldie Hawn had the best run.
There's definitely an air of care-free fun and energy accompanying the goofiness and relentless portrayal of women as dumb bints.
The mix of innocence and innuendo present is also a wonder to behold.
Laugh-In ran from 1968 to 1973. During those years, teaching and nursing were the only two career options I and the women who graduated from high school with me in 1972 were counseled and encouraged to consider, with the oft joked about MRS degree invariably coming up in casual conversations whenever the value of a young woman going to college was mentioned or debated. That was some of the soil in which feminism, however distorted and derailed it may be today, found root.
I am currently reading a very interesting book called "The Last Closet." It is a memoir of Moria Greyland who recounted the homosexual pedophlia abuse by her mother the famous science fiction writer Marion Zimmer Bradley.
It is pretty much a blueprint of where we went wrong.
Looking back at these vids does not bring up a longing in me for Good Old Days, Good Old Boys, Men in Suits who get off on controlling women or treating them as stupid or objects for abuse, and Women who Enable and promote that behavior.
How is fantasizing about sex with stupid energetic young women different from wishing to be met by 72 willing virgins? Aside from a possible experience factor, they're two culturally different but essentially similar manifestations of a desire to be in the one-up position and have power over another rather than enter into the effort and engagement of mutual relationship.
I'm intrigued but not amused by what I'm seeing. It may be the beginning of a decline, but it appears to me to be manifestation of a decline and degeneration already in progress. The flip side is this: out of decline new opportunities for goodness, growth and creative, life giving engagement continue to present themselves.
If someone complains about a fly in his drink, picking it out and saying "Now there isn't" seems okay to me. Am I missing some important point of etiquette?
What is the origin of the 'Waiter, there's a fly in my soup' joke?
A number of 'Waiter ...' jokes are attributed to the notoriously rude waiters at Lindy's Restaurant in New York, whose replies include: 'It's possible. The chef used to be a tailor' and 'Don't worry. How much soup can a fly drink?' Lindy's was started in August 1921 by Leo Lindemann and was as famous for the backchat of its waiters as for its clientele of comics, gangsters, show-biz stars and other celebrities. Among examples of repartee recorded on their menu (always entailing criticism of the customer and/or the food) are some which have gone on to become almost traditional: 'Waiter, do you serve shrimps here?' Lindy's waiter: 'Sure. We don't care how tall you are. Sit down.' and 'Waiter, this coffee tastes like tea.' Lindy's waiter: 'Forgive me, sir. I must have given you the hot chocolate by mistake.'
IN HER anthology, One Hundred Renaissance Jokes, Barbara Bowen identifies a Latin epigram by Sir Thomas More (1500's) as a likely forerunner. At a banquet, a guest removes some flies from the loving-cup, drinks, then replaces them, before passing it on with the remark: 'I don't like flies myself, but perhaps some of you chaps do'.
I actually was taken to a version of Lindy's located in Brownsville, Brooklyn when I was a kid. The neighborhood was already turning but there were a few good Chinese Restaurants and old fashioned Jewish Restaurants still hanging on by the grace of the Jewish clientele who had moved "up" and away but retained loyalty to the old places. Anyway, the mark of the waiters in those Jewish restaurants was complete disrespect for the clientele. They practically threw the food - which was mainly a version of Polish, Russian and Rumanian cooking, the "old" countries - at you. There was a particular bit of choreography around the serving of soup. The base or broth was always chicken soup. What made the soup special was what was poured into the chicken broth. That would be matzoh balls or kasha or even stuffed cabbage if I remember correctly. So the waiter brings the kasha in a large silver tureen, always silver, right over the bowl of chicken soup and DUMPS it in. All in one quick perfunctory motion, like basically FU! And the customers loved it! They felt cheated if the waiters didn't treat them with disdain. I'll never forget it.
They felt cheated if the waiters didn't treat them with disdain. I'll never forget it.
And there it is. The heart of the matter or at least another piece of the puzzle.
In the world of abuse and misuse, those who are mistreated (particularly as children, and the younger they are at onset the more convoluted and difficult it is to process the aberrant treatment-often leading to the formation of a personality disorder) either come to regard that kind of mistreatment as a norm or worse a form of attention; or they dissociate, compartmentalize or retreat into fantasy land. For some being misused becomes tangled up in need, desire or a distorted perception of love and affection, with perversion or addiction as an outcome.
In what life situation would being treated by others with contempt and disdain feel good or seem appropriate?
23 comments:
Five prisoners in my closet?
Not today.
We could never do this now
Who would want to?
Maybe the silliness worked back then to bring in a laugh and gather ratings, but is sure is bizarre to see in retrospect.
So much better to chose to portray women as silly drits and stupid sexualized little girls than cover them with cloth and silence them.
Whoever can't see that neither of those behaviors or choices is respectful or honoring, while holding up the value of a human fetus, is missing the boat.
Mama, keep one thing in mind.
Back then, we were allowed to have fun. Stupid fun sometimes. Silly fun.
But we were allowed to have it.
I think one thing that will strike many people about the Choom Years was how deadly dull and serious (at least in the minds of the Lefties) they were and how everything was the Ultimate Battle of Lefty Good and Eeeevvviiillll. A little silliness is welcome now and again.
The jokes weren't especially topical, but they don't hold up. There were some knock outs among the girls, but the only one I recognized was Lily Tomlin. Looks aren't everything. She has had a better life and a more successful career than Judy Carne. But looks aren't nothing either. Goldie Hawn had the best run.
Sheesh that was painful.
There's definitely an air of care-free fun and energy accompanying the goofiness and relentless portrayal of women as dumb bints.
The mix of innocence and innuendo present is also a wonder to behold.
Laugh-In ran from 1968 to 1973. During those years, teaching and nursing were the only two career options I and the women who graduated from high school with me in 1972 were counseled and encouraged to consider, with the oft joked about MRS degree invariably coming up in casual conversations whenever the value of a young woman going to college was mentioned or debated. That was some of the soil in which feminism, however distorted and derailed it may be today, found root.
I remember those days.
There is a reason why they are called the good old days.
Even Lily Tomlin tried to look normal. Like a woman.
What's the harm n that.
I am currently reading a very interesting book called "The Last Closet." It is a memoir of Moria Greyland who recounted the homosexual pedophlia abuse by her mother the famous science fiction writer Marion Zimmer Bradley.
It is pretty much a blueprint of where we went wrong.
When I look at these Laugh In videos I can see how far we have fallen.
It is a reprise of the fall of the Roman Empire.
When degeneracy is normalized...no when it is celebrated....then an empire is on its last legs.
Trooper, Camille Paglia makes your point about celebrating degeneracy leading to the fall of empires. And, she's a lesbo.
Then she has got the problem licked.
By the way. Whose that girl in purple.
What is purple? Give us a the time she shows up.
Looking back at these vids does not bring up a longing in me for Good Old Days, Good Old Boys, Men in Suits who get off on controlling women or treating them as stupid or objects for abuse, and Women who Enable and promote that behavior.
How is fantasizing about sex with stupid energetic young women different from wishing to be met by 72 willing virgins? Aside from a possible experience factor, they're two culturally different but essentially similar manifestations of a desire to be in the one-up position and have power over another rather than enter into the effort and engagement of mutual relationship.
I'm intrigued but not amused by what I'm seeing. It may be the beginning of a decline, but it appears to me to be manifestation of a decline and degeneration already in progress. The flip side is this: out of decline new opportunities for goodness, growth and creative, life giving engagement continue to present themselves.
If someone complains about a fly in his drink, picking it out and saying "Now there isn't" seems okay to me. Am I missing some important point of etiquette?
What is the origin of the 'Waiter, there's a fly in my soup' joke?
A number of 'Waiter ...' jokes are attributed to the notoriously rude waiters at Lindy's Restaurant in New York, whose replies include: 'It's possible. The chef used to be a tailor' and 'Don't worry. How much soup can a fly drink?' Lindy's was started in August 1921 by Leo Lindemann and was as famous for the backchat of its waiters as for its clientele of comics, gangsters, show-biz stars and other celebrities. Among examples of repartee recorded on their menu (always entailing criticism of the customer and/or the food) are some which have gone on to become almost traditional: 'Waiter, do you serve shrimps here?' Lindy's waiter: 'Sure. We don't care how tall you are. Sit down.' and 'Waiter, this coffee tastes like tea.' Lindy's waiter: 'Forgive me, sir. I must have given you the hot chocolate by mistake.'
IN HER anthology, One Hundred Renaissance Jokes, Barbara Bowen identifies a Latin epigram by Sir Thomas More (1500's) as a likely forerunner. At a banquet, a guest removes some flies from the loving-cup, drinks, then replaces them, before passing it on with the remark: 'I don't like flies myself, but perhaps some of you chaps do'.
I actually was taken to a version of Lindy's located in Brownsville, Brooklyn when I was a kid. The neighborhood was already turning but there were a few good Chinese Restaurants and old fashioned Jewish Restaurants still hanging on by the grace of the Jewish clientele who had moved "up" and away but retained loyalty to the old places. Anyway, the mark of the waiters in those Jewish restaurants was complete disrespect for the clientele. They practically threw the food - which was mainly a version of Polish, Russian and Rumanian cooking, the "old" countries - at you. There was a particular bit of choreography around the serving of soup. The base or broth was always chicken soup. What made the soup special was what was poured into the chicken broth. That would be matzoh balls or kasha or even stuffed cabbage if I remember correctly. So the waiter brings the kasha in a large silver tureen, always silver, right over the bowl of chicken soup and DUMPS it in. All in one quick perfunctory motion, like basically FU! And the customers loved it! They felt cheated if the waiters didn't treat them with disdain. I'll never forget it.
That's a Jew thing ric. They do the same thing at Katz's deli.
If a Guinea waiter did that he would get shanked.
They felt cheated if the waiters didn't treat them with disdain. I'll never forget it.
And there it is. The heart of the matter or at least another piece of the puzzle.
In the world of abuse and misuse, those who are mistreated (particularly as children, and the younger they are at onset the more convoluted and difficult it is to process the aberrant treatment-often leading to the formation of a personality disorder) either come to regard that kind of mistreatment as a norm or worse a form of attention; or they dissociate, compartmentalize or retreat into fantasy land. For some being misused becomes tangled up in need, desire or a distorted perception of love and affection, with perversion or addiction as an outcome.
In what life situation would being treated by others with contempt and disdain feel good or seem appropriate?
What's this fly doing in my soup?
Looks like the backstroke.
Post a Comment