Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    "Isn't Hannukah your Christmas?"
    

    Having "It's A Wonderful Life" shown on TV about 50 times a day during
    the Xmas season.  I am so sick of that movie!
    
    Lorna
    

    
    Okay, I'm not a total Scrooge, so I've included some things I
    even *like* as well!
    
    
    
    
    I hate popular Christmas music, especially the trash they
    play in stores and malls this time of year.
    
    I hate even more that they start playing it in October.
    
    (But I *love* Handel's Messiah, Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker Suite,
    medieval/renaissance Christmas madrigals, Christmas choirs,
    handbells.)
    
    I hate most of the cheap, ugly decorations that go up in
    October at almost every shopping plaza.
    
    (But I love shopping at this time of year in craft stores and
    country shops.  I love wrapping gifts and holiday baking.)
    
    I hate deciduous trees decorated with Christmas lights (tacky,
    IMHO).  Boston Common is the best (worst) example of this I
    can think of.
    
    I hate the yard across the street from my house that every year
    the day after Thanksgiving gets every tree, every bush, every *plant*,
    decorated with not only lights, but also fake Santas, fake reindeers,
    and assorted fake other things.  I hate fake Christmas trees too.
    
    (But I love real Christmas trees, real Christmas wreaths, and
    poinsettas).
    
    I also hate fake Santas - to me something that started out hundreds
    of years ago as a beautiful tradition just irritates me because it
    is now nothing (to me) but a symbol of excessive materialism and greed
    in our society.
    
    

    I hate it when people chop down live trees and then 'decorate'
    them with so much crap you can't tell there's a *tree* in there.

    
    Ellen, what's a real Santa?!?!?!
    
    Ho ho ho,
    
    Carla
    

    
    churches
    

    
    re .5:
    
    I was thinking of plastic Santa statues and big cardboard
    Santa pictures.
    
    The only 'Santas' I like are real people dressed up in
    Santa Claus suits who are able to entertain real children
    and make them smile.
    

    
    
    The thing I hate most about Christmas is when certain family members of
    mine expect to get a lot of expensive presents from me because they
    think I'm "rich" now.
    
    This Christmas is going to be really strapped because I'm flying to
    Arizona, plus renting a car for a week (to the tune of about $500+).
    Yet my family still "expects" loads of presents from me (more than from
    any other family member).....they don't understand that I'm not 
    made of money and they continually put me on a guilt trip because of
    it.
    
    kathy

    re .8 Buy yourself a present, Kath - a copy of "How To Say 'No'
    Without feeling Guilty"
    
    :-)

    
    
    
    		No one can make you feel guilty without your permission....
    
    
    
    Eleonor Roosevelt (I think)
    
    ...but we all allow ourselves to feel guilty, huh!

I could do without all the TV commercials/other forms of advertising showing
all the happy husbands/wives/lovers and all the joys of the season they share.
I've managed to leave the TV off (most of the time) and stay out of malls since
before Thanksgiving, but one can't seem to get away from it.  Those of us with
no one to share the season with or who otherwise can't be with the one's we 
love have a tough time with this stuff.

I enjoy getting stuff for my kids, but other than that I'd prefer to go into
hibernation til Dec 27th or so.



Jim

>    (But I *love* Handel's Messiah, 

	My favorite CD!
	The Messiah is Easter music. Well, actually it covers the whole
	letergical year but the a lot of the best stuff (which doesn't include
	the hallaluah chorus) is Easter related.

			Alfred

    i could do very well without the holiday blues that settle
    on me each and every year.
    
    actually, it is becoming quite traditional, and i think i 
    was kinda looking forward to it this year.

    The Messiah - yes, I could do without the Messiah.  I *HATE* IT.
    
    Every year, starting *before* Thanksgiving, the same 15 minutes of
    music over and over and over and over and over again.  Onto the
    RCA "entertainment center."  Never did like that huge piece of
    RCA furniture, it did in the backs of both my father *and* my uncle.
    
    Repeat play of that single record side every moment of the day, from
    first thing in the morning to until we went to sleep.  Alleluia!
    Alleluia!  (Or is it Hallelujah?  Hallelujah?)
    
    Year after year, every year, they all blend together now.  I can't
    even think of which Christmas was what, because they all are the
    same now.  The only memory left is a few minutes of sound.  Torture.
    
    
    But I love it.
    
    Every year one night we'd make the trip to the Eastman School of Music
    to hear the Rochester Oratorio Society perform Handel's Messiah.  And
    then the next night.  And then the next night.  Even if my mother
    looked so tiny because we always were sitting up in the balcony the
    three of us would spend the first twenty minutes of the first
    peformance arguing over which one was mom.  My favorite was always
    the french horns.  The sound carried beautifully to the top of the
    auditorium.
    
    
    Anyhow, we bought my parents a 2 CD set of Handel's Messiah last
    year *before* they had a CD player.  Hint hint hint hint, get
    a Sony CD changer.
    
    That worked, brought them into the 90's.  When we visit, the Messiah
    is on all day, every day during the Christmas season.  But's it's
    the *whole* Messiah, not just 15 minutes of it.
    
    I haven't heard my mother sing the Messiah in 15 years.  And that,
    I'll have to admit, I miss very much.
    
    								-mr. bill

>    But then they won't let you put your kid on
>    Santa's lap and take your own pictures, will they?  Stinking mercenary
>    <expletive deleted>s!
    
	I saw a sign the other day advertising a "Kids' breakfast with
	Santa - bring your own camera, $3.50".  It occurred to me as I 
	was reading your note that there's nothing to prevent you from 
	setting something like this up yourself, charging people a 
	nominal fee to cover the food, room, the cost of the Santa 
	suit, and Santa's breakfast, and donating the excess to your 
	favorite charity.  (With a little coaxing, you could probably
	convince Mrs. Claus to come too, and maybe a couple of elves.)

	And it's gotta be more fun than waiting in line at the mall.

	    Sharon

    For myself, I realy, enjoy Christmas. I like and enjoy giving to others,
    being with friends, Christmas lights and most of all celebrating the true 
    meaning of Christmas and going to Christmas eve service.
    
    Have a good Christmas all
     
    Peace,
    Bill

    Those **&* Hallmark and McDonald's commercial; also the one for Stop &
    SHop; if I have to look at the stupid kid saying his 'thank you
    prayer' at the family dinner ONE MORE TIME, I may have to shoot my TV.
    Maia
    

    
    New Years resolutions - has *anyone* ever really kept one?
    Why set oneself up for failure?

  New Years Resolutions?  Hell, why should I change?  I think its about time
the rest of the world changed instead.

(Paraphrased from Calvin and Hobbes)

    re: .1
    
    No Chanukah is not "Jewish Christmas" (as I've heard it referred
    to before).  It has nothing to do with Christmas.  It is not related
    in any way shape or form.  It's just that it happens to fall at
    the same time of year.  If you'd like to know more about Chanakah
    and what the holiday is about, you may send me mail off line.
    
    Lori B.

    
    re .22:
    
    It should be obvious that reply number .1 was from someone (Jewish)
    who can't stand the question.  I don't think she needs more
    information on Chanukah.
    

    re: .23
    
    Yes, I realized that.  I was clarifying it more for others who ask
    that question (believe me, there are some ignorant people who work
    for DEC).
    
    Lori B.

    re .24, you know, I really don't think it's fair to say "there are some
    ignorant people who work for DEC)" just because many/some Catholics and
    Protestants aren't familiar with Jewish holidays.  It's nice, of
    course, for people to learn about different ethnic holidays, but
    calling others ignorant isn't the best way to encourage interest, IMO.
    
    Lorna
    

    People who'd sooner cross the street rather than look a homeless person
    in the eye (let alone give a dime), suddenly become a hybrid of Ghandi
    and Mother Theresa.
    
    And on January 2nd, it's back to crossing the street again.  Ah, the
    true spirit of Christmas ...
    
    LArry

    
    re .26:  You just reminded me of something I can't stand most
    of all about Christmas - the hypocrisy.  It's demonstrated in
    womannotes every year when business-as-usual is being conducted
    (e.g., some disagreement comes up) and someone pipes up in
    (if you can 'sound' like something over the network) a voice that
    sounds like some mother's saying, "Children, let's not fight -
    it's Christmas.'
    
    Grrr, that really gets me going.  Either we shouldn't fight
    at all, or we should.  But, puleeease! don't give me this
    'it's Christmas' business!  Besides, not *everyone* celebrates
    Christmas!
    

Calvin and Hobbes was good yesterday...can't remember each frame, but his father
comments on Christmas TV programming...7 minutes of peace and love followed by
several minutes of materialism and greed..



Jim

    Okay, thanks.  Sorry I said anything.  But, it seems to me that out in
    the world where everyone is not so well educated and all-knowing as the
    typical Deccie, many people do use the word "ignorant" to mean
    "stupid."  
    
    So, how do I, or you, know what the user of "ignorant" meant?
    
    However, it did seem to me that the person who used the word "ignorant"
    was complaining about the fact that many Digital employees are not well
    informed about Jewish tradition, and my feeling is that many non-Jewish
    people have never been exposed to Jewish holidays and have no reason to
    be informed.
    
    Lorna
    

    Lorna, I'm sorry, a thousand pardons!  I meant no barb at anyone here,
    or in particular.  My distaste for the question stems from childhood,
    when at age 5 or so I discovered that *of course*, *_everyone_* is
    Christian at Christmastime, right?  I mean, just look around you.  It's
    everywhere!  You can't escape it, even if you wanted to!  So I had this
    feeling all through my childhood that I had this secret difference.  I
    mean, I was different, but nobody knew it, and they all assumed I was
    not different.  And, as a child, I began to resent it.  After all, this
    is not supposed to be a Christian country, but a free one.  And as I
    got older, I came to resent not only the assumption (that the world is
    Christian in Dec), but the ignorance of the traditions of others, which
    I saw as an extension of the assumption.
    
    Do I still feel this way?  Less than I used to.  Do I blame anyone for
    it?  What would be the use of that?  I have come to understand, a
    little, the special child's joy at Christmas -- to hear an echo of the
    sleigh bell, a little (see _the_Polar_Express_).  I have come to
    believe that caustic demands for the world to become the way I think
    it's SUPPOSED to be don't work, and instead I try a gentler approach.
    Sometimes I slip up, tho...
    
    I apologize to you, Lorna, and to anyone else I splashed.

    re .31, thanks, but, you really didn't have to apologize.  It wasn't
    your .1 that splashed me.  When I read your .1, I felt that I
    understood exactly what you meant.  
    
    It was the use of the word "ignorant" in .24 that splashed me.  But, as
    both Christine and -d already pointed out, according to strict
    dictionary meaning of "ignorant" it shouldn't be offensive.  It's the
    fairly common practice that many people seem to have of using
    "ignorant" to mean "stupid" or deliberately rude that makes it seem
    offensive to me.
    
    re .31, again, I have heard other Christmas stories from non-Christians
    of how they felt left out as children during this time of year.  I'm
    sorry it was like that for so many.  Maybe it's another case of the
    majority forgetting that they aren't the only ones.  I don't know.  I
    remember a former boss a few years ago telling me that his daughter
    came home from kindergarten one day during the Xmas season and told him
    that she "hated" him because Santa Claus didn't come to their house. 
    It is obvious that Christians have forced Xmas on everybody else in the
    past.
    
    Lorna
    

    Re .32:
    
    Lorna, when you say that Christians have forced Christmas on everybody,
    do you mean forced others to participate?  Or forced others to share
    the peripheral (and often tacky, IMO) experience?  Or am I
    misinterpreting?
    
    Thanks,
    aq
     

    re .33, I mean the second one.
    
    Lorna
    

    I think it's more accurate to say that merchants, or (broad-brush
    warning) our capitalistic society have forced everyone (Christians
    included) to be exposed to Christmas.  As a member of the Church of
    Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and thereby most decidedly a 
    Christian, I find the Christmas experience as thrust upon me by
    commercials, ads, muzak carols, etc., to be far removed from my own
    feeling of Christmas.
    
    On the other hand, I do subject my neighbors to cookies, and
    window-candles, so maybe I'd better just put down my stone and tiptoe
    quietly back to my [glass] house.  :)
    
    aq
    

    Ann, you're right that the commercial form of Christmas is foisted on
    us all, but other aspects of the holiday are pushed in more subtle ways
    as well.  For example, lots of folks feel 'pressured' to be happy and
    jolly at this time, and feel badly in some way -- guilty, failure,
    depressed -- if jolly just isn't in it.  For example, I know the
    melody, harmony, and words (often multiple verses) of every Christmas
    carol ever sung by an elementary school child.
    
    As with the rest of the world we live in, I try to enjoy what I like of
    the holiday, and ignore the rest as best I can...

    re; .35
    
    It is estimated that only 15% of America/North America is christian.
    
    Bill

    I was always under the impression that Christianity (in all of its
    various flavors) was a majority religious strain in America/North
    America.  Perhaps your figure comes from a denomination that does not
    credit others as "Christians," or which counts only Church-goers above
    a certain frequency?  I wonder whether others have more
    reasonable-sounding data...?
    
    Dan

    And who knows how many people there are like me, who do not
    attend any church nor categorize themselves under any specific
    denomination, but think of themselves as generically Christian
    by virtue of theology.
    
    --- jerry

	Back to the topic....

	I could do without the traditional Christmas Eve extended family
	get-together.  In the past, those attending were my Uncle and his
	wife, his daughter w/her husband and four children, his son w/his
	wife and SEVEN children, and my parents, brother, sister, and myself.

	The evening consists of lots of fattening food being consumed by
	all, and zillions of presents being frantically ripped open by the
	eleven young cousins.  The object seems to be who can get the most
	presents.  The living room looks like a distaster, with yards and
	yards of wrapping paper that isn't appreciated, but is responsible
	for the demise of I-don't-know-how-many trees.  

	When I was younger, it really bothered me that each cousin would
	get piles of presents, exactly what they wanted.  And I would get
	some hideous turtleneck, or book I would have never picked out 
	myself.  You see, my Uncle loved to spoil his grandchilren.  Since
	I wasn't his grandchild, I was an afterthought.  Now that I'm
	older, I don't really care WHAT I get for Christmas.  But I sure
	would rather spend Christmas Eve at home with my immediate family.

	Sue

    re .42, Sue, my ex-in-laws used to have very similar extended family
    get-togethers on Xmas eve so I relate, and since I was the least liked
    daughter-in-law I always got the peculiar turtleneck type tops that had
    been on sale at Filene's basement the previous summer. :-)
    
    The only redeeming feature was the seafood (which I was told was some
    sort of Italian American tradition) and the fact that my daughter,
    being a favored grandchild, always got a ton of presents.
    
    Lorna
    

    i'm looking forward (yeah, right) to an extended family
    gathering this year.  bunch of rels from manchester will
    be coming down, and crowding my parents house.  when i was
    first asked to spend christmas at home, i thought it was
    just going to be immediate family, which i would have
    loved, but now with them coming, and i know that we don't
    have enough beds and couches to accomodate (sp?) them all....
    
    i'm starting to plot how to get out of that environment.
    
    jonathan (who prefers quiet times with family to noisy celebrations)
    

    
    the term "Father Christmas".  I don't know about your house, but I know
    who makes it all happen in mine...  ;-)
    
    D.

    toothbrushes in Christmas stockings.  I mean, Santa gives CHOCOLATE and
    TOOTHBRUSHES at the same time???!?!?

    You bet!  That way the chocolate might ruin your complexion and your
    figure but your teeth will always be in shape for more chocolate!
    
    ;-)
    
    Nanci

    Pine needles in the rug.
    
    That's all.......... I love the rest.
    
    
    Kate
    

    re; .39
    
    The number I used is an old stat. But it still a low %.
    This stat. number was includeding all denominations. I don't rate
    or judge others thats up to God. Remember one is not a christian
    because they go to church or the mother and father were christian,
    or was baptized.
    One is a christian because they accepted Christ and have faith in
    Him.
    
    I don't know how said put a toothbrush in the stock, it's a good idea
    8^)    Maybe a diet book to after all the food we will be eating to.
    
    Have a good one all.
    
    Bill

    re .49, I disagree with your definition of a Christian, and also find
    it very offensive.  Just thought I'd let you know.
    
    Lorna
    

    in re .49
    
    But you do not have the right to say that I am not a Christian because
    how I believe is different from how you believe. I get very tired of
    the small fraction of conservative Christians who smugly exclude
    everyone else because they dont pass their particular litmus test
    of faith.
    
    Bonnie

    And then there's the other side - those who maintain that one
    is a Christian (RC in this case) _because_ one was baptized.
    My parents maintain that I will be Catholic 'til the day I die
    because I was baptized. My professed atheism, lack of respect
    for the church and the philosophy of Jesus mean _nothing_ to them.
    And I'd be willing to bet the parish still has me on record as
    a parishioner, and therefor as a Catholic. Ditto the Vatican.

    re:.52
    
    Would they still feel that way if you were excommunicated? :-)
    
    --- jerry

    Bill, so do I, perhaps it is possible that each of us being human
    interprets the words differently and that neither of us has a
    patent on truth?
    Bonnie

    Lorna, Bonnie
    
    If I have offended you in some way, I'm sorry no offence was ment.
    
    As fare as salvation is concerned it's clear in the bible (God's 
    word) and thats what I go by as well as the Holy Spirit.
    
    May God and His Son shine on you.
    
    peace,
    Bill

    Hi Bonnie,
    
    Christ is the Truth.
    
    I prefer to say "One interpretation, but many applications"
    
    Bill

    re .-1,re .49
    the spelling of the word <Christian> with a capital C is also "the
    truth". Even when used as an adjective.

    re .53 (re .52 ) Dunno, maybe it's worth a shot >8-)

    in re .57,
    
    actually, "One Truth. Many interpretations."
    
    stating it that way is less offensive to those of us who are not
    Christian, or christian, by choice.

    re .51 BJ -- 
        "I get very tired of
        the small fraction of conservative Christians who smugly exclude
        everyone else because they dont pass their particular litmus test
        of faith."
    
    Ditto for me and *ANY* type of religious fanaticism, I suppose that
    includes radical moderation in all things as well... :-)
    
    re .57 Bill --
    
    ''I prefer to say "One interpretation, but many applications"''
    
    Might I offer the techie alternative 
    
    "One Application Layer, but many ports to different Operating Systems?"  
    
    Or should that be
    
    "One Operating System, but many different Applications Layers (doing
    similar things)..."
    
    Or should I jes' stop forcing round pegs into fortnights and get back
    to work...
    
    :-)
    
    Dan

    without reading any replies.........
    
    The media hype. They treat shopping as a big news event. They try to
    make you think you can't get along without all these things.
    
    My wife hounds me to say what I want for Christmas, but it's hard as
    h@ll to think of something. Many things I think of are really
    ridiculous, or I KNOW I'd never use them (because of lack of time or
    something).
    
    ....Bob

    Re:63.. No male bashing there...
    
    REK

	You can be Christian (with a capital C) if you do not beleive in
	Christ, but are charitable or kind, likewise, Christianity is not
	just Christian faith, but also quality of character.

	Believing in a God is not a pre-requisite.    

	Heather

    'scuse me, Heather, but that (.67) makes me growl.
    
    I am not a christian, or a Christian, of any flavor or variety.
    
    C/christians may possess virtues (indeed, many do!) but the virtues are
    not C/christian in themselves.
    
    If I display either virtue or vice, they are MINE, and not ascribable
    to any belief or character outside me.
    
    I once had a casual conversation in the LTN2 lobby.  In it I mentioned
    some good deed or other that I had done (no big deal, and I don't even
    remember what it was).  The man I was talking to said, "Well, that was
    very C/christian of you."  This offends me!  just as much as that
    racist old saying, "that's white of you".

>    If I display either virtue or vice, they are MINE, and not ascribable
>    to any belief or character outside me.
    
 	Christian a.   
	of Christ or his teaching;	
	believing in or professing or belonging to Christian religion;
	charitable, kind.

	Chrisianity n.
	Christian faith or quality or character.


	So, it is, a fact. 

	If you don't like the fact, then that's fine, but don't say it's not 
	true.

	Heather

    I could do without Santa Claus.
    
    I realise this borders upon blaspheming and that I'm am likely opening
    myself to all manner of accusations along of the line of 'not believing
    in fun' or 'not getting into the childlike spirit of things' to mention
    a few -- quite ludicrous accusations once on gets to know me for more
    than 3 minutes, too.
    
    However, I wasn't raised on it and can't quite get the hang of why it
    would make anyone happier to believe that their gifts came courtesy of
    an oversized elven toymaker rather than the love in the hearts of
    friends and family.
    
      Annie

    re .70, Santa, I always thought it was pretty silly myself.  I can't
    remember ever *really* believing in Santa Claus.  Deep down inside I
    always knew that my mother was Santa Claus.
    
    I never encouraged my daughter to "believe" in Santa Claus (or the
    Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy.)  She always knew it was us.  I
    can't see the point in trying to encourage a child to believe in
    something that isn't really true.  (Why should I let those mythical
    figures get the credit for gifts I bought with my own hard earned
    money?)
    
    Lorna
    

    re .69 :                      -< like it or not, facts are facts >-

    You mean, like it or not, dictionary entries are dictionary entries.

    
    re .69:
    
    You and I have a different dictionary, because the definition
    in mine (American Heritage Dictionary) doesn't say anything about
    being charitable or kind:
    
    Christianity: 1. The Christian religion, founded on the teachings of
    Jesus.  2. Christendom.  3. Pertaining to Christianity or its
    inherents.
    
    Christian: n. One who believes in Christianity.  -adj. 1. Professing
    belief in Christianity.  2. Pertaining to Jesus or his teachings.
    3. Pertaining to Christianity or its adherents.
    
    (P.S. Sara, I hope this makes you feel better.  Because I can see
    how you would have been offended too.)
    
    

    
    re:.67
    this will come as news to a very large number of christians.
    
    furthermore, one is not necessarily being complimentary by
    calling someelse a christian.
    

    In re: .67
    
    I can scarcely imagine a religion whose adherents didn't hold their own
    moral teachings to be the best available approximation of basic virtue
    and right action (and to hold their own god(s) to be the true one(s)). 
    It is thus natural that Christians should equate general virtue with
    Christian virtue, just as Moslim's will . . . etc. . . .  Thus any good
    17th century new England Puritan could understand .67's point quite
    easily.
    
    It reminds me of a couple my parents knew years ago who got engaged.
    Both their families strongly objected to the marriage.  One was Jewish
    and one was Morman, and neither could bear the idea of their child
    marrying a gentile.
    
    		- Bruce

    
I certainly don't find it complimentary.

Anyway, "charity" in the New Testament is a translation of the Greek
*charis*, or grace, which was dispensed by the trinitarian Goddess -- as in
the three Graces, or Charites -- and which derived from mother love. 
Christians borrowed the concept and narrowed it considerably from its
earlier meaning, which was much more than giving away money. 

D.

    re .75 Thanx Bruce

    re.76
    
    was that _really_ necessary?
    
    caritas, charis, charity, grace -- have _nothing_ to do with the giving
    of money and goods in Christian teachings and traditions.
    
    saying that _Christians_ have narrowed charity to mean the giving of things
    falls into the realm of accuracy without truth -- there are many who
    use this narrow definition that are not Christian, nor did they learn
    this narrow definition as a adjunct of Christian teachings.
    
    It would seem that Christians and Christianity are an easy and
    acceptable target.  I find this _very_ distressing.
    
    .. as a sentient being.
    
    I appeal to your charity in accepting the core beliefs of others.
    
      Annie
    

    in re .66
    
    partiy::elwell worked in my building for about 3 months, and I can
    assure you that his pn has more to do with his age than anything
    else 
    
    (hi bob)
    
    Bonnie

    
    i believe ms. kottler was addressing gratuitously calling
    people 'christians'. one reason to be not amused might be
    the 'redefinition' of various goddess-based concepts in
    traditional christian dogma. that is, 'it's bad enough you
    calling me a christian, but you pour salt in the wound by
    twisting aspects of goddess worship to 'justify' this
    'compliment'.'
    

    re .81
    
    I know you winked, Joe ... but I don't think its OK. really.
    it's no more charitable to gratuitously mis-represent Christianity 
    than it is to gratuitously call someone Christian.
    
    caritas is the birthright of us all, regardless of how we limn the
    lifegiver.
    
    it truly felt like she was trying to tell me I hadn't the right because
    we characterise hir differently.
    
    that's why I said 'ouch.'
    
      Annie
    

Christmas traditions I could do with out?

Simple - the celebration of the birth of the cause of a male oriented, 
domineering religion that has arguebly caused more harm than good in this world.

The date of his birth, by the way, was moved to winter time in order to help
convert more pagans to the "flock", which in turn generated more $$.

And isn't that what christmas is about anyway? spending money and marketing.

Bah hum bug!

grins,

clark.

    
    re:.82
    it depends on what one means by 'gratuitously mis-represent'.
    i should think the derivation and history of the word 'charity' 
    to be primarily a matter of purely scholarly debate. anyway,
    as the writer of .83 has made abundently clear, a far more 
    virulent attack can be made upon christianity than merely 
    quibbling about some antique phrases. personally, i was raised
    as a christian and remain friend and relation to many christians,
    i have no quarrel with any individual on that account. and i'm 
    not insensitive to the special qualities of the season and revel 
    in it myself. but i'm not going to make or accept excuses for
    'christianity' the institution and philosophical under-pinning
    of our society.
    
    i do apologize to any and all to whom this may seem either a
    personal attack or merely scrooge-like. i am not in a good mood
    as is no doubt apparent.
    

    -d 
    
    anyone who knows anything about sheep knows that Jesus was
    born in the spring.
    
    bj

    G'day,
    
    But downunder , spring is september-ish, which is generally accepted as
    the date (based on the date of the census)
    
    December is due to a co-timing with local festivities, as is Easter
    with Eostre.... the rites of spring.
    
    But the timing has nothing to do with Faith....nor Belief nor
    Salvation... 
    
    derek
    ps for all fans of cold Christamsses and turkey and plum puddin' an'
    stuff.... its 40c in Sydney today =104F...
    
    

 	The definitions of the word Christian and Christianity that I gave, 
	were from the Little Oxford Dictionary 6th edition.

	These words are used, quite rightly, to denote the qualities of the
	faith, as well as the faith itself.

	If people use this term with reference to yourself, why not take it
	in the way it was meant, and not get all uptight about people who
	are complimenting you?

	Heather   

    
    re .88:
    
    Heather, I respectfully ask you to consider Sara's point of
    view - try to put yourself in her shoes.  Having someone tell
    her that something she did was a "very Christian" thing to do is
    very much reminding her that she lives in a society that does
    not value her own religion.  She's *not* a Christian and never
    has been and was not raised that way.
    
    Why is this so hard to do?
    

>    Heather, I respectfully ask you to consider Sara's point of
>    view - try to put yourself in her shoes.  Having someone tell
>    her that something she did was a "very Christian" thing to do is
>    very much reminding her that she lives in a society that does
>    not value her own religion.  She's *not* a Christian and never
>    has been and was not raised that way.
    
>    Why is this so hard to do?
 
	
	Probably because I, a non-Christian, can see no reason, why I would
	be upset by someone that used a word which means charitable and kind. 
   	
	Heather

>	Probably because I, a non-Christian, can see no reason, why I would
>	be upset by someone that used a word which means charitable and kind. 

    The reason someone would be upset is quite simple. The word
    "Christian" does not in general parlance mean "charitable and
    kind" - it creates an association with a specific religion or set
    of beliefs.

    The "charitable and kind" reference may be a secondary meaning
    used by some people and hence documented by your dictionary, but
    that doesn't make it generally understood as such.

    Some people think they're complimenting women by calling them
    "girls" and can't understand why some women take umbrage. It's
    basically the same thing. 

    re: .85 paper on time of Jesus birth
    
    Aw c'mon -d, do we have to read the whole paper to find out your
    conclusions?  When was it and what was the celestial event?
    
    Mary whose_curiousity_is_piqued_but_doesnt_want_to_read_the_whole_thing

        Was the calendar back then aligned with the seasons the
        same way it is now?  (The "drift" out of alignment was
        responsible for at least one calendar change.)
        
        Dan

    The birth of Jesus was assigned to December 25th because in another
    popular religion of the time and region (the name of which completely
    escapes me), the main deity (who also underwent death and resurrection)
    celebrated his birthday on December 25th.
    
    Early christianity often absorbed symbols and practices from other
    religions.
    
    					andrew

    
>    But the timing has nothing to do with Faith....nor Belief nor
>    Salvation... 
    
    some would argue that timing has *everything* to do with belief.
    the various 'festivals of light' (channukah, christmas, etc) in
    effect derive their power and meaning through their conjunction
    with the solstice, regardless of 'theology'.    
    

    
    absorbed.....hmmm......
    
    

    No!  Of course not!  Mistletoe was the missile used to slay Balder,
    the son of Odin, whose Second Coming is scheduled for Ragnarok.
    Mithras was the son of the Sun, and his death and resurrection are
    *entirely* *different* from those of Balder.
    
    						Ann B.

	Do five mistletoes make a foot?

    Only a real heel would ask that question.

    Or one whose sole interest is in extending her/his knowledge.
    
    

    Believe it or not, I distinctly remember many of my Hebrew School
    teachers telling us that "in fact," Christ was born in the Spring, but
    that (get this!) "to compete with Hanukkah," the celebration was moved
    back, towards the Wintertime.  
    
    The major competing product in that geography being, it would appear,
    the unhyphenated Judaeo- product, and it having the user-friendly
    feature of a holiday when folks tended to need it, rather than in the
    Springtime when there was planting and lambing to be done...
    
    Early "Product Positioning," so it would seem...
    
    Both for the then time, when the market window was wide open -- and for
    the time of my own childhood, when young Jewish kids had to cope with
    the all-pervasive American Christmas...
    
    Gee, the competition's planning to announce their product around the
    solstice...  I hear it's a humdinger!  We're a young religion, yet --
    not many holidays to offer...  Can't we speed up our product
    development cycle, or at least pre-announce and ship later???  :-)
    
    =====
    
    I, too, enjoy and try to amplify the spirit of the season... so --
    
    No offense is meant to those for whom this is a holy event or time; I
    am merely trying to poke some (what I hope is perceived as harmless)
    fun at both religious establishments.  
    
    Especially so, if my Hebrew School teachers conveniently forgot the
    other major market segment, i.e. the established Roman religion, as
    (perhaps?  Is Mithra Roman or pre-Roman?  I forget...) has been being
    pointed out earlier today by wiser -- and certainly more serious --
    heads than mine.
    
    Dan Kalikow

    
    re:.104
    it's difficult to imagine that the romans miscalculated the winter
    solstice.
    

    Mithras is Persian in origin, but was very popular with the Roman
    military man.  In the Middle East, Attis, Osiris, Adonis, and Tammuz
    were popular.
    
    						Ann B.

    G'day,
     Why should not the Romans get the date wrong??
    
    In Australia, the season starts are aligned to the 1st of the months ie
    Summer 1-dec, Autumn, 1-March, Winter 1- June and spring 1-September.
    
    This is because the soldiers in the early settlements could never
    remember which day the solstice/equinox was on, so they could change to
    the appropriate uniform, so it was decreed thatthe 1st of the month
    would do. And it still persists today..
    
    
    derek
    

    
    if memory serves, the roman calendar had a provision for 'leap year'.
    surely they'd be able to deal with something as trivial as the
    solstice. there may be all sorts of *political* reasons to change
    the calendar day, but lack of knowledge of which actual day is
    far-fetched.
    

There is recent evidence that the cult of Mithras was more popular than
previously believed. I personally find the cult of Mithras and the cult of
Osiris in Europe endlessly fascinating. Has anyone else here heard the theory
that the "Black Madonna" is actually a holdover from Osiris cults? I had the
impression that she was stolen from local Pagan religions and that she pre-dated
the Roman incursion into the area, but I don't have any evidence.

	-- Charles

    I had thought that the setting of Christ's birth in Dec was
    more to provide competition for Saturnalia than Mithras.
    
    Also, many of our 'traditional' Chirstmas customs such as the
    tree, mistletoe, the yule log, holly, etc, were taken from
    pagan German customs.
    
    BJ

>    The reason someone would be upset is quite simple. The word
>    "Christian" does not in general parlance mean "charitable and
>    kind" - it creates an association with a specific religion or set
>    of beliefs.
>
>    The "charitable and kind" reference may be a secondary meaning
>    used by some people and hence documented by your dictionary, but
>    that doesn't make it generally understood as such.


	The word "Christian" does mean charitable and kind in ordinary use.

	I refered to the Little Oxford Dictionary, because it is that, little.

	If I wanted to use terms that were defunct, or rarely used, I'd get an 
	Oxford Dictionary, or some other large tome.

	In the conversation that was reported here, the word was used when
	praising someone for their kindness, so it was indeed being used in
	this sense.

	The word was used in praise, it was used in relation to another persons
 	kindness, why can't you accept that?

>    Some people think they're complimenting women by calling them
>    "girls" and can't understand why some women take umbrage. It's
>    basically the same thing. 

	The term girl, when used for me, is a little inaccurate, but I take it 
	as a complement if anyone thinks I am young enough to be thought 
	of as a young woman.

	Heather

re. Note 573.114    
    
>	The word "Christian" does mean charitable and kind in ordinary use.

    Which means that 'ordinary use' has come to equate 'charitable and
    kind' with 'Christian'. The problem many have is simply that that
    equation ('Christian' = 'charitable and kind') implies the converse
    equation ('not-Christian' = '*not* charitable or kind').
    
    Having been raised in a church which proclaimed itself the one true
    way, and subsequently rejecting it, I found that virtues are not
    exclusive to certain faiths, beliefs, or philosophies. It is
    possible to be Christian, Moslem, Bhuddist, Shinto, atheist, Pagan,
    whatever, and still profess the virtues of charity and kindness.
    
    Some people are simply bothered by what they see as an attempt
    by Christians to claim exclusivity on certain virtues.

    
>    Some people are simply bothered by what they see as an attempt
>    by Christians to claim exclusivity on certain virtues.


	I am not a Christian, I do not claim any rights or any exclusivity,
	I claim that a word is a word, and when that word is used in its right
 	sense, and is used to praise people, I have no idea why some people 
	want to complain or get angry.

	
	Perhaps these complainers are not kind and charitable.


	Heather

One of the other cultures that caused a "big" holiday (with a tradition of
stuffing yourself until you can barely walk to the couch in front
of the tv to watch ritualized violence) comes from northern Europe.

By mid-December, the family pig is no longer able to forage, and has
eaten up the stored fodder.  Thus, it is time to invite the pig to
dinner as the guest of honor.

Now, your problem is getting rid of *a lot* of fresh meat; some can
be salted, dried, and stored, but you also get a once-a-year chance
at fresh meat (and the organ meats that can't easily be preserved).

Martin.

    
    I find this comment extremely offensive, Heather:
	
>	Perhaps these complainers are not kind and charitable.

    I have known Sara (the noter who brought this up here) for almost
    5 years and she is very kind and charitable.  I just cannot see
    where you're coming from to suggest that another noter
    A) whom you have not even met and B) who has never said anything
    unkind in this or any other file is "not kind and charitable".
    
    I sincerely hope you're not suggesting that Sara is one who is
    "perhaps not kind and charitable" 'cause you can dump that
    thought right here.
    

    first, Ellen, thankyou for that and your other kind words and hugs, esp
    lately.
    
    friends, please let's stop arguing.  I never meant to start all this. 
    Heather, I don't object to you, or anyone else, giving me a sincere
    compliment.  I only mean to point out that common usage of the noun as
    an adjective is not necessarily a good thing.  (does Kleenex=tissue???
    in common usage, yes, but actually kleenex is a brandname, and does not
    define tissue quality, color, etc.)
    
    sometimes we give offense without meaning to, because we don't always
    know what will be offensive, or why.  That's what I assume to have
    happened when someone tells me I have acted in a christian way.  I may
    or may not tell them so.  I explained this better in the splash
    topic...

  Re: December 25th and the Solstice

  One plausible explanation for this discrepancy is that the early 
  northern hemisphere calendar keepers were doing backyard astronomy 
  to determine whether the sun would ever stop moving south, reverse
  its motion, and come back to warm things up.

  Backyard astronomy means that you go out at dawn and somehow mark the
  position of the sun as it peeks over the eastern horizon.  'Way back
  when, I learned to do this by lining up a series of sticks with some
  permanent fixture like a tree to mark the changing position of the
  sunrise.

  This isn't very precise, and the problem is exacerbated by the fact
  that the sun's north/south motion is slowest at the time of the
  Solstice.  So it isn't until a day or two after the solstice
  that you can convince a disinterested bystander that the sun really
  has started to move north again.  Thrown in a couple of days for party
  preparations and there you are at December 25th.

  JP

>  I only mean to point out that common usage of the noun as
>    an adjective is not necessarily a good thing.  (does Kleenex=tissue???
>    in common usage, yes, but actually kleenex is a brandname, and does not
>    define tissue quality, color, etc.)
 
	It is an adjective, the three main useages I listed before, they are 
	all used as adjectives - thats what the "a" was for.
	The use of it as a noun is secondary, and not as frequently used.

	The reference to Kleenex I completely agree, the word Kleenex has
	nothing to do with any definition of quality and colour, and , if it
	was used as such, it would be a good example of mis-use of the word.

	re: "that's white of you"

	I have never heard this expresion used, the only thing I could guess
	would be the tieing up of "white" with "innocence", but It would
	depend on the context whether it was complimentary or not.
	The sort of thing someone would say if they found 100 bugs in 101
	lines of code?
	
	Back to my previous points, if someone is complementary to you, take it 
	in the spirit in which it is ment.

	Heather

I fully support .115 et al on this one. It's a good example of how certain 
attitudes that might offend some people become the "norm" once they're
embedded in language. The reason it's cause for concern is that language 
can direct thinking, i.e., it can perpetuate those same (potentially)
offensive attitudes. To me also, using the word "christian" to mean
"charitable" or "kind" obviously implies that those of us who are *not*
christian are *not* charitable or kind. 

Of course, some might actually believe that one has to be christian to 
possess those qualities...

It's a little like using the word "man" to mean "human being", once it had 
also come to mean adult male person...hey gang, how about the rest of us? 

D.

    Heather,
    
    "That's white of you" was (is still, unfortunately) a phrase used to
    mean you had acted as a "white" person as opposed to a black person (or
    any other minority).  That is to say, you had acted with dignity,
    *charity* and *kindness*.  Or, to put it another way, you had acted in
    a "christian" manner.  Of course [sarcasm, verrrryyy heavy sarcasm] no
    black could act in such a manner, as they were not "Christian."
    
    "that's mighty white of you" is an offensive statement.
    "that's very christian of you" is an offensive statement.
    
    Both statements mean exactly the same thing.
    
    The last, of course, is only my feeling, so it may only be valid for
    me.
    
    E Grace

    .111, Black Madonna -
    
    I haven't heard about a connection with Osiris. Do you know the book
    The Cult of the Black Virgin by Ean Begg? From a few years back. I'm
    not sure if he traces it to Osiris or not. Now I'm going to check!
    
    D.
    

    To continue the discussion of the effect of language on thought
    and behavior, you could also read:
    
    _Babel-17_ by Samuel R. Delaney
    
    _The_Languages_of_Pao_ by mumble mumble
    
    _Mother_Tongue_ by Suzy McKee Charnas
    
    						Ann B.

Definitely Babel-17 - wonderful book, first turned me on to the Worf Hypothesis.

Languages of Pao is by Jack Vance (I'm pretty sure)

Also see many books by Suzette Haden Elgin including "Judas Rose". (I forget the
others in the series...)

	-- Charles

    re: christian=kind & charitable
    
    I was born into a Jewish family and now consider myself to be an
    atheist.  I find your remarks about christian=kind *very* offenisive
    mostly because you are telling me that I *should not* be offended by that
    definition.  Why should you be able to tell me what offends me or
    doesn't offend me?  
    
    Another example of misusing the word Christian:
    
    Some was talking about people's names and said to me "your Christian
    name...."  I stopped her and said something like, "I don't have a
    Christian name, but I have a first name."  Remember, even though
    I know what she was talking about and she certainly didn't mean
    to offend me, her saying "Christian name" meant the name you are
    given during baptism.  Since I was not baptized, I don't have a
    Christian name.  Assuming that it's ok to use this term to anyone
    regardless of their religion is, at the very least, incorrect. 
    
    -Vicki_blowing_off_steam

    
    i wonder if a person who showed an aptitude and proclivity for
    syncopation should be called 'black' 
    

    As a Pagan, albeit a lapsed one, I personally have no time for these
    newfangled religions like Christianity. It will probably just be a
    flash in the pan like the Romans and Greeks with all their gods. Never
    hear much of them these days do you?
    
    Jamie.

    .-1; You live in the country? 
    
    8-} J

    
    No, no, no.  The best remedy for hiccups is a deep, long, soul
    shivering kiss.
    
    Carla
    

... actually, that sounds like a great way to seriously lock braces ...

    
    great minds....
    

	Re .123

>	To me also, using the word "christian" to mean "charitable" or "kind"
>	obviously implies that those of us who are *not* christian are *not*
>	charitable or kind.

	Christian DOES mean charitable or kind, behaving in this fashoin has
	nothing to do with your religion.

	re: 124:

>	"that's mighty white of you" is an offensive statement.
>	"that's very Christian of you" is an offensive staement.

>	The last, of course, is only a feeling, so it may only be valid for me.


	The first of these two statements actually means you are pale, or
	virginal, as it doen't make sense, I would ask the person who said it
	what they meant. I would then find out whether it was offensive or not.

	The second of these two statements means you are charitable and kind, 
	this does make sense, and is a complement (that is, unless you think 
	being called charitable or kind is an insult).

	The above two statements are NOT the same, if you want to assume that,
	it's up to you, however, it is not, in fact, the truth.

	re: 128

	If a word meaning charitable and kind offends you, thats for you to 
	deal with. I have no problems complimenting people who I think deserve 
	it, most people have no problems accepting complements when they are 
	deserved. If you have problems with it, then I am sorry for you.

	Also, one meaning of Christian name is personal name, it doesn't have to
	have anything to do with Christianity.

	Both the English and American languages have similar meanings for the
	same words. If you want to pick out one meaning, and discard the others,
	then you will always find yourself with these problems.
	
	    
	Heather

	Heather,

	I find your reply incredibly offensive.

>>	"that's mighty white of you" is an offensive statement.
>>	"that's very Christian of you" is an offensive staement.

 
>	The first of these two statements actually means you are pale, or
>	virginal, as it doen't make sense, I would ask the person who said it
>	what they meant. I would then find out whether it was offensive or not.


	Since you seem to be incredibly ignorant* concerning the use and history 
of this statement and since you do not wish to take our word for it and since 
you seem to take the dictionary as the final arbiter of Truth, let me quote from
the entry for "white" in _Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary_.:

white  adj - 2 a: being a member of a group or race characterized by reduced 
pigmentation and usu. specif. distinguished from persons belonging to groups 
marked by black,brown,yellow, or red skin coloration.  b: of,relating to, or 
consisting of white people <~ schools> c slang: marked by upright fairness
<a ~ man if ever there was one>

	The fact that the definition of "white as fair" is part of the subentry 
on "white as race"  clearly shows its racist origins.

>	If a word meaning charitable and kind offends you, thats for you to 
>	deal with. I have no problems complimenting people who I think deserve 
>	it, most people have no problems accepting complements when they are 
>	deserved. If you have problems with it, then I am sorry for you.

	* By the way, the Truth is that you shouldn't even think about being 
offended by my use of the word "ignorant" even though popular usage equates 
ingorant to stupid.  The almighty Dictionary shows that I mean lacking in 
knowledge about a specific item.  If you have problems with that.  I am sorry 
for *you*.


	Taking myself out of nasty sarcastic mode now:  Heather, language is a
dynamic and growing and amibiguous thing.  If everybody meant exactly and only 
the dictionary definitions of the words they said, we probably would have 
peace in our lifetimes.  But the reality is that communication is an amalgam
of words, connotations, facial expressions, cultural context, intent, tone of 
voice, and personal histories of the people involved in the attempt to 
communicate.

	The dictionary is NOT the end all be all of communication.  We have 
told you that the use of Christian to mean kind is offensive to us.  There are 
words that convey what was intended without the religious baggage.  If Christian
means kind and charitable, why not SAY "that was a kind thing to do?".

	To give you an example of how I read your reasoning, I could say I 
think that what you are doing in this note is just whoring and you should not 
take offense.  Afterall, according to my dictionary, the verb whore means to 
pursue an unworthy desire.  Reality is, if I really said that to you, you would 
most likely be offended and I would be slapped about by moderators and other
noters alike, because while that is A meaning of the word, that is not THE 
meaning that pops to mind and choice of that word to convey what I meant
would be ill-advised at best.  Particularly when there are other less loaded 
words with which to communicate.
  
	While I understand your desire to explain that the intent was not 
malicious, to keep on when others have shown that it is irrelevant, strikes me 
as saying to a pedestrian hit by a car, "That driver didn't mean to hit you.  
You shouldn't be hurt by it. If you hurt, there must be something wrong with 
you."  I.e. Not helpful and rubbing salt in the wounds.

Tracey      
 

    
    Heather, and just *who* are you to tell people what they
    should and should not feel?  Just who gave you that awesome
    responsibility?
    
    Sara kindly asked you back in .120 to drop it.
    
    I'll be less *charitable* in asking again.  Please drop it!
    

    American Heritage Dictionary, p 125:
    
    Christian n. One who believes in Christianity. -adj. 1. Professing
    belief in Christianity. 2. Pertaining to Jesus or His teachings. 3.
    Pertaining to Christianity or its adherents.
    
    

    Hold on a minute here.  Heather says she's never heard the expression
    "that's white of you".  To me that says her cultural background may be
    different from mine.
    
    I'm from the southeastern U.S. and to me the expressions "that's white
    of you" and "that's Christian of you" are pretty much *always* said
    with heavy sarcasm.  And yes, they both mean the same thing, roughly
    "how kind/good/fair of you", but again always with sarcasm.  "White"
    is definitely a reference to race, not purity.  To me the statements
    do not imply as much of a put down to non-Christians or blacks as a put
    down to the person to whom they are said.
    
    A person unacustomed to this usage might easily be confused.  There
    could very well be cultural contexts in which saying "that's Christian
    of you" (without the sarcasm) would be a complement without any intent
    of putting down non-Christians.
    
    Mary
    

    White is not always positive.  Prior to WWI (I think) there was a term
    in use for cowardice: "showing the white feather."  
    
    Trivially speaking, of course,
    aq
    (a white woman, although caucasian is more accurate, since,
    depending on the light and time of year, my skin ranges from yellowish-
    pink to pale brown.  On the other hand, I *do* have moments of
    cowardice.) 

    Oops, I see I've made an assumption:  cowardice is bad.  Well, I'll
    stand by it.
    
    aq
    

    Heather appears to be from 'across the pond' i.e. I believe she
    is writing from England.
    
    Bonnie

    Ah, once again the ubiquitous fallacy that: if I don't *mean* it to be
    offensive, then it *isn't* offensive, and if you take offense, it is a
    problem with *you*.  Why do people believe this?  It is clearly a
    widely held belief, thus the oft-heard absurd disclaimer, "No offense
    intended, but..."
    
    There are times when something is said with perfectly good intentions
    ("That's Christian of you") but it is *still* offensive.  Heather,
    "Christian" might equate to "kind and good" in *your* mind.  But the
    truth is, the *reason* that association exists at all is that,
    historically, Christians considered themselves to have a monopoly on
    goodness and kindess, and therefore all good and kind acts were
    "Christian-like."  While you might mean it as a pure synonym, it simply
    *isn't*.  Using it perpetuates the stereotype that Christian = good and
    non-Christian = non-good.  WHETHER YOU MEAN IT THAT WAY OR NOT!  (If
    you really believe that the word "Christian" = "kind" was arrived at
    totally seperately from the word describing those following the
    teachings of Jesus Christ, and the words are totally unrelated, you
    need to go read up on etymology.)
    
    Also, regarding Christian names, a Christain name is *not* the same as
    a first name.  We discussed this in another note, which you apparantly
    didn't read or didn't understand.  A Christain name is one given at
    baptism.  One may have both a first name *and* a Christain name.  In
    some cultures (England? Is that where you are from?) most everyone has
    a Christain name which is also their first name, but that does *not*
    mean the two are synonymous.
    
    What it comes down to is that if you use a term innocently, and are
    then *informed* that the term is offensive, and you continue to use it
    when presented with reasonable alternatives, then you are, in fact,
    being deliberately offensive.  Case closed.
    
    D!

    re: .145
    
    > then *informed* that the term is offensive, and you continue to use it
    > when presented with reasonable alternatives, then you are, in fact,
    > being deliberately offensive.  Case closed.
    
    Not quite closed D!  Sometimes old habits die hard.  I had a friend who
    objected to a word I used which was not offensive to most people, but
    was to her.  I tried very diligently not to say it when with her, but
    sometimes failed.  I don't think of that as being deliberately
    offensive, just being human.  I like to leave room for myself to make
    mistakes, and I like to leave room for others to make them, too.
    
    -Mary

    This may be irrelevent, but I had to respond:
    
    >Also, regarding Christian names, a Christain name is *not* the
    >same as a first name.  We discussed this in another note, which you
    >apparantly didn't read or didn't understand.  A Christain name is one 
    >given at baptism.  One may have both a first name *and* a Christain name.
    >In some cultures (England? Is that where you are from?) most everyone
    >has a Christain name which is also their first name, but that does
    >*not* mean the two are synonymous.
    
    I had to read this twice because I don't understand why you wrote it;
    or maybe you just misread what I wrote. 
                                                                         
    I said that *I* don't have a Christian name because I was not baptized.
    I *do* have a first name, which is *usually* synonymous with Christian
    name, and also it fit in with the context of my conversation with
    the person who said "C" name.  So I said to the woman, "but I have
    a first name" because that's what she meant anyway.  Get it?
    
    Anyway, I didn't read that note on this topic; is it a prerequisite
    to writing about this topic? (sarcasm abounds)  And no, I live in
    Los Angeles, what's that got to do with it?  
    
    -Vicki
                      

    Can we please get back to the topic subject? and can we let this
    rat hole go? Heather is not an American and doesn't understand
    how 'hot' some of these words are to us, coming from a different
    culture as she does. Can we value her difference also?
    
    I recall a few years ago in another file, where an English noter
    used and expression that in America was considered very racist
    and the note caused a major problem because the more the Americans
    called the English person a bigot the more the English noter insisted
    that the phrase was innocuous.
    
    Heather, please don't use 'christian' to mean charitiable when
    talking to non christian Americans, because to them it
    sounds like a put down because it has been so used here. 
    For the rest of us on this side of the pond, let us let the subject
    drop, and not keep after Heather.
    
    Remember, you don't educate people very well with a brick.
    
    Bonnie

    Rescued for: TLE::D_CARROLL 
 
    On the subject, I remembered a Christmas tradition I can do without -
    Christmas music on the radio.  I get so sick of it!  By the time the (4
    month long) Christmas season is over, I feel I never want to hear
    another Christmas carol.
    
    (On the other hand, I did hear on the radio today that the term
    "Christmas carol" comes from Greek winter celebrations, in which dances
    were called "carols"...after a while, the music associated with the
    dances were called "carols" and the rest is history...interesting
    fact.)
    
    D!                  
    

    You mean you object to sensitive, spiritual carols like "Grandma
    Got Run Over By A Raindeer"? Or (my favorite) "Please Daddy Don't
    Get Drunk This Christmas"?

    Some seasonal music is okay - I heard Maddy Prior on PBS today
    backed up by traditional medieval instruments. If only it were all
    like that, rather than like Mel Torme.

    Actually it isn't the Christmas "novelty music" I can't handle (in
    fact, I have an entire record of the stuff) but the *real* stuff, or
    even worse, Muzak versions of the "real stuff", and even worse yet,
    *rock* versions of the "real stuff".  Ya know, Bruce Greenbean, or
    whoever, doing "Santa Claus is coming to town" (aka "How to Terrorize
    Youngters this Holiday Season.)
    
    The very worst is the one that starts "Do you hear what I hear?"
    Ever since that song startted in Gremlins it has given me the creeps
    just to hear it.
    
    D!
    

    
    or, help!, 'the young messiah'
    

    
    My favorite re-done traditional christmas song has to be a reggae
    version of "Christmas in the city" I heard while driving around the
    U.S. Virgin Island's a few December's ago.
    
    Cruising around, windows open, funky reggae beat comes over the radio,
    and the lyrics "Christmas in the Ghetto" really caught my attention.
    
    Great song, but the message was all too true.
    
    Rich...

>	I find your reply incredibly offensive.

	I did not mean it to be.

>>>	"that's mighty white of you" is an offensive statement.
>>>	"that's very Christian of you" is an offensive staement.
>
> 
>>	The first of these two statements actually means you are pale, or
>>	virginal, as it doen't make sense, I would ask the person who said it
>>	what they meant. I would then find out whether it was offensive or not.
>
>
>	Since you seem to be incredibly ignorant* concerning the use and history 
>of this statement and since you do not wish to take our word for it and since 
>you seem to take the dictionary as the final arbiter of Truth, let me quote from
>the entry for "white" in _Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary_.:


	I did say that I had never heard of this saying, and I outlined how I
	would approach it, I did NOT say that I would not take your word for 
	what you believed it meant.


>	The fact that the definition of "white as fair" is part of the subentry 
>on "white as race"  clearly shows its racist origins.

	Maybe it does in America, this definition is not in the Little
        Oxford Dictionary.


>	* By the way, the Truth is that you shouldn't even think about being 
>offended by my use of the word "ignorant" even though popular usage equates 
>ingorant to stupid.  The almighty Dictionary shows that I mean lacking in 
>knowledge about a specific item.  If you have problems with that.  I am sorry 
>for *you*.

	I wasn't aware you used this word in previous notes, and I can assure 
	you I have not yet been offended, I am just trying to help you to
	understand that compliments should be taken in the spirit that they
	are given.

>	The dictionary is NOT the end all be all of communication.  

	This is also what I have been saying, if something is meant in a 
	complementary way, take it as such. The fact that it is also correct 
	useage of words only goes to back up the fact that the communication
	should be treated as it was given.

>We have told you that the use of Christian to mean kind is offensive to us.  
>There are words that convey what was intended without the religious baggage.  
>If Christian  means kind and charitable, why not SAY "that was a kind thing 
>to do?".

	Either words can be used, if Christian was used, I see no need to take
	offence, I see no reason to be offended. 

>	To give you an example of how I read your reasoning, I could say I 
>think that what you are doing in this note is just whoring and you should not 
>take offense.  Afterall, according to my dictionary, the verb whore means to 
>pursue an unworthy desire.  

	Why should I not take offence at someone telling me I was persuing an
	unworthy desire?  If someone did tell me this, then I would take 
	offence.

>Reality is, if I really said that to you, you would 
>most likely be offended and I would be slapped about by moderators and other
>noters alike, because while that is A meaning of the word, that is not THE 
>meaning that pops to mind and choice of that word to convey what I meant
>would be ill-advised at best.  Particularly when there are other less loaded 
>words with which to communicate.
 
	If you did call me this, then I would expect you to be slapped by the
	moderators.........unworthy: discreditable; contemptible; base.
	 
>	While I understand your desire to explain that the intent was not 
>malicious, to keep on when others have shown that it is irrelevant, strikes me 
>as saying to a pedestrian hit by a car, "That driver didn't mean to hit you.  
>You shouldn't be hurt by it. If you hurt, there must be something wrong with 
>you."  I.e. Not helpful and rubbing salt in the wounds.

	Actually, I would put your unaccptance at being able to take the 
	compliment in the manner it was meant, to be more like a car stopping 
	at a crossing to let you cross the road, and you turning your nose up 
	at it and ignoring the driver.
 
	However, if you would like to stop this here, I am quite willing.

	I will not use the term "Christian" to mean kind and charitible in 
	this notes conference, as it offends people. 

	Heather

    Heather, thank you very much for agreeing to not use the word. I am one
    of the people who would find it highly offensive, since I do not like
    Christianity and would not want my kind and charitable actions to
    cause someone to describe me with what I consider foremost to be a
    religion that I often don't respect.
    
    But I also realize that you live in another country, one that shares
    the same words, but doesn't necessarily give them the same meanings as
    in America. And admittedly, y'all did speak the language first! :-)
    
    A friend told me last week that the phrase "knock you up" in England
    means to telephone someone to wake them up in the morning. Here in
    America, that phrase means to get someone pregnant. Apparently there
    are ALL KINDS of words and phrases which have completely different
    meanings in different English-speaking countries.
    
    So, perhaps we can all learn something, instead of assuming that in
    using the same words, we all mean the same thing. And we can all try to
    be more sensitive. If there are words that offend the English - I
    understand that "bl**dy" is one - please point them out to us
    Americans, and we will try to be sensitive to you as well. Please also
    feel free to ask for definitions if Americans use phrases that don't
    seem to make sense.

	An interesting fact:

	"Knocking up" comes from a piece of history, but still makes sense in 
	todays world.

	When we used to have gas lamps, a man used to go around very early
	to light them. He also got paid to wake people up, who also needed
	to be up early, these were traditionally dockers, textile workers,
	miners..etc... and mostly lived in the cramped 2-up-2-down terraces.

	The bloke used to have a long pole which he needed to light the gas 
	lamps, he also used this long pole to knock on the upsatairs bedroom
	window to "knock-up" (wake-up) the people.

	My mother always used to knock on the bedroom door to wake me up,
	and we always called this "Knocking up", it makes sense when you think
	it's the knocking on the door or window that gets you up.

	I used this expression whilst in the States, along with fag(cigarette),
	rubber(eraser), and pants (knickers.....ever had the impression that
	all Americans must be dressed like superman - nothing over their pants!)
	and many other things.
	They all caused much hilarity, after the initial shock.

	Heather

    
    Ok, I know about that expression but, frankly, if someone used the
    expression "beavering away", I don't think the smutty interpretation
    would be the first to occur to me.  I don't think I've ever known 
    anyone who uses it that way.
    
    CQ
    

	I can't remember using that saying - tho' after a while most people
	I knew got used to the differences in the most commonly used words.

	They even started to use the word "lift" instead of "elevator".


	Heather (should there be a new topic about words??????)

    Re .161
    
    I've done better than that. I completely lost an audience of 60 people
    when I was in Boston ... similar situation only much, much worse!
    
    Don
    *8-)

    Don
    
    My husband, years ago was talking about network viruses in France
    to an English speaking audience.
    
    He compaired them to a 'social disease' and lost his audience
    entirely..
    
    Then some clever person said..
    
    oh, the 'german disease'
    
    sigh
    
    Bonnie

    
    There are numerous words and phrases that are innocuous in English and
    have a "low-level" meaning in American, and presumably vice versa (a
    show that bombs in America has failed utterly, conversely one that
    goes a bomb in England is a superb success). A beaver is a hard working
    animal and braces are elastic straps to hold up your trousers...
    
    Closer to the point a carol is a religious song with a Christmas theme:
    pop/rock/schlock muzak is *not* a carol.
    
    As for Christian names I have the baptismal names 'Ian Frederic' and
    older, more meaningful given names that the Church of England refused
    to endorse...
    
    /. Ian .\

    When and how the word beaver become dirty?  If I were to go to a zoo
    and watch an animal called beaver, would I still be asking this
    question?  Did it become derogatory after tv series "Leave it to
    beaver"?
    
    - Vikas

>Did it become derogatory after tv series "Leave it to beaver"?

Vikas,    

No, but this did engender the following joke:

Q: What was the most filthiest line ever uttered on a network TV 
   situation comedy?

A: "Don't you think you were a little rough on the Beaver last night, Ward?"

	I seem to recall that Kurt Vonnegut gives some history of the term
beaver in his book "Breakfast of Champions", but I don't remember exact quote.
Nor, of course, do I have any idea of the veracity of Vonnegut's explanation.


						--D

  At least Vonnegut was nice enough to provide illustrations to help those poor
confused readers ... ;^)

	I was polite enough not to mention the illustrations Jim!

						--D

    
    Explanation of Beaver I was given a while ago was that "sugar daddies"
    would buy their mistress a beaver coat. Word became commonplace through
    CB slang.
    
    Of course this could be totally false...
    
    And then there is gay, which a hundred years ago referred to a
    prostitute (male or female) - when did that get hijacked?
    
    /. Ian .\