Sensitive? I unabashedly love bars and am on my way to one right now.
sigh. You kids these days.
It was a self-designation of one of history’s most fascinating men, who has been of considerable interest to me (on both amateur and professional planes) for many years.
Sir Richard Francis Burton.
I could put that in my profile, I guess, if anyone ever looks at those things.
My first thought was GEICO Caveman and I’m leaving before you go and ruin that whole illusion.
Dammit, too late.
Get right out of town. This is a very shocking development.
Wait, you think Burton didn’t socialize in dark, noisy rooms while drinking? Or, hell, anytime, anywhere, with anyone. Burton was one of the all-time great socializers. How do you think he got the material for so many books?
Not to mention inspiration for Beetlejuice.
Me too! MeanOldLady, we gotta hang sometime! You’d love my bar! 
You need to read one of the updated biographies, and skip Rice’s.
I’ve read I. Burton, Brodie, and Farwell.
All outdated, and Brodie, for all her contributions, just kind of ends up in silly land with her retro-Freudian take.
I’ll make it short: Burton was not a socializer; he was a social-abuser. It’s hard to find a case where he was accepted by a social group and remained part of it very long; it’s easy to find cases where he went out of his way to piss people off rather than bow to anything like social graces. He was a self-isolate, an outside observer - a barbarian at civilized tables, but he softened his awareness of it by claiming he was an amateur one. That he was the intellectual superior man of his day was never softened by any humility or ability to ‘play nice.’ He paid the price for it, over and over, until the end.
I think you must be thinking of Farwell’s description of him drinking with his Indian Army comrades while forgetting how that turned out.
Well, that right there is a lie, isn’t it?
No, I’ve asked the question from a skeptical viewpoint. I can’t believe what a sore spot it seems to be to wonder if barhopping is an activity from another era. I think the reaction speaks volumes, but I sincerely and wholeheartedly withdraw any chronological value judgment that offended anyone.
Given that you couldn’t restrain yourself from slipping another dig in with your “apology,” I’m going to go ahead and stick with the sentiment in my previous post.
Because of course, anyone who enjoys going to a bar is a total alcoholic, doncha know? :rolleyes:
Also, going to a bar really isn’t the same thing as barhopping.
You keep bringing up ‘sensitivity’ and ‘sore spots’; but truly, I peeped your sore spot way back in post 65…
Bolding, mine. There, you bizarrely shoe horned in the idea that drinking alone is bad. That is not the normal, healthy takeaway from a discussion about how folks like to drink in bars with friends. You introduced that bit of straw into the discussion. I figure you are the one with the sore spots.
Your boy Sir Richard Francis Burton may indeed be the type who was ‘a barbarian at a civilized man’s table’ but he sat at the table nevertheless. And guess what? Lots of people who go to bars to drink have their own ideas about why they are there, how they are interacting, etc. Many people consider themselves observers and social scientists. Many people like to be around other people and knock back a few, all the while, collecting character traits and mannerisms for that novel they are writing or planning to write.
In other words, it is possible that plenty of the people who are in bars, drinking up, socializing with friends…are indeed Amateur Barbarians! They have cromulent reasons for socializing and chit chatting over drinks in bars, so you shouldn’t be so surprised after all.
Now, you are over there having two fingers of bourbon, I’m over here having a double shot of tequila, we are chit chatting and socializing on this message board. You know what that means?
You are no longer drinking alone, AB. No more.
Somebody is gonna get laid?
Well, technically speaking two people. Sorta.
You probably live too far away. Otherwise, I would.
Oh? And I suppose you like getting hit on verbally and then groped after repeatedly telling the scumbag no?
Hell, I don’t even like an unexpected groping from my husband.
What exactly would you call some jackass grabbing a handful of asscheeks and possibly tits, I personally call it sexual assault. Just because penis didn’t get shoved in anywhere does not make it not sexual abuse.
Damn, y’all, argue with Amateur Barbarian’s nonsense in another thread! The actual OP has enough nonsense to carry the thread.
Say, Chessic Sense, I see you have (deliberately) ignored the following exchange. In all sincerity, would you mind reading these two replies and honestly give them a ponder? They really have a damn good observation:
And additionally,
How can you say this with a straight face when you were the one who described your actions in the bar as “playing the male part”?