magistra_linguae

I've been seeing this guy off and on for several years now, and he is affectionate, considerate, and loving but has a very low sex drive. He has no problem getting it up and has erections around me frequently. He just doesn't want to do anything about it very often. He didn't lose his virginity until he was 25 (he's 40 now) and has been with very few woman. He has been in only 3 relationships. He also has difficulty achieving orgasm inside a woman but can do so manually or orally, which I am always willing to help him with. And although he continually claims that he does not want a relationship, he treats this more like a relationship than I do. I love him, but I just don't know how much longer I can put up with something that feels like rejection. Is there any chance he'll change?

The guy I'm seeing is intelligent, thoughtful, and well-read. Unfortunately, he speaks with a bit of a drawl, mispronounces certain words, and makes simple grammatical errors on a regular basis. Although I can live with the drawl, I find some of the grammatical errors annoying and embarrassing, especially when we socialize with others.

The errors he makes the most frequently include the following types: (1) saying "you was walkin" rather than "you were walking," (2) saying "I haven't ate yet" instead of "I haven't eaten yet," and (3) adding unnecessary prepositions, as in "Come 'ere so I can kiss on you" or "touch on you," etc...

If I bring a mistake to his attention, he corrects himself immediately. However, he understandably resents my doing so. Is there any chance that he might eventually learn to correct his worst grammatical habits, or should I just accept that his speech will never reflect his inner intelligence?

Et pour ceux qui étudient le français en tant que langue étrangère?

J'en comprends la plupart des paroles, mais pas toutes. (Et "fils de cham" c'est "fils de charme" en accent francophone?)

Tandis qu'au confins du néant

De concert, hurlent au mitan

Nuées de bossus soi-disant

Buvons aux maures et aux gisants

Au loin le râle des damnés

Monte comme funiculaire

L'ami les rameaux ont fané

Buvons au bal des chimères

Vienne la pluie, l'ami

Tombe la grêle

Je plie mais jamais ne m'oublie

A l'heure où sous l'écorce

Faillit la Force (c-cling baby)

Le voici, le voilà mon avis

La voilà ma philosophie

A l'heure où sous l'écorce

Faillit la Force (c-cling baby)

Fils de Cham

L'empire comme frappé de stupeur

Ne sait que faire de tant d'émois

Acte 2 : L'ère de la terreur

Ou le temps du chacun chez soi

Ouvert le bal des damnés

Tickets en vente sur ton palier

"Fils de Cham chantent misère

Et autres contes de la lisière.

Il ne s'agit pas messieurs

D'occire ou piller à tout va

Changer le monde s'il se peut

L'adoucir à défaut d'en être la lie.

Comment peut-on reconnaitre les uns des autres? Quels sont les plus prononcés? Les plus jolis? Quels sont les traits les plus curieux de l'accent québécois, provençal, ou africain, par exemple?

I can appreciate the practicality of messaging someone once or twice, but holding a whole back-and-forth conversation via thumb-typing?

Sending a message can be quicker and more practical than making a call when the message is short and to the point, especially if information such as an address, a meeting time, or a phone number must be communicated. However, I get irritated when people hold entire conversations via message rather than just calling.

When do your prefer messaging to calling, and why? What are your feelings about frequent messaging as opposed to phone calls or emails?

Ok, I know of at least one other person who thought it was horrible - the guy I went with. But other than us, wasn't there anyone who noticed who truly awful the dialog was, or how pathetically cheesy the storyline was? I'm all for great action sequences and hot bodies, but puuuuhleeease.

Did anybody else get the feeling that the script writers couldn't make up their mind about whether to turn the story into pro-Iraqi War propaganda or a gay porn flick?

I color my hair a dark auburn-red color that is quite attractive when the color is fresh and for a couple of weeks thereafter. When my brown and gray roots start becoming noticeable, however, it doesn't look quite as hot. Moreover, because red hair color tends to fade more noticeably than other hair colors, I almost always have to freshen up my overall color (by spreading the dye around to the ends for the last 10 minutes) when I touch-up my roots.

I wish I could color every 3-4 weeks, but I'm afraid to color my hair more often than every 5-6 weeks. Is coloring hair more frequently than that damaging? How often can you safely color your hair?

What can you do about roots in the meantime? Can you rotate permanent with non-permanent dye? Are there any good products you can use to temporarily color roots? (I apply a tinted toner called "Stay Red" to visible roots after washing my hair, but it's hard to apply. I wish they had a mascara-type applicator.)

Thanks for the tips!

Although you have to admire the vocal proficiency of certain pop artists and "American Idol" winners, it seems like most of the singers who are known for their great singing voices tend to produce shallow, lifeless pop. I personally prefer musicians and groups that have something to say and do so in a unique and interesting way whether the lead singer's voice is perfect or not.

Do you agree or disagree, and why?

If so, does that mean that they deny that English and German evolved from Anglo-Saxon, that French, Spanish, Italian, & Portuguese evolved from Latin, and that all of the above probably evolved from Proto-Indo European?

If they do accept that English evolved from Anglo-Saxon and French from Latin, then why do we even need the mechanism of the Tower of Babel to explain how various languages evolved? Doesn't linguistic evolution explain it well enough without drawing magic into the equation?

I teach college French, and I'd like to put together a website that my classes can go to for updates and help. I'm not looking for a place to post grades, just a place where I can post assignments and due dates, class notes, links to helpful websites, and such. It might be helpful to have a message board where students can discuss things, ask questions, and help each other, too.

Is it best to use a full website, a message board, a teacher's assignment website, or some other configuration? Let me know what has worked best for you.

Every generation has a constituency of people who feel like everything was perfect in the past and that society is quickly and irrevocably going down hill in every way possible. Some go so far as to predict the imminent end of the world within their lifetimes. Otherwise simply complain about certain aspects of society.

You know the type: the 40-something guy who thinks that music was at its apogee in the 1980's and has been nothing but crap since, as if his parents and grand-parents and great-grand-parents didn't lament about the same thing; the recluse who complains about how all marriages were perfect and all children were innocent and respectful in his day; the suburban housewife who predicts the death of American culture at the hands of ethnic and religious minorities, as if our culture were some immutable constant that had remained unchanged since 1776 only to die as foreign foods & tongues and imagined anti-Christmas sentiment proliferated.

Is there a name for this tendency?

I have two indoor cats, and although they seem perfectly happy in my three-bedroom house, I was wondering about how it compares to the space they'd have to roam in if they were allowed outside and whether they'd be significantly more active there than inside.

Does anyone have any idea how large the roaming territory of domesticated cats is, or how much they actually do roam? Does it depend on the territories of other neighborhood cats, geographical markers such as roads and creeks, the gender of the cat, or the cat's personality? And what do cats do when they're wandering around the neighborhood?

and atheists only to the definitions of "god" as established by various organized religions?

My personal problem with the concept "god" as defined by Christianity and other faiths is the way they anthropomorphize an entity whose existence and nature our minds are simply not equipped to comprehend. This would make me an agnostic by nature. However, I am an atheist when it comes to the definition of "god" held by most religions. Why must we constantly attribute human emotions such as jealous and vengefulness, human intelligence, even human gender to something so truly undefinable, if there is indeed anything there at all? It's like ants trying to define the giant ant-mound destroyers and food providers (we humans) using ant emotions and ant terminology.

I realize humans find it easier to contemplate something if they put a more familiar face on it, so I'm not opposed to anthropomorphosis of deities as a rule. It only bothers me when it is taken literally.

What's your take on this?

This isn't about the religious interpretation of "free will" but about what science/psychology says about it, so please don't cite biblical scripture. Thanks.

I see free will as the ability we sometimes have to step back from a situation & evaluate it logically, rather than emotionally or instinctively. It's like an on/off switch that we "throw" in one direction or another in order to gain intellectual control over a problem we might otherwise react to emotionally. I don't think it's 100% in our control, however. The "free will" switch appears to be harder for certain people to throw in certain situations.

For example, in societies like the USA where people are constantly tempted by fattening food, there are more fat people. Apparently those who have a harder time losing weight have a "heavier" eating switch than thin people. In societies with healthier foods, people are thinner because they don't have to use their "eating" switch as often.

What does science have to say about this?

"The Eternal has his designs from all eternity. If prayer is in accord with his immutable wishes, it is quite useless to ask of him what he has resolved to do. If one prays to him to do the contrary of what he has resolved, it is praying that he be weak, frivolous, inconstant; it is believing that he is thus, it is to mock him. Either you ask him a just thing, in which case he must do it, the thing being done without your praying to him for it, and so to entreat him is then to distrust him; or the thing is unjust, and then you insult him. You are worthy or unworthy of the grace you implore: if worthy, he knows it better than you; if unworthy, you commit another crime by requesting what is undeserved.

In a word, we only pray to God because we have made him in our image. We treat him like a pasha, like a sultan whom one may provoke or appease." - Voltaire

Wal-Mart has been criticized for denying benefits to employees by making sure they aren't allowed to work the number of hours that would push them up to the "full-time worker" level, among other criticisms. Abercrombie has a record for sexually exploitive ads marketed to adolescents and pre-teens, as well as a record of discriminating against certain employees on the basis of their race. Should we be shopping at these places?

Let's face it: every dollar we spend is a vote for or against a certain company. In addition to rewarding companies with quality merchandise at competitive prices, shouldn't we also reward companies that act morally and responsibly?

And don't accuse me of being an anti-capitalist. Nothing I have proposed goes against the tenets of capitalism. This is not about passing laws or fining companies. It's about purchasing power, personal responsibility, and working within the market system.

Also, if you wish to suggest other companies to avoid, please do so.

I live in Texas, and I've noticed that about the second question people ask you when they meet you (especially in small towns) is what church you go to. As an atheist, I don't go to church, or to mosque, or to temple, or to any other establishment linked to a particular faith. I often don't know what to say in response. I'm usually flabbergasted that they assume that because I'm friendly, intelligent, and kind, I MUST be a Christian. Or perhaps it's just that they wouldn't approach someone who looks foreign, so they're pretty certain I'm not a Muslim or Hindu. In any case, it's annoying. Why do they do this? And what's the most tactful way to respond?

With the New Year approaching, I'd like to make a resolution to do more to make sure that the money I spend doesn't go straight into the pockets of the very rich. Therefore, I'm trying to find out more about fair trade companies with a good reputation.

Are there any well-known companies that divide profits in an equitable way, making sure that the people who actually manufacture or produce their goods are paid a fair amount for their labor? Are there less well-known companies that offer goods at a competitive rate or quality while nevertheless engaging in "fair trade" practices? What companies offer "fair trade" goods online?

Also, what American companies pay their employees well and offer health insurance benefits rather than underemploying and underpaying them like Wal-Mart does? What American companies are the worst offenders when it comes to doing everything they can to keep their employees from earning better pay and basic benefits?