first name basis

[Wahoo Redux]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

[apl68]

I've said before that I'm now increasingly known as Mr. <first name,> which around here means I'm now regarded as old enough to be considered an elder.  Here many people, including younger ones, still use what I was taught in my youth to regard as the polite terms of address.  What's taking some getting used to is hearing them applied to me!  Fifteen years ago I was still occasionally being mistaken for a teenager.  Now I guess I look my age.  Shrug.

[apl68]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

You don't strike me as the Lizard King type.  Now Para, on the other hand....

[Wahoo Redux]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

You don't strike me as the Lizard King type.  Now Para, on the other hand....

Would you believe..."Mighty Dragon Master?"

[jimbogumbo]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

Perhaps you remind them that people are strange?

[Wahoo Redux]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

Perhaps you remind them that people are strange?

Well now THAT is probably true, actually.

[Kron3007]

My students called me Lizard King.  I don't know why.

Perhaps you remind them that people are strange?

Well now THAT is probably true, actually.

Or maybe they are lizards?  And you are their king?

Pretty awesome though, your reptilian Majesty.   Makes me think of the old TV show V, which was kind of awesome.

[kaysixteen]

I apologize for not having kept this up, but I have been sick.

I would ask this question, of those, esp wahoo, who advocate unfettered casualization or even 'slobification' of our society, exactly how much is too much, and what if any standards of personal accoutrement and social address/ interaction, should be maintained?   And who gets to choose-- if I think calling me 'Kay' is disrespectful and wearing a 'f*ck you' t-shirt is unacceptable, and you do not...?

[Wahoo Redux]

Sorry you were sick, man, I hope it was the common cold and not something more serious.

I can't imagine why you want to know specifically what I think, but I don't know, really.  We need basic sanitation for practical purposes, and presumably people will wear more clothes when it is cold and fewer clothes when it is warm. Anything else? Well, sumo fashion is perfectly decorous in context of the sport. And uncontacted tribes seem to be able to handle near-nudity without losing their minds as we tend to do.  I do not have any idea how their kids refer to their elders, however. 

Remember that everything you and I and anyone else thinks is "decent" or "appropriate" or "decorous" or "right" is an entirely random construct.  So anything that upsets you is entirely a product of your imagination. 

I really don't care what are on other people's T-shirts.

[little bongo]

Remember that everything you and I and anyone else thinks is "decent" or "appropriate" or "decorous" or "right" is an entirely random construct.  So anything that upsets you is entirely a product of your imagination. 

Well, that's kind of true of everything, I think--including what we choose to invest in emotionally. To paraphrase Lily Tomlin's "The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe," what if reality is just a collective hunch?

So who decides? Whose turf is it--that's pretty much what it boils down to. When it's your name, or how you're addressed, that's your turf. Other aspects of dress and self-expression tend to be a bit less cut and dried. If you're the teacher in a class, you get to decide. If you're both visitors in a library, you might need to disapprove silently and move along.

[Wahoo Redux]

Remember that everything you and I and anyone else thinks is "decent" or "appropriate" or "decorous" or "right" is an entirely random construct.  So anything that upsets you is entirely a product of your imagination. 

Well, that's kind of true of everything, I think--including what we choose to invest in emotionally. To paraphrase Lily Tomlin's "The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe," what if reality is just a collective hunch?

So who decides? Whose turf is it--that's pretty much what it boils down to. When it's your name, or how you're addressed, that's your turf. Other aspects of dress and self-expression tend to be a bit less cut and dried. If you're the teacher in a class, you get to decide. If you're both visitors in a library, you might need to disapprove silently and move along.

All things are true above.

Everything but essential life functions are an evolution of someone's random choices and seem real only in our imaginations.  According to "Modern Tie" this is the origin of the necktie:

Early ties hardly resemble the modern tie today as we know it. We can thank Croatians for the necktie, but the French made it the fashion staple it is today. The origin of the necktie can be traced back to the 17th Century, during the 30 Years' War (1618-1648). The French hired Croatian mercenaries who wore traditional knotted neckerchiefs around their necks as part of their uniform. This held the top of their jackets together and was more practical than stiff collars.

Towards the end of the war, Croatian soldiers were being presented to French King Louis XIV. During his inspection, the king noticed these neckerchiefs and took a strong liking to them. The boy-king began wearing these himself around 1846, at just seven years old, according to the Dubrovnik Times. He named the early neckties "La Cravate,'' after the Croatians who invented the fashion piece and is still the French word for necktie today. The king made cravats a mandatory accessory at royal gatherings. With the king and other nobility wearing cravats, the new fashion trend caught on like a wildfire across Europe.

I'd always heard that business ties were invented to cover the buttons on button-down shirts because buttons were indecorous, like having your underwear show.  I don't know which is true. Either way, the business tie is a random accoutrement developed by a random historical occurrence, yet they are considered an important, even necessary accessory, and not wearing a tie to a formal interview can nix a job offer. 

The same is true of how one is addressed.  I tend to think these random conventions should be beneath our considerations...even as I follow them.

Mind you, I would never insult Kay if he asked me to call him "Dr. Sixteen."  I understand that what is important to me might not be to someone else, and vice-versa. 

[secundem_artem]

I thought the purpose of a tie was to collect soup or mustard at the dinner table.  Lord knows that's all mine ever do - on the vanishingly few occasions I actually wear one.

The question of "who decides" for these kinds of issues is an interesting one.  I mean, who decided today was Thursday??  Nobody asked me.  How do we know there's not another whole number between 6 and 7?

Yet somehow, we collectively come to the decision that using first names is generally OK in most circumstances (unlike the Germans), that tattoos are no longer a big deal to most people (unlike my grandparents), that same sex relationships are of no more interest than those in different sex relationships (unlike some religious belief systems), etc.

If if you don't agree with these kinds of collective decisions, you're pretty much left to deal with it on your own.

[kaysixteen]

You are right to acknowledge that social conventions end up deciding what is acceptable and unacceptable in any given society, and that these change over time.   It is also true that in an enormous *and enormously diverse* country such as the USA there will be 'changes' that unambiguously are not accepted by all, and indeed certain avant garde or otherwise rarified/ distinctive subgroups may well change faster than other more traditional elements in society, even though those latter traditionalists may well be numerically superior, esp in, like it or not, areas of the country outside of the comparatively few areas dominated by the change agents.  So those change agents do not get to simply assert: 'we have changed, deal with it'.  Nor get offended when the traditionalists say: 'tough patooties, we ain't changin'.'  And of course there is the related question of how to figure out how to deal with any given person, in the sense that if you decide that I have the right to be addressed as I wish, and you as you wish, how does either one of us know what the other's preferences here are?   This of course is another piece of evidence suggestive of some sort of overarching cultural standard that would allow each of us to assume a priori how to address the other, unless specific instructions/ evidence to the contrary are given.

I am also still going to push back on the idea that anyone realistically is going to say he does not mind if someone wears a 'f*ck you sh*thead' shirt in public.   You may well say you would not care, would not differentiate your response to this person upon such a sight, but, despite your doubtlessly motivated by progressive sympathies notion, methinks that, ultimately, you are lying to yourself.

Wahoo, thanks for your kind words.  Sadly my illness is no cold.   I am struggling with fairly severe anemia, with various bloodtest numbers very low, and immense and growing fatigue, sadly exacerbated by pretty bad fall allergies.   There are adjacent health issues as well, and I have several doc appts next week during which anemia treatments will be undertaken-- I am hopeful to be able to return to work in about ten days or so.

[Wahoo Redux]

So those change agents do not get to simply assert: 'we have changed, deal with it'.  Nor get offended when the traditionalists say: 'tough patooties, we ain't changin'.'

Yeah, buddy, I'm afraid they do on both counts.  It's in the Constitution.  Numerical numbers have nothing really to do with it----and I don't think my position is terribly avant garde at all.  I think the numericals are actually the inverse of what you are suggesting.

And of course there is the related question of how to figure out how to deal with any given person, in the sense that if you decide that I have the right to be addressed as I wish, and you as you wish, how does either one of us know what the other's preferences here are?   

You have to hash it out.  I used to ask my students if they had a particular way they wanted to be addressed----nicknames, diminutives (ex. "Freddy" for "Frederick"), etc.----and I apologized when I got it wrong.

But I don't think personal address is a "right," simply a common courtesy that most people will voluntarily observe.

This of course is another piece of evidence suggestive of some sort of overarching cultural standard that would allow each of us to assume a priori how to address the other, unless specific instructions/ evidence to the contrary are given.

There is a cultural standard.  It is shifting.

I am also still going to push back on the idea that anyone realistically is going to say he does not mind if someone wears a 'f*ck you sh*thead' shirt in public.   You may well say you would not care, would not differentiate your response to this person upon such a sight, but, despite your doubtlessly motivated by progressive sympathies notion, methinks that, ultimately, you are lying to yourself.

I was only speaking for myself.  Other people would indeed be offended by an obscene insult on a T-shirt. I might be offended by a T-shirt degrading women or a racist or fascist T-shirt.

I am just not sure there is very much I could do about it except complain to management if I were someplace like a mall or a Barnes & Nobels.  I suppose I could punch someone, but they would probably punch me back and/or I would be arrested.

Sometimes we have to accept what other people do, say, and think, even if we hates it, hates it, hates it.

I'm really sorry to hear about your health concerns.  I am dealing seriously for the first time in my life with potentially dangerous hypertension.  Getting old sucks.  You will be in my thoughts and prayers.  And I will celebrate when you get better!!!

[Caracal]

Remember that everything you and I and anyone else thinks is "decent" or "appropriate" or "decorous" or "right" is an entirely random construct.  So anything that upsets you is entirely a product of your imagination. 

Well, that's kind of true of everything, I think--including what we choose to invest in emotionally. To paraphrase Lily Tomlin's "The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe," what if reality is just a collective hunch?

So who decides? Whose turf is it--that's pretty much what it boils down to. When it's your name, or how you're addressed, that's your turf. Other aspects of dress and self-expression tend to be a bit less cut and dried. If you're the teacher in a class, you get to decide. If you're both visitors in a library, you might need to disapprove silently and move along.

All things are true above.

Everything but essential life functions are an evolution of someone's random choices and seem real only in our imaginations.  According to "Modern Tie" this is the origin of the necktie:

Early ties hardly resemble the modern tie today as we know it. We can thank Croatians for the necktie, but the French made it the fashion staple it is today. The origin of the necktie can be traced back to the 17th Century, during the 30 Years' War (1618-1648). The French hired Croatian mercenaries who wore traditional knotted neckerchiefs around their necks as part of their uniform. This held the top of their jackets together and was more practical than stiff collars.

Towards the end of the war, Croatian soldiers were being presented to French King Louis XIV. During his inspection, the king noticed these neckerchiefs and took a strong liking to them. The boy-king began wearing these himself around 1846, at just seven years old, according to the Dubrovnik Times. He named the early neckties "La Cravate,'' after the Croatians who invented the fashion piece and is still the French word for necktie today. The king made cravats a mandatory accessory at royal gatherings. With the king and other nobility wearing cravats, the new fashion trend caught on like a wildfire across Europe.

I'd always heard that business ties were invented to cover the buttons on button-down shirts because buttons were indecorous, like having your underwear show.  I don't know which is true. Either way, the business tie is a random accoutrement developed by a random historical occurrence, yet they are considered an important, even necessary accessory, and not wearing a tie to a formal interview can nix a job offer. 

The same is true of how one is addressed.  I tend to think these random conventions should be beneath our considerations...even as I follow them.

Mind you, I would never insult Kay if he asked me to call him "Dr. Sixteen."  I understand that what is important to me might not be to someone else, and vice-versa. 

Regardless of their origins, ties do draw the eye down which makes most men look taller and thinner when combined with a jacket. I don't like wearing a coat without a tie because I feel like it looks like my shirt is balooning out. Of course, the idea that men should want to look taller and thinner is a cultural construct...