"Emma" mattress ads have been making me smirk for a while now - having long ago had a girlfriend of that name, my first thought when I saw one was "It's been a long time since I sent a night on top of an Emma!"
There's an advert currently on the London tube network where Tess Daly announces "the day hasn't started till I've taken my Wellwoman!"
I have trouble taking a local radio ad seriously---which is a shame, because it is for a very good cause (disabled veterans). But the announcer, with deep gravitas, uses the phrase: "at a time in history when kindness is a virtue..." And it always distracts me from the rest of the commercial as I try to contemplate when, exactly, in history, kindness was not a virtue?
Unfortunately, often. In quite a few cultures, for example, children were deliberately mistreated to toughen them up.
But even in those times, people would still probably have paid lip-service to the idea that kindness is a good thing, and would not have recognized their rough treatment of children as unkind.
I suspect the writer of the ad thought he was saying something like "At a time in history when kindness is needed more than ever..."
Unfortunately, often. In quite a few cultures, for example, children were deliberately mistreated to toughen them up.
In UK grammar schools in the 50s and 60s bullying and humiliation by the staff and prefects were often facts of life; expected and tolerated. Whether or not the intention was to toughen us or was simply sadism, I still don't know.
...English youth have been so educated time out of mind, and we have hundreds of thousands of apologists and admirers of injustice, misery, and brutality, as perpetuated among children.
Unfortunately, often. In quite a few cultures, for example, children were deliberately mistreated to toughen them up.
In UK grammar schools in the 50s and 60s bullying and humiliation by the staff and prefects were often facts of life; expected and tolerated. Whether or not the intention was to toughen us or was simply sadism, I still don't know.
Indeed. And yet many people look back to that era as a golden age.
My grammar school was horrid and would not like any young person of the future to endure such a regime.
It's very disturbing that the school authorities gave the older pupils the right to rule over and abuse the younger ones
The idea of giving older children the opportunity to lead younger ones is pretty normal. "Rule over and abuse" is rather a reflection of the attitudes to authority at that time - prefects and other senior pupils weren't doing anything that the staff weren't.
Interesting tangent. Are you all saying that, during those periods of time, kindness was not considered a virtue? I accept that kindness was not being shown--that is not the point. I accept that cruelty was prevalent--again, not the point. Does all of that mean that cruelty was considered a virtue and kindness was not?
Because that is not the way I view it. Cruelty was (wrongly) considered to be necessary to toughen the young up against the horrors of the world (as the elders perceived it, blind to the fact that their cruelty was causing those horrors). It is not that kindness was not recognized as a virtue--just that it wasn't expedient. Those are different concepts.
Does all of that mean that cruelty was considered a virtue and kindness was not?
Maybe not in that society as a whole, but indeed in that microcosm--Kindness was considered a contemptible weakness. And I do think that throughout World History there have been societies where almost every individual would now be considered a sociopath--not being toughened "against the horrors of the world", but to be better used to eliminate other societies.
I doubt kindness itself was considered "not a virtue," but individual choices and behaviors we consider kind might have been classed as "not truly kindness but mere mollycoddling" or some such obnoxiousness. And of course different cultures have their pet virtues and vices, and also ones they are largely insensible to (consider, for example, the place of the virtue of chastity in most of the modern developed world today--or even temperance in general, as opposed to excess or abstinence. We don't do moderation well).
There's also the problem that humans-in-general tend to miscall their vices by the names of the virtues they most closely resemble, either out of bullshittery or out of pure confusion of mind. Thus people say "toughness" when they are actually describing cruelty, and "tolerance" when they mean indifference. See also "liberty" for licentiousness, "passion" for inability to control oneself, "courage" or "bravery" for rash behavior, and "initiative" for half-assed fuckwittery.
There's also the problem that humans-in-general tend to miscall their vices by the names of the virtues they most closely resemble, either out of bullshittery or out of pure confusion of mind. Thus people say "toughness" when they are actually describing cruelty, and "tolerance" when they mean indifference. See also "liberty" for licentiousness, "passion" for inability to control oneself, "courage" or "bravery" for rash behavior, and "initiative" for half-assed fuckwittery.
A brilliant summary of most of the problems of today’s world. I don’t know whether
to put 👏👍or☹️😢, both are appropriate.
Unfortunately, often. In quite a few cultures, for example, children were deliberately mistreated to toughen them up.
In UK grammar schools in the 50s and 60s bullying and humiliation by the staff and prefects were often facts of life; expected and tolerated. Whether or not the intention was to toughen us or was simply sadism, I still don't know.
Fagging was still in place when I was at school. I can remember teaching a fellow newbie how to clean shoes. In most houses it was really only the top year boys who used fagging and then mainly confined to exam periods. Our Housemaster was, I think, against it.
The practice was abolished a couple of years after I left
Having to do that may have been a nuisance, but that I don't think that example is particularly cruel--no worse than squiring a knight or a summer job.
Having to do that may have been a nuisance, but that I don't think that example is particularly cruel--no worse than squiring a knight or a summer job.
In times more long gone past, said senior boys had the power to discipline said younger boys as they deemed fit.
You don't need much imagination to think how that could go...
Not at the place I attended but other places in the 1960s/70s I'd say a few.
The bulk of the bullying at my place was either from locals shouting abuse or tourists trying to photograph us, presumably because of what they perceived to be an odd uniform.
CS Lewis commented that he was less miserable in a WW1 trench than at boarding school. In the trenches you were at least spared having to pretend you were having a good time.
Having to do that may have been a nuisance, but that I don't think that example is particularly cruel--no worse than squiring a knight or a summer job.
But the junior boys had their own shoes to clean, etc. in addition to what they had to do for the older boys. AIUI they didn't have a lot of free time.
In UK grammar schools in the 50s and 60s bullying and humiliation by the staff and prefects were often facts of life; expected and tolerated.
Not my experience, having attended a midland Grammar School from 1955 to 1960.
It was a bit snobbish, but I came across no particularly harsh teachers (although a couple of incompetent ones) and I don't remember any kind of interaction with a prefect.
I seem to recall that John McCarthy, a British journalist taken and held hostage in Beirut for 5 years, said that his 5 years at Haileybury were good preparation for being held chained to a radiator by militant Palestinians .
I seem to recall that John McCarthy, a British journalist taken and held hostage in Beirut for 5 years, said that his 5 years at Haileybury were good preparation for being held chained to a radiator by militant Palestinians .
The lunches at my place would be good preperation for rations in WWII Japanese PoW camp...
The lunches at my place would be good preperation for rations in WWII Japanese PoW camp...
Same here - 1960s all girls grammar. The teachers were mostly ok, no bullying though some of them were pretty strict and strait laced! Little serious bullying among the pupils, just general schoolgirl cattiness.
I seem to recall that John McCarthy, a British journalist taken and held hostage in Beirut for 5 years, said that his 5 years at Haileybury were good preparation for being held chained to a radiator by militant Palestinians .
The lunches at my place would be good preperation for rations in WWII Japanese PoW camp...
I was a language assistant at a school in France in 2006, and ate from the school canteen. Think of all the stereotypes of French cooking: Michelin stars, gastronomie, haute cuisine, gourmet ...
... Nope, it still tasted like something dug up from a Cold War bunker.
Comments
He weathered badly! 😂
Since The Now Show, I have problems with either reading or hearing the words 'Diane Aaaabbaaaaaht!' in a certain tone of Andrew Neal type voice.
A friend whose first language is not English once referred to him, in all seriousness, as Jack Human. I love that and have adopted it ever since.
There's an advert currently on the London tube network where Tess Daly announces "the day hasn't started till I've taken my Wellwoman!"
But even in those times, people would still probably have paid lip-service to the idea that kindness is a good thing, and would not have recognized their rough treatment of children as unkind.
I suspect the writer of the ad thought he was saying something like "At a time in history when kindness is needed more than ever..."
In UK grammar schools in the 50s and 60s bullying and humiliation by the staff and prefects were often facts of life; expected and tolerated. Whether or not the intention was to toughen us or was simply sadism, I still don't know.
Indeed. And yet many people look back to that era as a golden age.
My grammar school was horrid and would not like any young person of the future to endure such a regime.
The idea of giving older children the opportunity to lead younger ones is pretty normal. "Rule over and abuse" is rather a reflection of the attitudes to authority at that time - prefects and other senior pupils weren't doing anything that the staff weren't.
The Roald Dahl short story Galloping Foxley is all about this.
Because that is not the way I view it. Cruelty was (wrongly) considered to be necessary to toughen the young up against the horrors of the world (as the elders perceived it, blind to the fact that their cruelty was causing those horrors). It is not that kindness was not recognized as a virtue--just that it wasn't expedient. Those are different concepts.
There's also the problem that humans-in-general tend to miscall their vices by the names of the virtues they most closely resemble, either out of bullshittery or out of pure confusion of mind. Thus people say "toughness" when they are actually describing cruelty, and "tolerance" when they mean indifference. See also "liberty" for licentiousness, "passion" for inability to control oneself, "courage" or "bravery" for rash behavior, and "initiative" for half-assed fuckwittery.
A brilliant summary of most of the problems of today’s world. I don’t know whether
to put 👏👍or☹️😢, both are appropriate.
Fagging was still in place when I was at school. I can remember teaching a fellow newbie how to clean shoes. In most houses it was really only the top year boys who used fagging and then mainly confined to exam periods. Our Housemaster was, I think, against it.
The practice was abolished a couple of years after I left
Could you define that term for those of us who were deprived of the privilege of experiencing the practice?
In times more long gone past, said senior boys had the power to discipline said younger boys as they deemed fit.
You don't need much imagination to think how that could go...
The bulk of the bullying at my place was either from locals shouting abuse or tourists trying to photograph us, presumably because of what they perceived to be an odd uniform.
But the junior boys had their own shoes to clean, etc. in addition to what they had to do for the older boys. AIUI they didn't have a lot of free time.
It was a bit snobbish, but I came across no particularly harsh teachers (although a couple of incompetent ones) and I don't remember any kind of interaction with a prefect.
The lunches at my place would be good preperation for rations in WWII Japanese PoW camp...
Same here - 1960s all girls grammar. The teachers were mostly ok, no bullying though some of them were pretty strict and strait laced! Little serious bullying among the pupils, just general schoolgirl cattiness.
I was a language assistant at a school in France in 2006, and ate from the school canteen. Think of all the stereotypes of French cooking: Michelin stars, gastronomie, haute cuisine, gourmet ...
... Nope, it still tasted like something dug up from a Cold War bunker.