S.C. Dixon-ary

Okay, here’s one that really tweaks me:

“I’m a chocoholic!”

“I’m a work-aholic!”

or, “I’m a sex-aholic”

Obviously these “words” are based on the root word, “alcoholic.” That is someone who is addicted to alcohol, as if you didn’t know. So, the word is “alcohol” and we add “ic” to it, to create a word that means “an addict of alcohol,”  follow me?

Now simple logic dictates that a so-called “chocoholic”, if we remove the appendage “ic,” is apparently addicted to “chocohol” because otherwise, following the rule above, a person addicted to chocolate would be a “chocolatic”.

A “workaholic” is addicted to “workahol”, otherwise he or she would be a “workic”.

A “sexaholic” is addicted to “sexahol.”

Just what in Hades is “sexahol” anyway? Do you know how to buy “sexahol”? Can you get me some “sexahol?”

I could use it. Better yet, I know others whom I would like to buy some “sexahol” for. Never mind just why, just keep an eye out for me. I’m not sure how they sell it, but lets figure on starting out with, oh, say half a gallon.

Price? Forget about the price. Something intrinsically tells me that half a gallon of “sexahol” is probably going to be a bargain at whatever the going rate is.

In the meantime lets all make a concentrated effort to stop using stupid, made-up words.

Americans, after all,  seem to have enough problems saying real words, even the simple ones, you know, like correctly pronouncing the second month of the year.

Whenever I hear a commentator or an announcer on television say something like, “well, we’re looking for colder weather come FEB-YOU-AIRY I cringe, then I change the channel and forever mark that person down in my memory banks as an idiot.

If one makes a living using words in the English language one should know that February is a really simple one. It is pronounced EXACTLY as it is spelled, “FEB-ROO-AIRY”…

Forgive me, I digress. Such is the way of a confirmed WORDAHOLIC.

I am clueless about cheerleaders. Why are they still around? Haven’t we all outgrown that? How can that particular activity have survived in this age of political correctness and respect of women?
Back during the days of Germain Greer and Gloria Steinem we saw stewardesses become “flight attendants.”
Waitresses became “wait staff.”
Bar wenches became “servers.”
How is it that one of the most demeaning jobs on earth, being a cheerleader, is still politically correct?
PLAYBOY™ and PENTHOUSE™ models were reviled as sell-outs and “meat market” models.
If that’s true, what on god’s green earth is a cheerleader?
(Yes, of course I know that there are male cheerleaders, too. They are no less pathetic, mind you, but at least they generally tend to keep most if not all of their clothes on…)
I have been told that cheerleaders (for the pro teams) can sometimes make tons of money*. Well, so can nude models for PENTHOUSE & PLAYBOY. Or for that matter, the “actresses” (and “actors”) in porn films often make a lot of money, too.
I know that nude models are often accused of being meager, pitiable pawns of the prurient interests of men and, if that’s so, is someone implying that cheerleaders somehow are not?
What could be more debasing for someone who wants to show women at there best than instead watching buxom lasses strutting their stuff to show their (men’s) team (well, actually they play a lot more to the television cameras) that they support them?
“We’re too weak and stupid to actually get out there on the court or field and DO anything ourselves, after all, we’re only GIRLS, but gosh, we hope that rush of testosterone you’re getting by watching us strike odd postures in uber-revealing ‘clothes’ stimulate you and the other boys to a big win!”
Back in my high school days I dated a cheerleader or two, it was a status thing, but I guarantee you than when I was out on the basketball court I was concentrating on the game itself and not on those girls. Actually, a lot of athletes look at cheerleaders as something more of a distraction than as a bonus. Really, what does a cheerleader actually do to determine the outcome of a game?
Nadda.
Otherwise we would see cheerleaders at baseball games, hockey matches, volleyball games or tennis tournaments.
You say that cheerleaders would NOT do in those situations because it would be far too distracting (particularly at tennis)?
Thank you.
My point exactly.
I cannot imagine any parent wishing the short-lived career of cheerleading upon their child. “Please dear, go out there, jump brainlessly around, show your rump, shake your ta-ta’s and give deep, ‘come-hither’ looks to the camera while licking your chops in the most seductive way imaginable. You are really and important part of the game! Those players depend on YOU. We’re just so danged proud of ya!”

*Addendum: Having read this a friend chastised me and told me that some cheerleaders, even for pro teams like the Kansas City Chiefs, don’t  always make all  that much money and that some have to work at full-time jobs besides.

A.) Doesn’t that just make it even sadder? and B.) Can you prove that the Chiefs are a professional team and, if so, how can you tell?
She also told me that many consider cheerleading a “sport”. Of course many also consider chess a “sport”, which it isn’t, it is a game and, yes, there is a difference. But then there are other people who consider Competitive Eating, X-Ball Online, Squirel Fishing (?), and Extreme Ironing as “sports,” too.

Go figure.

I was watching reruns from THE FAMILY FEUD that originally aired in the 1970’s and early 80’s. I couldn’t help but notice that whenever there was a question like, “what would you buy first if you won the lottery.” Or, “what would you most like to spend a big tax refund on,” or “what is the most used appliance in your home,” one of the most popular answers was “a stereo.”
Apparently those folks were obsessed with their stereo systems. So were their friends. So were my friends. So was I!
First there were record players, then Hi-Fi, then stereos, then consoles, systems and “components.”
(Stereo tried to morph into quad but it never really caught on.)
You had a power amp, a “receiver” (AM/FM radio), a turntable and some sort of a tape deck. Reel-to-reel for the true audiophile, later the 8-track then the cassette. Ok, if you’re being picky, there were 4-tracks before 8-tracks, but they were generally just for the car.
Most of us put the most money into the power amp, Pioneer, Sony, Sansui, Fisher, were top brands, and into speakers. Big speakers. The bigger the better. Sansui, JBL, Altec-Lansing, Pioneer, Hitachi… Friends had some of these monsters sent back from Southeast Asia and they were highly prized and coveted.
For those of us who were financially challenged or lived in small quarters we would settle for a bookshelf speaker. Sony made great ones and so did Hitachi.
You had your tweeters, your midrange, your woofers, tuned ports, Piezo’s, and lord knows what else.
A complete system might also feature such periphery as stand-alone Dolby® Noise Reduction units or a reverb amp or echo chamber.
Plus some components, such as the turntable, were worlds unto themselves. One had to decide how many grams of tracking weight on the tone arm would give best playback results without damaging the vinyl records. (1.5 grams for me, thank you.)
45-rpm records cost under a dollar but most albums were in the $4.99 range and, hey, money didn’t grow on trees back then
The weight of the platter itself was of interest. My Technics weighed in at around 10 pounds. I used only the best tone arm head shells, cartridges and stylus and that “needle” was changed on a regular basis. Stanton, of course. Nothing less.
Of course the true audiophile sniffed at the belt-driven turntables and would settle for nothing less than direct drive with pitch control. Of course the platter itself had to be equipped with a “strobing” device to insure that we were running at EXACTLY 33 AND 1/3rd rpm’s.
Reel-to-reel tape machines were also in their own league. Pioneer® made arguably the best. Unless one preferred Teac™.
Of course the highest tape speed made the best recordings. You had your choice of 1-something ips (inches per second) the frugal might use 3 and ¾ ips, but hotshots like myself settled for nothing less than 7.5 (don’t hold me to that, it might have been 7.25 or 7.75…who remembers?
But did one use quarter inch or tape or go pro with half inch, one inch, or even two-inch tape? Ampex® tape or Scotch© recording tape? I really liked BASF™ for a while there.
Did you choose 7-inch reels or the big ones, up to 13 inches? (The little 5 inch reels and the tiny 3-inchers were kid’s stuff!)
Every strip-mall had a stereo shop in it. People spent huge percentages of their disposable income on their sound systems and, of course, whatever you bought, something better was sure to come along.
To think that miniaturation and sub-miniaturation has relinquished all these powerful components to the status of quaint curios or, worse yet, just plain old junk is amazing. The average iPod puts more technical savvy in the palm of your hand than those clunky dinosaur systems did in your entire apartment. When it comes to sheer volume a laptop with a soundcard and two tiny Bose™ speakers can do as much damage as those 4-foot tall Sansui’s ever dared.
It is a brave new world for the audiophile. Plug in your ear-buds and enjoy!

I avow that if ever there was an example of federal intervention in state’s rights it is the outlandish concept of the congress and senate dictating the so-called “minimum wage” on a national level (each state already has the right to set minimum wages anyway).

Minimum wage is an issue that should belong to the states exclusively. Otherwise we are faced with the preposterous concept that it costs the same to live in Emporia, Kansas as it does in New York City as it does in Houston, Texas as it does in Fairbanks, Alaska as it does in Amarillo, Los Angeles and/or Chicago. Simply put, it doesn’t.

(I’ve talked with people from New York who spend more to park their car in a public garage than the monthly payment on a half-a-million dollar home where I live in Lyon County.)

The concept of the feds governing minimum wage is absurd to the extreme, but a classic case of smoke-screen politics. It is a feel-good issue that does little if any good to the working class in the lower income range but possibly considerable harm to small businesses.

(I own a small business, which such legislation doesn’t directly affect, but remembering the days of owning a deli, which my wife ran, an arbitrarily dictated “minimum wage” would most likely guarantee someone losing his or her job.)

This is really merely another case of disconnect in Washington D.C.

Too bad the yahoo’s “representing” us can’t find something more pertinent and productive to spend their time—and our money—on.