Funny. A buddy of mine who’s in the “lifestyle” (eg, BDSM and all that) thought the same thing. Nosy neighbor called the cops, said she heard “screaming and yelling.” Buddy’s girlfriend (a willing participant) answers the door with marks on her shoulders. Buddy gets hauled away because South Carolina CDV law is now a ‘no complantant necessary’ arrest. Buddy gets tried and convicted, with prison time suspended due to ‘mitigating circumstances’ (mitigating in the fact that his girlfriend said under oath that she had not been abused or harmed in any way.) Still had to pay a $1065 fine, and that conviction will be on his record for the rest of his life. As far as what his First Sergeant had to say…well…I don’t think he’ll be making Master Sergeant on the next promotions cycle.
~Mang
Please support the NCSF. They love all of you, and want you to love how you want to love.
No, actually I’ve never heard that. Way back in French class in high school, I was told that “va te faire fou(d)re” meant “go fuck yourself.”
The word is actually spelled “foutre”, and foudre is a misspelling I have been guilty of in the past (although the idea of “fucking” as “making lightning” could be interesting). An online translator suggested, however, that the appropriate translation of “fuckhead” would be “tete de baise.”
Actually, I should have said that the original meaning of foutre was “cum”. Nowadays, you are right it could be used as “fuck” (since it is argot, the meaning could be varied, just like con originally meant “cunt” and now is mostly used meaning “stupid”). As for your request for a translation for “fuckhead”, enculé (someone who is fucked in the ass) would probably be what you are looking for.
I, too, hate this question, not only for the reason mentioned in the OP, but also because its supposed “unanswerability” with a pure yes or no is complete bullshit.
If you asked a married man (who had never beat his wife), “Have you stopped beating your wife?”, and told him to answer strictly in terms of yes or no, he should answer “no”. Having never begun beating his wife in the first place, it would be impossible for him to have ceased doing so. If you were to ask ME this question, I could answer “no” even more unequivocably because, being single, I have no wife to beat, and could most certainly therefore not have stopped beating her, as she does not exist. In both these cases, the extraneous information may be useful to prevent any assumptions being made on the part of the observer, but it is in no way necessary to the correct and concise logical response to the question.
Now, with that in mind, a few additional points:
The person who would ask this question, fully aware of the possibility for misinterpretation on the part of any observers if the response does not contain an inordinate amout of extraneous information, is an asshole.
The person who would make any judgements upon the one responding to this question based on his/her answer to it is either an idiot, or an asshole on par with the one who asked the question.
The person who would care about the opinion of an idiot and/or asshole of the caliber of (1) or (2) in regard to the question such an asshole would ask or such an idiot would misinterpret the answer to, has self-esteem issues far beyond the scope of a loaded question posed by an asshole.
Given the above, I’d say the whole thing can be quite deservedly dismissed as irrelevant. Can we get rid of this fucking question now?
Of course I do. As I explained in the rest of my post, “the whole problem here” is not actually a problem at all because everything supposedly problematic is either blatantly incorrect or based upon assumptions unfounded by any part of the exchange…and furthermore, based on that and the other reasons listed, there’s no reason for anyone involved to care about any of it. Ergo, the whole thing is irrelevant and I, like the OP, could do without people who bring it up to showcase their bullshit semantic intellectual mojo.
But if you establish some strange set of parameters in the premise, it isn’t really all that clever.
“Answer only ‘tiny’ or ‘embarrasing’: describe your penis!” Oooh, nailed you!
“Answer only yes or no? Did you like fucking a blow-up doll?” Oooh, burn!
Perhaps when first done on Perry Mason, it was quite something. In every fourth thread where it isn’t even an apt description of another person’s tactic, it just comes off as foolish. (And yes, “every fourth thread” is hyperbole.)
