… I hope the cook puts it differently, because to me that sounds like saying you’re going to have pasta with al dente.
Could you please describe this food item? I’m not sure if what’s au jus is the steak or the bread has been juiced up with the juices from the steak… in which case it’s the bread that’s au jus. But definitely not “with au jus”, which has two prepositions doing a conga.
“Au Jus” is used by many (incorrectly, IMO), as a noun to describe the juice one might dip a roast beef sandwich in. I was using it as a humorous example of how we not only sometimes (perhaps?) misuse French in beauty products, but also in food products.
Now, sometimes it’s described on a menu as “Roast beef sandwich Au Jus”, but that’s the minority, most of the time the phrase is used as a noun.
Thank you, I thought it was a woosh but figured I might as well inquire about the meaning of the term.
What no reference to “Sperm Dumpster” (Family Guy) ?
Brian
By the way, “al dente” does not mean, “the way they cook it at Denny’s.”
One of the presents my wife brought me back from her year in Taiwan a bit over a dozen years ago was a T-shirt with a pair of cartoon fish, one large, one small, apparently strolling along (on their back fins) holding han . . . er, fins (pectoral fins, to be precise), with the title “Iovi’s Fartner” in large, cartoonish letters above them. I have no idea what it means, but it’s definitely amusing in a perplexing sort of way.
Just committed PWD – posting while distracted. Hit “reply” to comment on something more on-topic, had to leave the computer for a bit to deal with some other stuff, came back, and the fractured English bit was what stuck in my head. What I intended to report on was the young lady – somewhere between 14 and 17, but judging from her friend who was with her and her demeanor, probably toward the younger end of that range – I saw at a Chattanooga Lookouts baseball game several years ago. Very cute, fairly mature physically, but obviously a middle-teen-aged girl. On the back of her very short shorts were the words “Wild Cherry” with a picture of two very red cherries. She and her friend walked back and forth along the concourse, directly in front of where I was sitting, several times, and each time I thought “what the hell were her parents thinking letting her out of the house in that?”.
Of course, the mother lode of inappropriate attire for kids is the “Baby Hell” section of the T-Shirt Hell web site (NSFW, so Google it if you can’t figure it out). Among the tamer offerings:
[ul]
[li]All mommy wanted was a backrub[/li][li]Breast-fed Baby – stick around for the show[/li][li]Mommy drinks because I cry[/li][/ul]
Some of them are funny as, well . . . hell, if you can get past the thought that there actually are parents out there buying these shirts and putting their kids in them.
The first rule of Skat Club is you don’t talk about Skat Club. I imagine the rest of the rules are the same as the first rule.
Apparently part of the burgeoning self-esteem crushing apparel industry. An idea which time has come.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I can just picture it…Some hot shit guy wearing a World’s Best Grandma shirt! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!1
I read an article somewhere to the effect that clothing that won’t sell or can’t be sold in the U.S. is often dumped overseas to recoup some of the cost of manufacture. According to the article, this includes a lot of sports logo stuff, like those Super Bowl Champion hats the winning team members are seen wearing minutes after the game ends. Apparently, hats, t-shirts and other items are made ahead of time; the winners get to take delivery, the other stuff goes overseas, mostly to Third World countries. I have this vision of some guy in Zimbabwe proudly wearing his Green Bay Packers Super Bowl XXXII Champions hat.
Yes, please do.
I simply don’t think it’s appropriate for young girls to draw my attention to their asses. Young is subjective. Age of consent, legally, is not. So, yes, it’d have to be their country of residence.
Well you could read it like that that. Or, as I did, in a John Lennon “imagine there’s no countries” kind of way. 
[sub]Preamble–No war intended here.
[/sub]Well, first (which isn’t the point that I was addressing, but since you brought it up):
Whether you find it “appropriate” for young girls to draw your attention to their asses is, of course an opinion that you are entitled to have. Still, that’s a two way street, for which you both must take some responsibility: they present their asses as they see fit to the general public, and you notice whatever grabs your attention from the general public. As an objective observer, I would not peg their end (no pun intended) of the transaction as being any more or less appropriate than yours.
Is it inappropriate for them to “draw attention”? Possibly…but by the same token, it should be equally inappropriate for you to “pay attention.”
(I personally don’t care either way, but you seem to.)
If you really want to make an issue out of their appropriateness, that’s one thing; but yours should be an equal factor in that objection.
I would not entirely agree with the second half of this, which was the motive behind my criticism: While age of consent may not be legally subjective within a specific jurisdiction, it IS subjective overall. Legal age of consent is a co-function of jurisdiction and age (not a function of age alone), and thus collectively subjective…just on a larger scale than the “What do you think?” discussion. My impression was that you considered “age of consent” to be some sort of universal measuring stick which could not be argued with (like “north of the north pole”…as opposed to “north of Chicago”).
To further my disagreement with your position, you mention their “country of residence”. But THAT isn’t even an objective standard overall. Here in the states, legal age of consent varies from state to state even within the country…not to mention that age of consent outside of the country varies for Americans against age of consent inside the country. Never mind the question of how can you tell where someone is from by the words on their bum?
It’s a lot less cut and dried than you seem to think it is.
If I have misconstrued you, I certainly apologise, and welcome corrections. Your post just struck me as implying “The age of consent is X. Anything that transgresses it to me is the other person’s fault.”
I don’t find that to be a legitimate position to take. If I misconstrued you, I am certainly sorry.
Fair enough.
I do agree with you, however, that the age of consent is a very fuzzy line. Perhaps “Of legal age in the place of wearing,” would have been more precise. But, that’s a completely seperate debate. My point, and I can understand how it could have been misinterpreted, was that words on the bum are eyecatching. I wonder how many of their fathers would be ok with it. I may be in the minority on this one, as I’ve seen sweatpants for sale intended for toddlers like this.
Fair enough for me, too.
What seemed to be your unilateral “age of consent” standard is what piqued me; because it seemed to imply that there is one standard that applies to everyone, which obviously isn’t true.
As for “of legal age in the place of wearing,” I’m not aware of “legal age” laws that apply to what people wear, so it seemed like you were applying a standard that doesn’t apply, which struck me as unjust.
As for what’s eyecatching: everything is eyecatching to somebody. If you’re going to try to eliminate “eyecatchingness,” you are going to fail.
I’m not sure how many fathers would be okay with what you described, either; but surely that’s the father/daughters’ decision, and not some random person that happened to glimpse the daughters in a mall.
Sweatpants for toddlers? Maybe so. I remember the fracas over Abercrombie & Fitch selling thongs in child sizes. There’s no doubt that there are clothes sold for children that some people think are “inappropriate.”
In my opinion, though, it’s a lot MORE inappropriate to scope out children in a mall and obsess about them than it is for parents to make decisions as to how their children may go out in public.
You (or I, or anyone else) may disagree with someone else’s parenting decisions, but if you (or I, or anyone else) is paying more attention to their kids’ derriere than they are, that doesn’t automatically prove them to be the one with issues.
Sometimes, before we can remove the mote in our brother’s eye, we must remove the beam in our own.
Hmm. I’m 31, well over any age of consent, and I still wouldn’t wear words across my bum. 
Not to raise the ante, but howsabout words across your breasts on a t-shirt?
Is it a my-size T-shirt, a bellybutton T-shirt, a tent-size T-shirt?
Are the words appropiate in themselves?
That’s perfectly fine. (But only if they’ve reached a unilateral age of consent, their father is ok with it, and their bra doesn’t have too much padding [padding ammount to be determined by me, and me alone]). You know, they say when reading for pleasure, one tends to spend more time lingering over each word…
But you bring up alot of good points, perhaps we should have started another thread. Words on tshirts are pretty commonplace. Perhaps that’s why I don’t consider them very “eyecatching”.
Again, not to beat a dead horse, but as for the first paragraph in the above post, I was refering to glancing observations. In the second, that was going way deeper into the subject than I had ever thought into it.
