tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post2329667709704576706..comments2024-03-29T07:55:40.047-04:00Comments on Rex Parker Does the NYT Crossword Puzzle: Life, in Rome / TUES 9-01-20 / Brunch cocktails / Soccer great Mia / Round Table figuresRex Parkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16145707733877505087noreply@blogger.comBlogger111125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-9359454116138142682020-10-06T17:53:39.607-04:002020-10-06T17:53:39.607-04:00Count on David to save the day after yesterday'...Count on David to save the day after yesterday's MoanDay puzzle. Good times were had here!<br /><br />Diana, LIW for CrosswordsDiana, LIWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-33850606286349215732020-10-06T14:42:31.677-04:002020-10-06T14:42:31.677-04:00This is a pro's pro doing a Tuesday in a very ...This is a pro's pro doing a Tuesday in a very satisfying puzzle. Simple but well-presented theme with a nod to modern usage. There *were* a few crosswordese entries, BUT HEY, they were used in service to some great answers. I once had a tenant who owned a HIMALAYAN cat - a beautiful and visceral animal.<br /><br />MIMOSAS, BROUHAHA, CHAI LATTE (I agree-yuk), ARTHUR ASHE, ARETHA really helped with the overall sense of the puzzle. I'm a fan.rainforestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-64313587823189606212020-10-06T14:11:52.105-04:002020-10-06T14:11:52.105-04:00Lots of PPP here, BUTHEY, that’s what the puzzle i...Lots of PPP here, BUTHEY, that’s what the puzzle is about.<br />Liked it.leftcoasternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-26655385314287173402020-10-06T13:11:41.190-04:002020-10-06T13:11:41.190-04:00@spacey – these days in the government/corporate w...@spacey – these days in the government/corporate world there is often an add-on to a person’s pre-set email signature declaring by which PRONOUNS they prefer to be called/referred. It usually looks like this:<br />(Pronouns: She/Her/Hers)<br /> I find it tiresome. Notice the slash, similar to the black square slash through the heart of the puz.<br /><br />And Mr. Steinberg doesn’t *need* to sell to the NYT. He is the editor of the Universal Crossword as found in the Mpls Star-Tribune and other fine fish wrappers near you. I suspect that this puz publication was meant as a statement.<br />Agree on TARA Reid.<br />rondonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-26955219116115074462020-10-06T11:47:51.792-04:002020-10-06T11:47:51.792-04:00In my experience these slashed gender identifiers ...In my experience these slashed gender identifiers are most helpful with names like Chris, Pat, or Dana, etc. Otherwise they are being overused by the supposed ‘woke’ folks and others trying to appear ‘correct’ with way too much focus on gender. I don’t care about your private parts. Gettest THOU the job done SIRS and MAAM and I don’t care about your gender, or your PERSONAL PRONOUNS. ARETHA gets some respect today. I imagine there was a purpose for putting in this DS puz.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-44390246049322914792020-10-06T11:37:38.230-04:002020-10-06T11:37:38.230-04:00Typical early-week hack job, to me. A weakish them...Typical early-week hack job, to me. A weakish theme, with (ugh!) shaded squares, the old crutch vowel string and other fill woes...and then I saw the byline. WHAT?!? Are there two Davis Steinbergs? (Actually, there are probably dozens.) BUTHEY, the one associated with crosswords surely didn't crank out this one, did he?<br /><br />The most praiseworthy entry in the grid is a PPP: ARTHURASHE. That and DOD TARA Reid. I had no idea that HIMALAYANS were anything but mountains, much less how to describe cats native (presumably) to there, so points for education on that one. But CHAILATTE? Yuk. and FBPOSTS; no fan of double-letter add-ons. This is so far beneath DS' usual standard, it makes me think he's out of money and desperately needed a sale. Bogey.spacecrafthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09125304293611865503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-66232883762601196192020-10-06T10:55:47.350-04:002020-10-06T10:55:47.350-04:00ARETHA & ARTHUR MET
THEY got PERSONAL at THE ...ARETHA & ARTHUR MET<br /><br />THEY got PERSONAL at THE INTERVIEW,<br />BUT,HEY, WHO RANKED WHO was persuaded?<br />OKTHEN, now I HERD IT is TRUE,<br />HIMALAYAN HER is how THEY MADEIT.<br /><br />--- ELSA HAMM<br />Burma Shavenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-60640891981920442872020-10-06T10:14:53.216-04:002020-10-06T10:14:53.216-04:00Not bad. Bonus (gender-neutral) pronoun THOU at 24...Not bad. Bonus (gender-neutral) pronoun THOU at 24D.thefogmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01870509029973778266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-11578413742268706542020-09-05T04:56:31.426-04:002020-09-05T04:56:31.426-04:00Bigots tend to get mad when they see people who li...Bigots tend to get mad when they see people who list their pronouns and mock them for it. That's how they out themselves. I wouldn't consider somebody a bigot for omitting (intentionally or not) their pronouns somewhere.<br /><br />That said, the way you talk about pronouns it seems like you've kinda outed yourself here. Adam Coopermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08957569020940232670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-86583772676210462592020-09-02T10:07:48.415-04:002020-09-02T10:07:48.415-04:00Anon 6:16 -- SPOILER ALERT for everyone else. (Sc...Anon 6:16 -- SPOILER ALERT for everyone else. (Scroll down)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />I'm giving you the last one -- the hardest one, the one you asked for: SPORE. You do the rest: I have full confidence in you! :)<br /><br /><br />Nancyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16737377749030219974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-82622135304001158172020-09-01T23:37:17.198-04:002020-09-01T23:37:17.198-04:00@Giovanni 10:33
Thanks for explaining. Your positi...@Giovanni 10:33<br />Thanks for explaining. Your position seems clear enough, and reasonable enough to me. I too can't see a harm, in the context of an academic paper in sociology, and for the purpose of maintaining clear conceptual distinctions relevant to the paper, in referring to cis- and trans-. (I mean, after all, there *is* a clear conceptual distinction.) And of course, if a person explicitly identifies as cis- or trans-, then no harm. In ordinary discourse, one must simply listen and go by the personal preference, and no further. <br /><br />The word "deviant" is interesting -- somewhat akin to a wolf whistle. Consider calling someone a "sexual deviant". There is just enough plausible deniability where someone using the phrase could fall back on, "no, all I meant was deviating from the norm by one standard deviation" (or whatever). At the same time, the phrase itself unquestionably carries a taint of referring to something considered unacceptable in society, if not something outright criminal. <br />TTrimblenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-38631239967723838422020-09-01T23:04:44.204-04:002020-09-01T23:04:44.204-04:00Came hoping the comments wouldn’t disappoint...and...Came hoping the comments wouldn’t disappoint...and was disappointed.<br /><br />Thanks @Giovanni (and others). No thanks for quite a few other comments here. I thought they were moderated.A trans solvernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-40856395541427394352020-09-01T22:49:17.975-04:002020-09-01T22:49:17.975-04:00@Giovanni- I thought this was a crossword blog. Op...@Giovanni- I thought this was a crossword blog. Opinions are like a-holes. Everybody has one. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-71367203829176569132020-09-01T22:45:46.130-04:002020-09-01T22:45:46.130-04:00Nancy, it’s anon at 6:16 again. I’m just not getti...Nancy, it’s anon at 6:16 again. I’m just not getting it. I just can’t get my brain to work right on this! Can you “spill the beans” about the five words?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-47534720399381274462020-09-01T22:33:00.638-04:002020-09-01T22:33:00.638-04:00I should have been more clear. Whatever one wants ...I should have been more clear. Whatever one wants to call themselves, or how they think of themselves is fine. A transwoman can of course refer herself and think of herself as a woman. She is a woman, 100% a woman. A cis woman can also refer to herself as a woman.<br /><br />Trans and cis-gender are descriptions. These terms exist in vocabulary.They are descriptive terms, use to describe. They are not what someone "is". That was my mistake, when I wrote you are one or the other. You can be what you want. You are whatever you know you are.<br /> These terms are used by people, usually in writing, to describe, not to describe a person's true essense. I don't know how you could take the words trans and cisgender out of vocabulary. I think if someone were doing an academic paper and used these terms in description, it should not be offensive to anyone, because it's being used in a general way to describe. When the first poster said she was offended by the use of the word, I was puzzled as no one is in particular specifically calling her a cis woman, however in an essay, she may be put into a group and referred to that way by the author, and I didn't understand how that would offend anyone.<br />I understand this is a serious issue, it is literally a persons life. I have a cousin who I am very close with, that is, well a woman, and things have been difficult for her. I was not trying to be insensitive or flippant.Camilitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17828952049318428219noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-66191912975399893762020-09-01T21:51:53.864-04:002020-09-01T21:51:53.864-04:00@Anonymous 7:40 -- "To modify the standard is...@Anonymous 7:40 -- "To modify the standard is to undermine it." And "pernicious" is the perfect adjective to describe the effect. You've captured precisely why the term "cis woman" bothers me so much, only you've said it much better than I did.<br /><br />I strongly agree that the very term "woman" is being [deliberately] undermined by qualifying it. I suspect that's the idea -- to make sure that there's no such thing any more as an ordinary woman. To rejigger the identity of half the human race in order to make the point that you're no more an outsider than anyone else is the height of chutzpah and hubris.Sis, not cisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-75824410274111104012020-09-01T21:04:20.949-04:002020-09-01T21:04:20.949-04:00Roo,
You’re as far from an A-hole as is humanly po...Roo,<br />You’re as far from an A-hole as is humanly possible. The fault was mine. Hey all is all yours, and rightly so. <br />Peace my brother.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-51999054221005822922020-09-01T20:34:22.497-04:002020-09-01T20:34:22.497-04:00@Giovanni 7:04
I am puzzled by your stance. Suppo...@Giovanni 7:04 <br />I am puzzled by your stance. Suppose someone calls herself a woman. She might be trans, but she prefers to identify simply as a woman, without having anyone making inferences or guesses one way or another. Why should that not be honored? TTrimblenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-64425886755681086432020-09-01T20:04:34.436-04:002020-09-01T20:04:34.436-04:00Two things:
@Anon 4:08
Har! And touché. I reread m...Two things:<br />@Anon 4:08<br />Har! And touché. I reread my last post, and I sounded like an a-hole! Didn't mean it that way... Ah, texting... (or blogging, really)<br /><br />@Nancy<br />Figured it out with your P hint. I had given up! Thanks.<br /><br />RooRooMonsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14103892151115549684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-57027912005760839232020-09-01T19:49:50.152-04:002020-09-01T19:49:50.152-04:00Giovani,
No one is calling you a jerk to your face...Giovani,<br />No one is calling you a jerk to your face. Why are you bothered that they refer to you that way unbeknownst to you?<br /><br />Mods,<br />This is logically equivalent to Giovani's claim. That the folks who patrol this blog are sympathetic to his argument does not refute mine.<br />Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-26201498986440517612020-09-01T19:40:16.066-04:002020-09-01T19:40:16.066-04:00Giovanni,
I prefer to refer to myself as the King ...Giovanni,<br />I prefer to refer to myself as the King of France. Should you oblige me?<br />Sis, not cis is of course correct. Why should the normative identify be modified. Set aside any judgment, surely any person who claims to be trans is a deviant. That is to say, a deviation from the norm. To modify the standard is to undermine it. That’s why cis gender is pernicious. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-65991863973886792972020-09-01T19:10:21.447-04:002020-09-01T19:10:21.447-04:00Short version -
I enjoyed the puzzle. But then, ...Short version -<br /><br />I enjoyed the puzzle. But then, I always do. <br /><br />A slasher puzzle...I didn't actually notice.<br /><br />Mai Tais, and Blue Hawaiians, can result in technicolor yawns (love the Aussie vernacular).<br /><br />HIMALAYANS...needed some yaks.<br /><br />I cut the cord, got rid of the satellite dish, put up an OTA antenna last September. I think it's been 6 weeks since I turned on a TV. Books are better.<br /><br />For those who have never heard of, or consumed, TRITIP: it must be BBQd. Period. It can't be done any other way. And once you do have it, you'll realize it's one of the best cuts extant.<br /><br />Am I the only one to think it? I don't care what pronouns you use. If I'm speaking to you I'll use your name; if I'm referring to you it'll be as whatever seems most appropriate. I am certainly not going to remember your preference. <br /><br /><br />PERSONAL BROUHAHA. OK THEN.<br />Mark<br />Somewhere behind the Orange CurtainRuns with Scissorshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16280938333784679275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-27117861981187389402020-09-01T19:06:40.776-04:002020-09-01T19:06:40.776-04:00Anon (6:16) Big hint. (Don't look anyone who...Anon (6:16) Big hint. (Don't look anyone who doesn't want a big hint.) Scroll way down...<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Three of the five missing words begin with a "P".Nancyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16737377749030219974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-91476250544271622652020-09-01T19:04:43.109-04:002020-09-01T19:04:43.109-04:00@sis not cis why does it bother you so much to be ...@sis not cis why does it bother you so much to be referred to as a cis-woman? People aren't actually calling you that, to your face, as in: hey cis-woman, come over here". If anything, it would not be used in your presence at all but in a more generic way in writing. <br /><br />And they are not "altering" or "fudging" your identity. You are either trans or non-trans (cis). You are still a woman. It is to distinguish you from trans, so what is the big deal?Camilitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17828952049318428219noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35115061.post-3598328222654288432020-09-01T18:16:57.053-04:002020-09-01T18:16:57.053-04:00Nancy, can I have some hints to your puzzle?
-Do...Nancy, can I have some hints to your puzzle? <br />-Does the last blank refer to a bean dish? Or is it a type of bean?<br />-Is it five different letters?<br />-What would be the order of the blanks if they were in alphabetical order?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com