On 9/7/2021 9:18 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <sh92te$tsu$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7/3/2021 11:05 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 21:55:47 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <sbqd3a$74b$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 30/06/2021 18.41, Kevrob wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 4:08:34 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>>> Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about recasting Wonder Woman as a man? Prince Dane of the all
>>>>>>> male island of something-mumble, and so on. You *really* think
>>>>>>> there wouldn't be the same (only more so) reaction to a Wonder Man
>>>>>>> movie?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sometimes a "gender-flip" adds something. My favorite is
>>>>>> Roz Russell as Hildy Johnson, turning "The Front Page" into
>>>>>> "His Girl Friday."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Girl_Friday
>>>>>
>>>>> John Varley went one better in _Steel Beach_ by having Hildy start
>>>>> out (in the novel) as male and then switch to female. Now I need to
>>>>> reread it to see if some character is a Cary Grant analog.
>>>>
>>>> Well, let us know. Now, if you'd generalized it as a
>>>> gender-switching story of any kind with a Cary Grant analog, I'd
>>>> recommend "Some Like It Hot," in which Tony Curtis's character,
>>>> when not hiding from the mob in female clothing, adopts a Cary
>>>> Grant accent to woo Marilyn Monroe's character. He came by the
>>>> accent almost honestly; he was in the US Navy during WWII and
>>>> stationed someplace where there was a projector but only a few
>>>> films, one of which starred Grant. The guys got to the point
>>>> where they knew every line of dialog, so they'd turn the sound
>>>> off and recite the dialog themselves. Curtis got to voice
>>>> Grant.
>>>
>>> It's not really gender-switching, but Cary Grant spends about half of
>>> "Bringing Up Baby" wearing Katherine Hepburn's bathrobe.
>>
>> My wife freaking loves that movie. I must admit that it is hilarious,
>> especially when the guy starts to make the big cat cry and the big cat
>> beats him to it.
>>
> Heh. I have never seen that one, but your description of that
> scene make me want to. If ever I discover that some site that my
> daughter subscribes to is streaming it, I'll watch it. Cats rule.

BTW, the big cat, "Baby", is a leopard.

Lynn

In article <she65p$4nl$2@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 9/7/2021 9:18 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <sh92te$tsu$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2021 11:05 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 21:55:47 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <sbqd3a$74b$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 30/06/2021 18.41, Kevrob wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 4:08:34 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>>>> Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about recasting Wonder Woman as a man? Prince Dane of the all
>>>>>>>> male island of something-mumble, and so on. You *really* think
>>>>>>>> there wouldn't be the same (only more so) reaction to a Wonder Man
>>>>>>>> movie?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sometimes a "gender-flip" adds something. My favorite is
>>>>>>> Roz Russell as Hildy Johnson, turning "The Front Page" into
>>>>>>> "His Girl Friday."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Girl_Friday
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John Varley went one better in _Steel Beach_ by having Hildy start
>>>>>> out (in the novel) as male and then switch to female. Now I need to
>>>>>> reread it to see if some character is a Cary Grant analog.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, let us know. Now, if you'd generalized it as a
>>>>> gender-switching story of any kind with a Cary Grant analog, I'd
>>>>> recommend "Some Like It Hot," in which Tony Curtis's character,
>>>>> when not hiding from the mob in female clothing, adopts a Cary
>>>>> Grant accent to woo Marilyn Monroe's character. He came by the
>>>>> accent almost honestly; he was in the US Navy during WWII and
>>>>> stationed someplace where there was a projector but only a few
>>>>> films, one of which starred Grant. The guys got to the point
>>>>> where they knew every line of dialog, so they'd turn the sound
>>>>> off and recite the dialog themselves. Curtis got to voice
>>>>> Grant.
>>>>
>>>> It's not really gender-switching, but Cary Grant spends about half of
>>>> "Bringing Up Baby" wearing Katherine Hepburn's bathrobe.
>>>
>>> My wife freaking loves that movie. I must admit that it is hilarious,
>>> especially when the guy starts to make the big cat cry and the big cat
>>> beats him to it.
>>>
>> Heh. I have never seen that one, but your description of that
>> scene make me want to. If ever I discover that some site that my
>> daughter subscribes to is streaming it, I'll watch it. Cats rule.
>
>BTW, the big cat, "Baby", is a leopard.

Yes, that's been mentioned; and I think I've seen a few stills
from it.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 12:31:25 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, 8 September 2021 at 17:13:58 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 04:13:36 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
>> wrote:
>> >In article <ipqn0l...@mid.individual.net>,
>> >Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>> >>In article <qz3Ft...@kithrup.com>,
>> >>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> >>>In article <5r3gjg9i46695f538...@4ax.com>,
>> >>>The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
>> >>>>On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 08:05:23 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>> >>>><rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>A society of men with no women is seen in various
>> >>>>>religious communities, with the question of how
>> >>>>>laundry is done addressed by not having any.
>> >>>>>However, Captain America's original situation
>> >>>>>was an American army camp which I suppose
>> >>>>>probably was all guys, I don't know. It really is
>> >>>>>not quite the same.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>In fairness the most common "society of men without women" are either
>> >>>>military stories or stories of ships at sea.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>You simply can't perform Moby Dick or Saving Private Ryan with a 50%
>> >>>>female cast.
>> >>>
>> >>>Not in the mid-nineteenth or -twentieth century in which those
>> >>>books/films are set. In a more egalitarian future, however....
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>The past is already being re-written for kids movies to show kids what
>> >>they expect to see.
>> >>
>> >>This was notably true in the mediocre "The House with a Clock in Its Walls"
>> >>where 1955 Michigan has notably modern ethnic balance and mixing in its
>> >>public shcools.
>> >>
>> >>The excellent "Merry Poppins Returns" was the same. Now, since the
>> >>UK never had formal Jim Crow, I'm sure there could have been a few
>> >>black lawyers in a city the size of London in the 1930s, but they
>> >>certainly would have been remarkable individuals. And it's hard
>> >>to imagine a prestigious bank president's public facing secretary
>> >>having been black.
>> >
>> >Consider that a high-caste Hindu would have been considered
>> >"black" in London.
>> >
>> >(There's this children's book, no longer available for
>> >understandable reasons, called _Little Black Sambo._ Kid gets
>> >treed by a group of tigers, who since they can't climb the tree
>> >run around it faster and faster until they turn into a puddle of
>> >melted butter--_ghi_, in other words. They're in India, not
>> >Africa.)
>> Well, of course they are. Tigers are in India, Lions are in Africa.
>>
>> The cartoon has him defeating the tiger (by turning him into melted
>> butter) /to defend his mother and sister/. I don't recall if that was
>> in the book I had as a very small child, but I /do/ recall that the
>> butter ended up on a very large plate of pancakes!
>>
>> I don't think the problem is the /story/. I think the problem is that
>> "Sambo" was used by racists as an insult. We have, IOW, only ourselves
>> to blame.
>
>Per <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Little_Black_Sambo>
>besides his parents' actual names being Black Jumbo and
>Black Mumbo, it was illustrated. And since apparently copyright
>wasn't a thing between Europe and the U.S. then, it got pirated,
>but with new illustrations in line with American cultural norms
>of 1900.

Apropos of "Jumbo", apparently it's a valid name. I rather like a
British actress of Nigerian descent named "Cush Jumbo", who,
incidentally, received an Olivier for portraying Marc Antony.

On 8/09/21 2:55 pm, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
snip
>
> The past is already being re-written for kids movies to show kids what
> they expect to see.

That is a creepy spine chilling observation. What do kids expect to see
in movies? Who makes these social engineering decisions?
As a child I was swamped with American cowboy and indian westerns which
were basically dishonest propaganda. The past has always been rewritten
by ghostwriters.

snip

In article <shetoa$t68$1@dont-email.me>, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 8/09/21 2:55 pm, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>snip
>>
>> The past is already being re-written for kids movies to show kids what
>> they expect to see.
>
>That is a creepy spine chilling observation. What do kids expect to see
>in movies? Who makes these social engineering decisions?
>As a child I was swamped with American cowboy and indian westerns which
>were basically dishonest propaganda. The past has always been rewritten
>by ghostwriters.
>
>snip

Kids expect to see their world, but with funny looking cars.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 09/09/2021 10.35, Paul S Person wrote:

> The scene in /Dr No/ where the big hairy tarantula is crawling up
> Bond's body has always looked to me as if the insect was on a sheet of
> glass. If not added later. It just doesn't move right for being in
> contact with the actor's skin. IMHO, of course.

It looked fake to me the first time that I saw the film, in the theater,
at about age ten (1964 or so).

--
Michael F. Stemper
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

On 09/09/2021 11.58, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

[Doctor No]

> But to an arachnophobe who has avoided knowing anything about
> spiders that they don't have to, the bigger the arachnid, the
> more frightening. I'm not going to do the research, but I'd love
> to know whether (1a) the tarantula appeared in the original book,

Nope. In the novel, it was a centipede.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

In article <shflkf$o4i$1@dont-email.me>,
Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 09/09/2021 11.58, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>[Doctor No]
>
>> But to an arachnophobe who has avoided knowing anything about
>> spiders that they don't have to, the bigger the arachnid, the
>> more frightening. I'm not going to do the research, but I'd love
>> to know whether (1a) the tarantula appeared in the original book,
>
>Nope. In the novel, it was a centipede.

Aha. Now, they are venomous, and (so I'm told) would rather
sting than not. But the scriptwriter (or whoever made the
decision) figured that the movie viewers would be more creeped
out by a great big spider than a dinky little centipede. And he
was right.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:06:31 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
<michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 09/09/2021 10.35, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> The scene in /Dr No/ where the big hairy tarantula is crawling up
>> Bond's body has always looked to me as if the insect was on a sheet of
>> glass. If not added later. It just doesn't move right for being in
>> contact with the actor's skin. IMHO, of course.
>
>It looked fake to me the first time that I saw the film, in the theater,
>at about age ten (1964 or so).

We can only hope the scene where Bond pounds it to death inside a
blanket (?sheet?under a pillow?) was also faked.

But I don't think the ASPCA (or, rather, the Brit equivalent) was as
active then.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 18:25:12 +1200, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 8/09/21 2:55 pm, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>snip
>>
>> The past is already being re-written for kids movies to show kids what
>> they expect to see.
>
>That is a creepy spine chilling observation. What do kids expect to see
>in movies? Who makes these social engineering decisions?
>As a child I was swamped with American cowboy and indian westerns which
>were basically dishonest propaganda. The past has always been rewritten
>by ghostwriters.

Without disputing that most of them were "basically dishonest
propaganda", not to mention brain-dead shoot-em-ups, what about the
films that

-- showed the (played by John Wayne!) hero objecting to the use of
deception when dealing with "them"?

-- told the story of great First Peoples' leaders, such as Cochise or
Geronimo?

Or don't they count?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

In article <ittmjg1ga4psaqs0apabts848s1cgsqe7u@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:06:31 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
><michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 09/09/2021 10.35, Paul S Person wrote:
>>
>>> The scene in /Dr No/ where the big hairy tarantula is crawling up
>>> Bond's body has always looked to me as if the insect was on a sheet of
>>> glass. If not added later. It just doesn't move right for being in
>>> contact with the actor's skin. IMHO, of course.
>>
>>It looked fake to me the first time that I saw the film, in the theater,
>>at about age ten (1964 or so).
>
>We can only hope the scene where Bond pounds it to death inside a
>blanket (?sheet?under a pillow?) was also faked.

Probably. Their supply of tarantulas has got to have been
limited, and they would have had to plan for an unexpected number
of retakes.

>But I don't think the ASPCA (or, rather, the Brit equivalent)

RSPCA.

>was as
>active then.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On 9/8/2021 3:50 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 07:30:42 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 8 September 2021 at 03:31:18 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <sh92te$tsu$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 7/3/2021 11:05 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 21:55:47 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <sbqd3a$74b$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>> Michael F. Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 30/06/2021 18.41, Kevrob wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 4:08:34 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>>>>> Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How about recasting Wonder Woman as a man? Prince Dane of the all
>>>>>>>>> male island of something-mumble, and so on. You *really* think
>>>>>>>>> there wouldn't be the same (only more so) reaction to a Wonder Man
>>>>>>>>> movie?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sometimes a "gender-flip" adds something. My favorite is
>>>>>>>> Roz Russell as Hildy Johnson, turning "The Front Page" into
>>>>>>>> "His Girl Friday."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Girl_Friday
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John Varley went one better in _Steel Beach_ by having Hildy start
>>>>>>> out (in the novel) as male and then switch to female. Now I need to
>>>>>>> reread it to see if some character is a Cary Grant analog.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, let us know. Now, if you'd generalized it as a
>>>>>> gender-switching story of any kind with a Cary Grant analog, I'd
>>>>>> recommend "Some Like It Hot," in which Tony Curtis's character,
>>>>>> when not hiding from the mob in female clothing, adopts a Cary
>>>>>> Grant accent to woo Marilyn Monroe's character. He came by the
>>>>>> accent almost honestly; he was in the US Navy during WWII and
>>>>>> stationed someplace where there was a projector but only a few
>>>>>> films, one of which starred Grant. The guys got to the point
>>>>>> where they knew every line of dialog, so they'd turn the sound
>>>>>> off and recite the dialog themselves. Curtis got to voice
>>>>>> Grant.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not really gender-switching, but Cary Grant spends about half of
>>>>> "Bringing Up Baby" wearing Katherine Hepburn's bathrobe.
>>>>
>>>> My wife freaking loves that movie. I must admit that it is hilarious,
>>>> especially when the guy starts to make the big cat cry and the big cat
>>>> beats him to it.
>>>>
>>> Heh. I have never seen that one, but your description of that
>>> scene make me want to. If ever I discover that some site that my
>>> daughter subscribes to is streaming it, I'll watch it. Cats rule.
>>
>> Wikipedia says it's a tame leopard, from Brazil.
>
> And very well trained.

Did the same leopard play both leopards: Baby and Mankiller ?

Lynn

On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>
>>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>
>> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought this was
>> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in the novel
>> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>> this story of the far future.
>>
>> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
>> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>
> I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.

Emphysema will not go away though ...

Lynn

On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
> >>
> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
> >>
> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought this was
> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in the novel
> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
> >> this story of the far future.
> >>
> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
> >
> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>
> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>

Smoking contributes to heart disease and stroke, among other
woes.

[quote]

Impotence

The incidence of impotence (difficulty achieving and maintaining penile
erection) is approximately 85 percent higher in male smokers compared
to non-smokers. Smoking is a key cause of erectile dysfunction. It causes
impotence because it promotes arterial narrowing and damages cells
lining the inside of the arteries, thus leading to reduce penile blood flow.

[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco

--
Kevin R

In article <c67d2c82-972d-42f1-9c28-9e020b650acdn@googlegroups.com>,
Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>> >>
>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>this was
>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>the novel
>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>> >> this story of the far future.
>> >>
>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>> >
>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>
>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>
>
>Smoking contributes to heart disease and stroke, among other
>woes.
>
>[quote]
>
>Impotence
>
>The incidence of impotence (difficulty achieving and maintaining penile
>erection) is approximately 85 percent higher in male smokers compared
>to non-smokers. Smoking is a key cause of erectile dysfunction. It causes
>impotence because it promotes arterial narrowing and damages cells
>lining the inside of the arteries, thus leading to reduce penile blood flow.
>
>[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco
>

But that doesn't matter because it minimizes your chances of getting laid
anyway.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 11 Sep 2021 03:40:26 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
<tednolan>) wrote:

>In article <c67d2c82-972d-42f1-9c28-9e020b650acdn@googlegroups.com>,
>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>> >>
>>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>>this was
>>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>>the novel
>>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>>> >> this story of the far future.
>>> >>
>>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
>>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>>> >
>>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>>
>>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>>
>>
>>Smoking contributes to heart disease and stroke, among other
>>woes.
>>
>>[quote]
>>
>>Impotence
>>
>>The incidence of impotence (difficulty achieving and maintaining penile
>>erection) is approximately 85 percent higher in male smokers compared
>>to non-smokers. Smoking is a key cause of erectile dysfunction. It causes
>>impotence because it promotes arterial narrowing and damages cells
>>lining the inside of the arteries, thus leading to reduce penile blood flow.
>>
>>[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco
>>
>
>But that doesn't matter because it minimizes your chances of getting laid
>anyway.

That Bogart never got any would be news to Bacall.

These are all just artifacts of our primitive understanding of
medicine, only a few notches above barber-surgeons and witch doctors.

On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
> >>
> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
> >>
> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought this was
> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in the novel
> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
> >> this story of the far future.
> >>
> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
> >
> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>
> Emphysema will not go away though ...

I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own serious problems.
It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix without the cancer
addon.

Pt

In article <iq2mpaFdtc0U1@mid.individual.net>,
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>In article <c67d2c82-972d-42f1-9c28-9e020b650acdn@googlegroups.com>,
>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>> >>
>>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>>this was
>>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>>the novel
>>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>>> >> this story of the far future.
>>> >>
>>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation
>Trilogy
>>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>>> >
>>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>>
>>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>>
>>
>>Smoking contributes to heart disease and stroke, among other
>>woes.
>>
>>[quote]
>>
>>Impotence
>>
>>The incidence of impotence (difficulty achieving and maintaining penile
>>erection) is approximately 85 percent higher in male smokers compared
>>to non-smokers. Smoking is a key cause of erectile dysfunction. It causes
>>impotence because it promotes arterial narrowing and damages cells
>>lining the inside of the arteries, thus leading to reduce penile blood flow.
>>
>>[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco
>>
>
>But that doesn't matter because it minimizes your chances of getting laid
>anyway.

Because it makes you stink.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

In article <f040a768-66e2-48a3-aace-0dcb91c9d588n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>> >>
>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>this was
>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>the novel
>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>> >> this story of the far future.
>> >>
>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>> >
>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>
>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>
>I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own
>serious problems.
>It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix
>without the cancer
>addon.
>
>Pt

There seems to be a movement to stamp it out instead of embracing it as
a less harmful (though not non-harmful) route for nicotine addicts.

Yet somehow the smoking scolds seem to turn a blind eye to weed normalization..
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Thursday, 9 September 2021 at 20:20:43 UTC+1, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Our_Man_Bashir_(episode)
> is a holodeck Janes Bond game where Colonel Anastasia Komananov,
> Dr Bashir, and Garak the Cardassian courier

Ugh, I meant "couturier"

....which I just found very difficult to spell,
so I'll take that excuse!

> are knocked out
> by drugged cigar smoke at one point.

On 11 Sep 2021 05:40:05 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
<tednolan>) wrote:

>In article <f040a768-66e2-48a3-aace-0dcb91c9d588n@googlegroups.com>,
>pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>> >>
>>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>>this was
>>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>>the novel
>>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>>> >> this story of the far future.
>>> >>
>>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
>>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>>> >
>>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>>
>>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>
>>I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own
>>serious problems.
>>It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix
>>without the cancer
>>addon.
>>
>>Pt
>
>There seems to be a movement to stamp it out instead of embracing it as
>a less harmful (though not non-harmful) route for nicotine addicts.
>
>Yet somehow the smoking scolds seem to turn a blind eye to weed normalization..

I dunno. I now officially live in a hick town. The state legalized,
with town option on sales so I now live in the modern equivalent of
one of those hick towns in the South that never got over Prohibition.

In article <iq2tplFf4o0U1@mid.individual.net>,
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>In article <f040a768-66e2-48a3-aace-0dcb91c9d588n@googlegroups.com>,
>pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>> >>
>>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>>this was
>>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>>the novel
>>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>>> >> this story of the far future.
>>> >>
>>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation
>Trilogy
>>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>>> >
>>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>>
>>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>
>>I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own
>>serious problems.
>>It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix
>>without the cancer
>>addon.
>>
>>Pt
>
>There seems to be a movement to stamp it out instead of embracing it as
>a less harmful (though not non-harmful) route for nicotine addicts.
>
>Yet somehow the smoking scolds seem to turn a blind eye to weed normalization..

Well, if they are using the stuff themselves, it's ... how may I
put this tactfully ... affecting their judgment.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

On Saturday, September 11, 2021 at 9:01:17 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> On 11 Sep 2021 05:40:05 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> <tednolan>) wrote:
>
> >In article <f040a768-66e2-48a3...@googlegroups.com>,
> >pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> >>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
> >>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
> >>this was
> >>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
> >>the novel
> >>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
> >>> >> this story of the far future.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation Trilogy
> >>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
> >>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
> >>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
> >>> >
> >>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
> >>>
> >>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
> >>
> >>I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own
> >>serious problems.
> >>It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix
> >>without the cancer
> >>addon.
> >>
> >>Pt
> >
> >There seems to be a movement to stamp it out instead of embracing it as
> >a less harmful (though not non-harmful) route for nicotine addicts.
> >
> >Yet somehow the smoking scolds seem to turn a blind eye to weed normalization..
> I dunno. I now officially live in a hick town. The state legalized,
> with town option on sales so I now live in the modern equivalent of
> one of those hick towns in the South that never got over Prohibition.

It boggles me that there are two cultivation facilities, and a retail pot shop
within walking distance of my house. Guess I'm old.

My BiL left half a dozen potted plants in our back yard, for some
breeding related reason, and to get around the per household
limit.

Pt

On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 20:38:00 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com>
wrote:

<snippo>
>Smoking contributes to heart disease and stroke, among other
>woes.
>
>[quote]
>
>Impotence
>
>The incidence of impotence (difficulty achieving and maintaining penile
>erection) is approximately 85 percent higher in male smokers compared
>to non-smokers. Smoking is a key cause of erectile dysfunction. It causes
>impotence because it promotes arterial narrowing and damages cells
>lining the inside of the arteries, thus leading to reduce penile blood flow.
>
>[/quote] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco

Anyone else ever notice that when something gets demonized by Modren
Medicine, whether smoking or obesity, it suddenly becomes the One Root
Cause of everything else? "Bad gut bacteria" are currently being lined
up for the same role. Well, they cause obesity, it is said.

How many One Root Causes of Everthing Else can there be?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021 13:52:23 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <iq2tplFf4o0U1@mid.individual.net>,
>Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>In article <f040a768-66e2-48a3-aace-0dcb91c9d588n@googlegroups.com>,
>>pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 9:57:30 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 9/7/2021 11:02 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2021 20:59:50 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:54:45 AM UTC-6, Steve Coltrin wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Already people are complaining because the trailers show women doing
>>>> >>> things other than fetching coffee, and nobody is smoking.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Not having read the Foundation Trilogy again *recently*, I thought
>>>this was
>>>> >> some strange kind of joke. But reading the replies, apparently in
>>>the novel
>>>> >> Asimov really did put these characteristic elements of 1960s culture in
>>>> >> this story of the far future.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Obviously, a film adaptation for audiences today of the Foundation
>>Trilogy
>>>> >> would be simply _bizarre_ if it depicted an advanced far-future world as
>>>> >> so far behind the times even for our age. So while gratuitous political
>>>> >> correctness is one thing, these are changes that are obviously necessary.
>>>> >
>>>> > I suspect that once cancer is knocked down smoking will come back.
>>>>
>>>> Emphysema will not go away though ...
>>>
>>>I'm really disappointed that vaping is turning out to have its own
>>>serious problems.
>>>It look like it would be a way for nicotine fiends to get their fix
>>>without the cancer
>>>addon.
>>>
>>>Pt
>>
>>There seems to be a movement to stamp it out instead of embracing it as
>>a less harmful (though not non-harmful) route for nicotine addicts.
>>
>>Yet somehow the smoking scolds seem to turn a blind eye to weed normalization..
>
>Well, if they are using the stuff themselves, it's ... how may I
>put this tactfully ... affecting their judgment.

Actually, it makes a /lot/ of sense.

We tolerate tobacco. We tolerate alcohol. Why should /any/ other drug
be any different?

When we finally learn that /prohibition does not work/. Never has,
never will.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."