"There would be some rules. You can slap as many people as you want, but you get only one slap against any one person...."
Of course, this is wrong for so many reasons -- on so many levels -- but indulge the fantasy....
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८१ टिप्पण्या:
The "non-injurious" part of it certainly takes the fun out of it.
"...wrong for so many reasons -- on so many levels"
If you think I'm going to waste my slap just for that, you need to think again, young lady.
Doesn't sexual harassment law allow one feel?
I may have that wrong.
One feel, one slap, that's it. Hmm...
Come to think of it, that would be much more efficient... and more satisfying for so many reasons -- on so many levels.
One of the ways it's wrong is the "no retaliation" clause.
I actually think that part of the reason that our society is so very rude is because we've all been taught to never never respond physically to insult or rude behavior.
I suppose it's one of those "take away the right to clobber someone and only the criminals will clobber someone." Or something.
But sometimes it's called for.
Take that famous punch-out by Buzz Aldrin. Some guy, about a foot taller than him, gets in his face and starts accusing him of being a liar. Mr. Aldrin says "back off", and the guy doesn't, so Aldrin punches him.
And I ask you? Was the "fake moon landing" moron surprised? Did he expect Aldrin to have to endure his diatribe and invasion of his personal space because those are the *rules* our society enforces?
Would a "learning experience" or two earlier have given the fellow a clue about what acceptable behavior actually is?
Our society isn't more civilized because we compulsively teach children to endure abuse and "use their words". It's less civilized because words and behavior no longer have consequences, because the law-abiding do not enforce a standard of public conduct.
My hand hurts just thinking about it and my foot is jealous as can be
I've no desire to slap most people. In the cases where I do, I want to do so not once, but repeatedly, so this law's no help.
I'd bet that if such a law came into being, we'd see in its path the concept of slap-bartering: "If a slap that person for you, so that you get more than one slap via proxy, you have to agree to slap this person for me." Next there would be slap-conspiracies, slap-swarms or even slap-gangs. Just think, a whole new slap-system would snap into place!
Nature abhors a vacuum, and human nature is what it is. That's all I'm saying.
Can the slap involve a fish?
May we film the dancing forthwith?
Where's Michael?
"Where's Michael?"
Slapped into oblivion, I expect.
Does one get a running start with the slap? The practical remedy is outweighed by the employment expansion for lawyers. This sounds like one of those laws which starts out small, simple, and obvious. Then evoles into something bloated and stupid. But then again we are talking the legal profession.
At one time in this country duels were used to solve matters of honor. Reviving that might make things a tad more civil and simplified.
Synova's comment is great.
The image of men slapping people is lame as a slap doesn't seem very manly. I'm a woman, and I can't imagine slapping another woman. So that leaves women slapping men, and if someone truly deserves a slap, the slapper shouldn't need some special rule to hide behind because whatever the slappee has done should be shameful enough that he wouldn't want to recount it to accuse the slapper.
Ha ha ha ha ha.
Slapping's silly. I want my one punch.
What about the "free hugs" movement?
Kind of creepy, I think.
Of course, the movement's founder, Juan Mann, has been on Oprah.
And I ask you? Was the "fake moon landing" moron surprised? Did he expect Aldrin to have to endure his diatribe and invasion of his personal space because those are the *rules* our society enforces?
Aldrin follows "moon rules."
Once you've been there, you're never the same.
An ass kicking society is a polite society.
Plan: be obnoxious to a rich person. Get slapped.
Wear a disguise. Be obnoxious to the same rich person. Get slapped again.
Repeat until lots of rich people have slapped me lots of times.
Then slap them all with suits for assault & battery.
Legislators and the media love to come up with high-minded names for laws, whether named after a particular politician, a victim, a cause or principle.
I have a great name for this law.
The Three Stooges and You're Out Law.
Can one buy slaps from others?
I would like to accumulate slaps to be used on Congressional types.
----
WANTED
Slaps to buy.
Will pay generous rates.
CONTACT: No Slap Left Behind
----
re: fish slap, how about pie? Or tar and feathering - would that be considered two slaps?
Why do I get the feeling only the male commenters will laugh while watching the link in my last post?
What is the rule regarding a ricochet slap, that is, a slap causing the slapee to bounce off a neaby person?
EDH - I laughed and I'm female! I especially like the slap that got, what... 7 people? in the semi-circle.
Synova, the "use your words" thing when talking about defending yourself doesn't work because most people will not allow their children to use the most appropriate words :-)
Freeman --
"The image of men slapping people is lame as a slap doesn't seem very manly."
Edward G. Robinson, Humphrey Bogart - Key Largo. Simply depends on the delivery.
And that, my friends is how real actors do a slap. They do a real one.
I think most people I meet deserve a good slap.
Yes, the Key Largo slap is a manly slap. A manly slap is so rare.
Oh, that's a great scene in Key Largo. And isn't it The Maltese Falcon where Bogie slaps Elijah Cook Jr around and says, "You'll take it and like it!"? Or was that The Big Sleep.
That Buzz Aldrin punch never gets old. (Some turds have put this behind the "adult content" screen--probably moon landing conspiracy freaks--so you have to log in.) Look at Buzz's form! He's punching up, which is bad, but he rotates his foot and really puts his hips into. The guy's a good foot taller and the 75-year-old Buzz knocks him back about three feet. Wonderful!
As for one "slap", I should point out that I have broken cinder blocks with one of my "slaps", as well as three inches of pine. So, you know, all this would really do is open up lawyerly debate on what constitutes a "slap".
EDH: I laughed, too! Love the Stooges. I was trying to find a clip of the "Spread Out!" forehead slapping at that ritzy dinner party in one of their movies. That always makes me laugh.
And so true, Oligonicella. There are no slaps like the old movie slaps!
Of course the slaps would only be for men.
For the ladies, we have the spanking.
For the ladies, we have the spanking.
Let's talk throat slitting. I see a place for it to fit in.
Incidentally, I love this slap scene.
Pretty good movie, too. This was a remake of a movie called The Women, which was recently remade again with Meg Ryan. I've seen them all, and this June Allyson version is by far the best, I think.
Merry Christmas Freeman.
Merry Christmas, Trooper. :)
You can slap as many people as you want, but you get only one slap against any one person...."
You do realize that this rule would mean the death of Madonna before the line had even finished forming.
'm a woman, and I can't imagine slapping another woman. So that leaves women slapping men,
Then the hypothetical law isn't necessary. Pretty much all female-on-male violence is already de facto legal.
The "take it and like it" quote of Bogie's is from Maltese Falcon.
The clear winner of this thread I think will be :
Ginger Rogers
Complete with catfight judo throw!
Darcy --
Exactly what I was talking about. Watch that earring jump!
I was doing an outdoor scene with a gal and she was supposed to slap me. Weak and woosie. No, harder. Not much. Like this. I slapped her, her eyes flared and she chopped me. Yeah, keep it like that, the audience needs to hear it twenty feet away.
blake --
Done that too, but you'd be hard pressed to actually call an open handed "punch" like that a slap. You don't use the fingers so much as the heel and ball.
The spanking comment immediately reminded me of this movie, a movie I almost liked and then, during the end, it is revealed that the woman has been acting vengefully with cause, and that ruined it.
Whatever the drawbacks of McClintock (and I agree the spanking is a horrible one) you just can't beat the mudslide fight. Unless you pair it with the fight in The Quiet Man.
What did the five fingers say to the face?
I'm a big fan of The Quiet Man. The thing that ruined McLintock was when she says something like, "You came back from [wherever] with lipstick on your collar!" He says, "So what?!" And as the viewer you spend the rest of the fight waiting for an explanation that never comes. It looked like a casualty of editing to me, but it still ruined the movie. The whole point is supposed to be that she's being a brat for no reason, and he's going to straighten her out, but then this mysterious justifiable reason is thrown in at the end, throwing off the whole plot.
The Quiet Man was much better.
The Quiet Man and McClintock! Two movies I'll watch any time they are on. Such PC films! LOL.
"Here's a good stick to beat the lovely lady."
Ha!
Love that clip, Ron!
Here's a recent yet classic clip of Trooper York teaching Titus some manly philosophy.
Exactly what is it about elderly former astronauts that elicits such violence? (Sorry no video.)
Not Exactly A Campaign Swing
NYT October 29, 1989
Who would have thought that a tree-planting ceremony of the American Forestry Association at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington would make compelling television news? Certainly not Senator John Glenn (below), the Ohio Democrat and former astronaut, who was being interviewed on other matters of the day at the ceremony by a television correspondent. Suddenly, a well-dressed man walked up and punched the Senator in the jaw. Television viewers could hear the man, Michael Breen, 31 years old, of Washington muttering about earthquakes. A startled Mr. Glenn rubbed a sore jaw and said, ''I haven't been hit like that in 30 years.'' Mr. Breen, charged with assaulting a member of Congress, a felony, was ordered held for psychiatric evaluation. His lawyer, Barry Stiller, declined to discuss the case but described his client as ''just a very nice young man who I think is a little confused.''
Michaleen Flynn: Is this a courting or a donnybrook? Have the good manners not to hit the man until he's your husband and entitled to hit you back.
(The Quiet Man, 1952)
Y'all have missed the bureaucratic end of this. There will have to be an Office of Slapometrics, so that all the "first" slaps can be recorded and you know when the "second" and future slaps occur. And every first slap will have to be recorded, else who knows when the second, third, or fourth slap may have occurred. This can be blended into another department, but the database will need to be shared among various departments, so we can keep track of slaps. That obviously makes jobs for DBAs and this is good.
Ah, but slaps aren't done with the fingers, they're done with the palm. What you're doing is keeping your wrist relatively limp (maybe that's why it doesn't seem manly) so as not to seriously harm the other person.
Somehow the legal right to a limp-wristed slap seems less than appealing. And even then you can still break wood, you just have to rely on speed rather than strength.
k--
Does that mean we'd have a Secretary of Slapping? Department of Discipline?
Department of Discipline? Kinky :-)
Freeman, I'm going to have to go back and watch McClintock again now, because I totally missed out on that part you describe.
I honestly thought the whole McClintock plot was a misunderstanding and lack of communication between two people truly in love with each other.
Perhaps I am overly romantic and preferred to ignore anything to the contrary.
Isn't bin Laden the Wazir of Wankage?
What if the law allowed everybody one non-injurious slap against everybody else?
Life, liberty, and pursuit of slap-happiness are already inalienable rights.
blake --
"What you're doing is keeping your wrist relatively limp (maybe that's why it doesn't seem manly) so as not to seriously harm the other person."
Nice attempt at derision, but I keep my wrist locked, not limp. The context is the "non-injurious slap".
Oh, heh, no, I didn't mean that.
I meant, "What one is doing is keeping one's wrist limp...."
I hardly meant to deride your slapping abilities.
bearbee:
No Slap Left Behind
Wait a second. If the slapper is an attractive female, then I for one might welcome a slap on the Left Behind.
Oh yeah, there was a non-slapping incident at the Olympics this year-- Misty May offered President Bush the chance to slap her on the rump (apparently that is supposed to be the equivalent of 'go break a leg' for volleyball players), and he declined. Does that mean the offer now passes to Obama?
rhhardin:
Doesn't sexual harassment law allow one feel?
Only if it also allows the victim one (she gets to choose) punch, kick, stomp, bite or bullet.
Well, I'm glad Blake. I've been told I have a manly slap.
On you/one. I miss the thees and thous. Eliminated a lot of confusion in the written word.
Even if it's the talented Amy Winehouse - you cant - you should not be allowed to slap anybody.
Here Amy making a fool of herself yet again.
http://tinyurl.com/5tjn4v
It breaks my hart.
There used to be an understanding among baseball players that if someone hit a homerun the next batter would get a brushback pitch, a beam ball.
But now with the money, the high salaries and the potential of a career ending beam beam at the head, that understanding has fallen by the wayside.
Baseball has lost a little bit of the give and take.
The ability of the opposition to respond to something like a homerun has been lost.
That genie is not going back in the bottle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushback_pitch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hyybb0F_o0
The ability of the opposition to respond to something like a homerun has been lost.
By respond I mean an immediate response.
The problem with baseball is not money per say.
The problem is that because baseball is a monopoly and the monopoly has accepted free agency, the players are in a unique (reaching near fantasy land) position.
Not unlike the Illinois union auto workers.
For the sake of the game Baseball needs to change, or it will be forced to change if it is to survive.
Baseball is a toothless monopoly.
The only way to save it (that i can think of) would be to take away its monopoly status.
Let there be freedom to form professional leagues, watch salaries come down and the ability of the average fan to go to the park and watch the f*$&*~g game the way it was intended.
it's like David Lynch says.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0
Maybe people need to slap someone as a poor substitute for an original experience.
put it this way.
Slapping someone unlike chocolate soon becomes an inadequate substitute for the things in life that bring one sustainable pleasure.
From The Common Law Origins of the Infield Fly Rule (a must read)
Baseball's society, like general human (btw - baseball is the most humane game under the sun) includes more than gentlemen, and the forces of competitiveness and professionalism required that the moral principle of fair play be codified so that those that did not subscribe to the principle would nonetheless be required to abide by it.
Chancing the rules so drastically as to render precedent irrecognizable is an aberration, indeed an affront to civilized society.
If general Patton could not slap, the burden to show the benefit of a slap are that much greater.
I mean, for a slap to come back in vogue it might take an Obama like event.
Chancing the rules so drastically as to render precedent irrecognizable is an aberration, indeed an affront to civilized society.
See Roe v Wade ;)
Last call folks.
And don't forget the Wisconsin blue law.
:)
Most (unlike Wisconsin and New Jersey) have been repealed, declared unconstitutional or are simply unenforced,
People in NJ dont go to Giant Stadium - it's a mirage.
there is no alchool there either ;)
get real.
Ok.
I'm not going to Blago Althouse.
(stay while shown the door)
I like this place too much.
I like this place too much.
There's always a tomorrow (after 12PM CST of course)
;)
Althouse said.
...indulge the fantasy....
And then there was this
Last call folks.
from "The Common Law Origins of the Infield Fly Rule"
To the generalization set forth in the preceding sentence there is an exception, both at common law and at baseball. At common law, the exception was equity, which was able to aid the plaintiff who could not find a form of action at law. At baseball, the exception was the power of the umpire to make a call that did not fit within a particular rule.
My defense is that of the former vice president of the United States Al Gore.
"My counsel tells me there is no controlling legal authority that says that is any violation of any law."
As far as I'm concerned Al Gore's standing today makes that plea a good standard.
Indeed the binding document is directly below "leave your comment"
...Otherwise, express yourself. Be interesting. You can digress, but digress creatively. Amuse us!
Hasta que lea, de que se acusa de violar las pautas ya declarada por la serenisima Alhouse, asumo el privilejio ya proscrito por su deseo.
There is someone suing the US because he was not sent to guantanamo.
Arar v. Ashcroft
The irony is just delicious.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
Chancing the rules so drastically as to render precedent irrecognizable is an aberration, indeed an affront to civilized society.
That explains this
A throw of the dice never will abolish change.
Modern-day blue laws are but the merest wisp of what they once were, as Alexis de Tocqueville points out in his great work Democracy in America (1835-40):
‘Although the strict puritanism that presided at the birth of the English colonies in America is already much relaxed, one does still find extraordinary traces of it in habits and in laws.
‘In 1792, that very year in which the antichristian French republic began its ephemeral existence, the Massachusetts legislature promulgated the following law to enforce Sunday observance. I quote the preamble and the main clauses of it, which are well worth the reader's closest attention.
‘“Whereas the observation of Sunday is in the public interest; inasmuch as it produces a useful suspension in labor, leads man to reflect upon the duties of life and the errors to which humanity is subject, permits the private and public worship of God the Creator and Ruler of the Universe, and dedication to the acts of charity which are the ornament and comfort of Christian societies;
‘“Whereas irreligious or light-minded persons, forgetting the duties which Sunday imposes and the advantages society derives from it, profane its sanctity by following their own pleasures or labors; inasmuch as this manner of acting is contrary to their own interests as Christians; that furthermore it is of such a nature as to upset those who do not follow their example, and being a real prejudice to the whole society by introducing there the taste for dissipation and dissolute habits;
‘“The Senate and the House of Representatives ordain that:
‘“1. No one will be permitted on Sunday to keep open his shop or workshop. No one on that day will occupy himself with any work or business whatsoever, attend any concert, dance, or entertainment, or indulge in any form of hunting, sport, or game, under penalty of fine. The fine will be not less than ten shillings and will not exceed twenty shillings for each infraction.
‘“2. No traveler, conductor, or driver, except in case of necessity, will travel on Sunday, under penalty of the same fine.
‘“3. Tavern keepers, retailers, innkeepers, will prevent any resident of their township from coming to their establishment on Sunday to spend time there for pleasure or business. In case of infraction, the innkeeper and his guest will pay the fine. Furthermore, the innkeeper can lose his license.
‘“4. Anyone who, being in good health and without sufficient reason, fails for three months to attend public worship, will be condemned to a fine of ten shillings.
‘“5. Anyone who, within a church, behaves improperly will pay a fine of from five to forty shillings.
‘“6. The tithingmen of the townships [{Footnote} These are annually elected officers whose duties resemble those of both the garde champetre and the officier de police judiciaire in France] are responsible for the execution of the present law. They have the right to visit all rooms of hotels or public places on Sunday. The innkeeper who refuses them entrance to his establishment will be condemned to a fine of forty shillings for this act alone.
‘“The tithingmen will stop travelers and inquire the reason why they are obliged to travel on Sunday. Whoever refuses to answer will be condemned to a fine which can be five pounds sterling.
‘“If the reason given by the traveler does not appear sufficient to the tithingman, he will prosecute the said traveler before the justice of the peace of the district.” (Law of March 8, 1792, General Laws of Massachusetts, Vol. I, p. 410.) [{Note by JPM} Tocqueville condensed the legal text; cf. op. cit., p. 407 ff.]
‘On March 11, 1797, a new law increased the rate of the fines, half of which was to go to the offender's prosecutor. (Same collection, Vol. I, p. 525.)
‘On February 16, 1816, a new law confirmed these same measures. (Same collection, Vol. II, p. 405.)
‘There are similar clauses in the laws of the state of New York, revised in 1827 and 1828. (See Revised Statutes, Part I, chapter XX, p. 675.) It is forbidden therein to hunt, fish, gamble, or frequent places where drink is sold on Sunday. No one may travel except in case of necessity.’
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 13th Edition, 1850, Edited by J. P. Mayer, Translated by George Lawrence, Anchor Books, Doubleday and Co., Inc., New York, 1975, pp. 712-713.
The history of the depiction of the relationships of men and women and violence are as old as the history of the motion pictures. Tracy and Hepburn, Gable and Colbert, Stewart and Dietrich all were depicted in various famous movies engaged in hand to hand combat in the battle of the sexes. But my favorite pairing of all time is of course John Wayne and Maureen O’Hara.
The famous liberal icon and all around nasty cunt Pauline Kael once disparaged Maureen O’Hara as portraying a “John Ford” woman whose main job was to keep the home fires burning and say things like “Be careful Matt.” As usual the incoherent feminist twat had no idea what she was talking about. The women of the John Ford films were tough enduring pioneer women who were creatures of their times but who were full partners with there men. Even the citified Claudette Colbert who moved to the rough Frontier in Drums along the Mohawk, toughed up and became a full partner with her husband in the fight for survival. And no one was tougher than Maureen O’Hara.
The first pairing of Wayne and O’Hara in Rio Grande has always seemed to be the best to me. They were originally meant to star in the Quiet Man but the Studio insisted on the cavalry movie first to pay for the quaint Irish tale. The themes of honor and duty and sacrifice recur throughout Fords work and he sets up the contrast between Colonel Yorkes stern dedication to his honor and Kathleen’s devotion to a genteel ideal past of the antebellum south. North vs. South. Yankee vs. Confederate. Man vs. woman. The continual battle of opposites that attract each other. It is a staple of all the movies that Wayne and O’Hara made together.
In the Quiet Man, they are transported to Ireland as Sean Thornton woos and marries Mary Kate Danaher despite the obstacle placed in their path by her brother the Squire. The comical fist fight between Thornton and Red Will Danaher is also a staple of most of Fords best work bring a measure of comedic violence to leaven the sentiment. You know he didn’t want it to be too mushy.
If Rio Grande and The Quiet Man were the work of the master, then McClintock is homage by lesser talent. Made by Wayne’s Batjack productions it was done at the time the studio system had fallen apart and stars had to finance their own projects. Wayne was able to get financing based on the fact that it was a Western and starred him and O’Hara which was considered money in the bank. Loosely based on the Taming of the Shrew the comic violence and conflict between the rough hewn frontier and the civilizing influence of a woman were also in place. Directed by Andrew V. McLaglen, the son of Victor McLaglen who played Red Danaher as well as Wayne’s faithful sergeant in so many Ford Films. McLaglen had a long career directing Westerns but he is of course just a pale imitation of the Master. And he was constrained by Wayne’s sensibility as he had his pet writer pen this trifle of a home movie. Also starring Wayne’s son they basically copied the comic fight scene from the Quiet Man but made it between a Wayne and O’Hara with a lot of slapstick thrown in. So it is not quite fair to judge McClintock in comparison with the work of the master John Ford.
Still, it is miles better than the crap these assholes produce today.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा