Diet

Diet (pronounced dahy-it)

(1) Food and drink considered in terms of its qualities, composition, and its effects on health.

(2) A particular selection of food, especially as designed or prescribed to improve a person's physical condition or to prevent or treat a disease.

(3) Such a selection or a limitation on the amount a person eats for reducing weight.

(4) The foods eaten, as by a particular person or group.

(5) Food or feed habitually eaten or provided.

(6) Anything (food and otherwise) habitually provided or partaken of.

(7) To regulate the food of, especially in order to improve the physical condition.

(8) Legislative bodies of certain countries.

(9) The general assembly (Reichstag) of the estates of the Holy Roman Empire.

(10) In the law of Scotland, the date fixed by a court for hearing a case.

(11) In the law of Scotland, a single session of a court.

(12) In microbiology, the abbreviation of Direct Interspecies Electron Transfer.

1175-1225: From the Middle English diete or dieten (pittance, fare) and the Old French diete (diet, pittance, fare), from the Medieval Latin dieta (parliamentary assembly (also "a day's work”; daily food allowance, food) from diaeta (prescribed way of life) from the Ancient Greek díaita (way of life, regimen, dwelling), from diaitan & diaitasthai (separate, select (food and drink) which later had the sense “to direct or lead one's life”), frequentative of diainysthai (take apart), the construct being dia (apart) + aita (akin to aîsa share, lot) from ainysthai (take), from the primitive Indo-European root ai- (to give, to allocate).

As a verb, diet began its evolution to the current modern meaning from the late fourteenth century with a range of meanings such as “customary way of eating", "food considered in relation to its quantity and effects" & "a course of food regulated by a physician or by medical rules", the latter often a restriction of food or certain foods, hence the sense of “putting someone on a diet” which was attested by the 1650s in the sense of the specific meaning "to regulate oneself as to food" and applied especially against growing fat; from here came “dieted” & “dieting”.  A long obsolete word for this was banting (an early system for weight loss through diet control, named after its inventor, William Banting (1797-1878), the English undertaker(!) who self-tested the programme and advertised it in his 1863 pamphlet: Letter on Corpulence, Addressed to the Public").  The undertaker lived a long life and was inspired to enter the embryonic field which would become such a huge industry because, in the course of his work, he noted, impressionistically, a striking correlation between obesity and those who died young.  Because of the linguistic coincidence, although the word is a surname, it was used as a verbal noun as in “she needs to start banting".  The system was similar to some modern diet advice in that it advocated eating lean meats and limiting the intake of fat, starch, and sugar.

As a noun applied to legislative bodies (assembly of delegates, etc., held from day to day for legislative, political, or other business), it came into use in the fifteenth century, the Medieval Latin diēta (public assembly) apparently the same word as Latin diaeta, from the Ancient Greek diaita (way of life, regimen, dwelling) but associated with Latin dies (day).  Technically, diēta was a variant of diaeta (daily office of the Church) most often translated as daily duty or an assembly or meeting of counsellors.  In Latin diēta meant also "a day's work, diet, daily food allowance", derived from diaeta (prescribed way of life), from the Greek diaita and the best-known early assemblies were the German and Austrian of the Holy Roman Empire, “diet” used as a descriptor by both French and English authors.  The (now rare) adjective dietal (pertaining to a diet in the “assembly” sense) entered the language in 1845.

Product placement: Diet Coke in Mean Girls (2004).

The verbal noun “dieting” from the verb diet was first noted circa 1400 and the first practicing (or at least one advertised as such) dietician (one who practices some theory of diet) dates from 1845, from the noun diet on the model of physician, replacing the older dietist from circa 1600 although it seems curious dietist hasn’t been picked up as an Instagram niche; one can hardly think of a better tag for many an influencer.  The adjective dietary (pertaining to diet) is from the 1610s, from the Medieval Latin dietarius, from the Classical Latin diaetarius.  The old adjectives are listed by dictionaries thus: diætetic (archaic), dietetical (dated) and dietetic (obsolete).  All meant “pertaining to the rules for regulating the kind and quantity of food taken” and again were from the diaeteticus, from the Ancient Greek διαιτητικός (diaitētikós).  The adjective “diet” as a trade-name meaning (or at least implying) “slimming, having reduced calories” was first used in the US in 1958 when the Diet Rite soft drink was released, its novelty being sugar-free and the Coca-Cola Company responded in 1963 with the similar Tab which remained available in a gradually dwindling number of markets until 2020.  Interestingly, the Coca-Cola Company which since 1983 had been selling Diet Coke, discovered from its extensive market research that “diet” was off-putting to male consumers and thus in 2005 released Coca-Cola Zero though they must have though consumers just didn’t get it because in 2017 it was re-named Coca-Cola Zero Sugar.

Japanese Diet: Upper (2013 & 2016) and Lower House (2017) Election Results

Elections for the lower house (House of Representatives) of the Japanese diet became rambunctious sometime in the 1950s but those for the upper house (House of Councillors) were usually rather sleepy affairs which seemed to matter little until, in retrospect, the polls of 2013 and 2016 seemed to assume an unexpected importance after the Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP) unexpectedly decisive victory in the 2017 (lower house) general election.  What the 2017 landslide meant was that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s (b 1954; Prime Minister of Japan 2006-2007 & 2012-2020) LDP suddenly enjoyed a two-thirds majority in both houses, a type of control of the legislature called a supermajority, giving Mr Abe the legal means, if perhaps not a mandate, to attempt to amend Japan’s pacifist constitution which had been a long-held ambition of members of certain LDP factions.

Adopted in 1947 when Japan was under US occupation, the constitution has ensured Japan’s so-called Self-Defense Forces have never been deployed in combat although successive LDP administrations have for decades stretched policy well-beyond what the constitution technically permits.  The critical matter is Article 9 of the constitution which prohibits war as a means to settle international disputes and its repeal would be controversial in the region where the conduct of Imperial Japan’s military remains in living memory.  Nor is it universally popular at home, some fearing a government might be tempted by risky military adventurism.  However it’s analyzed, the people of post-war Japan have done very well out of their “pacifist” constitution and even with his double-chamber supermajority, constitutional revision was no simple thing, a change requiring a national referendum and the opinion polls indicated there was no certainty voters would approve what would have been the be the first change to the document which has been the nation’s basic law for some seventy-five years.  It is now the world’s oldest, un-amended constitution.

Under the terms of Article 9, the Japanese people “…forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes".  That would seem to make illegal the waging of offensive war, confirmed by the phrase “The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized” but Article 9 also stipulates "…land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained".  Article 9 needs obviously to be read in conjunction with more recent documents, given the Japan Self-Defense Force (JSDF) consists of: Ground Self-Defense Force (Rikujou Jieitai, GSDF; includes aviation), Maritime Self-Defense Force (Kaijou Jieitai, MSDF; includes naval aviation), Air Self-Defense Force (Koukuu Jieitai, ASDF); Japan Coast Guard (Ministry of Land, Transport, Infrastructure and Tourism) (2021) with an establishment of approximately 240,000 active personnel (145,000 Ground; 45,000 Maritime; 45,000 Air; 4,000 Joint Forces); 14,000 Coast Guard (2021).

JSDF helicopter carrier Hyūga (DDH-181) on exercises with a US carrier strike group.  Listed as an escort ship according to JSDF naming conventions, the two Hyūga-class carriers are the largest largest ships commissioned by the Japanese navy since the Second World War.

The emphasis admittedly is certainly on self-defense because the official overseas deployment in January 2022 stood at 175, all attached to the US base in Djibouti (2021).  Still, most analysts rate the JSDF as the fifth most powerful (in non-nuclear capability) military on the planet so the idea that “…land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained” clearly needs a bit of mental gymnastics to be understood.  Indeed, in the years immediately after Japan regained its sovereignty in 1954, some black-letter law judges in lower courts felt compelled to declare the JSDF unconstitutional but appellate courts found a number of ways to rationalize matters and have always regarded it as a political matter, declining to be involved and in recent years it’s never been tested.  Political it certainly is, the US, authors of Article 9 (in the years before the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) conquered mainland China), soon began to review its position, re-equipping the embryonic forces which would become the JSDF, the constitutional constraints apparently no impediment.  In the years since, the US has more than once encouraged Japan to amend Article 9, the Pentagon not unhappy at the thought of the JSDF’s impressive capabilities being able to augment US forces in overseas deployments.  Those capabilities may be more impressive still, some analysts claiming the country has the capacity to commission and equip existing delivery systems with nuclear warheads within weeks or even days, depending on who is running the numbers.  According to some, lurking deep in (the inevitably secret underground) bunkers, the warheads lie in an almost complete state, awaiting only the placement of the weapons-grade plutonium.  A marvelous conspiracy theory, no evidence has ever been presented other than the circumstantial matters of technical capability and a supposed ability use the capacity of the local nuclear industry for the purpose.  It became an especially interesting theory after the passage of a “Regional Affairs” law in 1999 which permitted Japan automatically to participate as "rear support", were the US to be engaged in armed conflict involving "regional affairs”.  Nobody has ever suggested the South China Sea is anything but a “regional affair”.

Neither Beijing nor Seoul have suggested Tokyo is planning a second attempt at an East-Asia Co-prosperity Sphere but a change meaning Japan can again declare or wage war remains controversial at home and abroad although given how the force has evolved since 1954 and the doubtless ability of Japanese governments to be most expansive in just what “regional” means, the status of Article 9 may be less significant than once it appeared.  As things transpired, the implications of Mr Abe’s rare dual chamber supermajority remained unexplored and he retired from office in 2020 as Japan’s longest-serving prime-minister.

In praise of dieting: Lindsay Lohan before and after.

Genocide

Genocide (pronounced jen-uh-sahyd)

(1) A special class of mass-murder, the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group, usually by a state; the systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of their ethnicity, religion, or nationality.

(2) In casual (and imprecise) use, by extension, the systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on other grounds.

(3) In casual (and imprecise) use, by extension, the systematic suppression of a cultural identity, language etc on the basis of cultural, racial or ethnic origin (often expressed as culturicide or cultural genocide).

1944: The construct is géno + cide.  Géno is from the Ancient Greek γένος (genos) (race; kind) from the primitive Indo-European gene- (give birth, beget (with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups)); it was cognate with the Latin gēns (tribe, clan).  The suffix cide (cīda) is from the Latin caedere (to kill; a killing).  The creation of the word genocide is attributed to Polish-born US lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) who used it in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1943-1944) in reference to the Nazi extermination of the Jews of Europe.  In the English-speaking world, there were the pedants who didn’t approve of the mixing of Latin and Greek, noting the proper formation would be genticide, the construct being the Latin gēns (a race, nation, people; a clan, family (oblique stem: gent-)) +‎ -cide and is a hypothetical Latin etymon of the form genticīdium (from gēns +‎ -cīdium (the suffix denoting “killer”; “cutter”) +‎ -ium (from the Latin -um (neuter singular morphological suffix)).  Genocidal is the adjective.

There was earlier, in a similar sense, the French populicide (variously cited as dating from 1792 or 1799) from French populicide, a construct made necessary by the excesses in the aftermath of the 1789 French Revolution.  This was later adopted in German as Völkermeuchelnden (genocidal) and was known in English by 1893 as the anglicized folk-murdering.  The less rigorous ethnocide is attested from 1970 in French and 1974 in English.

Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959).

The word genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959), a Polish-Jewish lawyer who had immersed himself in study after, as a student, being shocked to discover there existed nothing in international law to prosecute the Ottoman leaders who were complicit in what is now (though not by all) often called the Armenian Genocide (1915-1917) in which over a million are thought to have been killed.  Essentially, Lemkin identified the doctrine of sovereign immunity (the idea that what happens within nation boundaries must be regarded as purely internal matters) as the reason state-sanctioned mass-murder had such a long history and it could be stopped only if this doctrine was subject to some limitations.

In November 1944, Lemkin’s book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe was published.  It was a review of the legal implications of the consequences of the Nazi Germany New Order administrations in the occupied nations and contained the first definitional framework of genocide.  His point was that genocide did not of necessity mean “the immediate destruction of a nation” which was a concept of course familiar from thousands of years of warfare but instead signified “a coordinated plan of different actions aimed at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.”  That formulation was something specific to the circumstances of the holocaust, a process which, for almost a decade, progressed from the Nazi state introducing laws which sought to marginalize and exclude the Jews from Germany’s cultural and economic life to the building of an industrial system intended to murder every Jew in Europe, a process which was organic, a reaction to the circumstances at the time.  The Nazis, upon their assumption of power in 1933 had not even the vaguest plan of extermination, not because Hitler would have thought mass-murder on any scale unacceptable but because it was unimaginable that such a thing was possible.  What was planned was eradication, the forced migration of the Jews from what Germany was and what it was to become, what would now be described (in the literal sense rather than as the euphemism with which the phrase is now associated) as ethnic cleansing.  It was the circumstances of inter-war politics and later war-time realities which meant (1) that mass-emigration firstly within and later beyond Europe was not possible and (2) that under the Nacht und Nebel (night and fog) of war, the mass-murder of millions became possible.  As the word tends now to be used, between 1933 and 1942, a displacement of population became genocide.

Perhaps surprisingly given the perceptions of many, the word genocide did not figure large in the incitements served at the Nuremburg Trial (1946-1946), being mentioned not as one of the four counts but included in Count Three (War Crimes:  "...deliberate and systematic genocide, viz, the extermination of racial and national groups, against the civilian populations of certain occupied territories in order to destroy particular races and classes of people and national, racial or religious groups, particularly Jews, Poles and Gypsies and others."

Judges' bench at the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 1945-1946.

Although the holocaust was the most monstrous matter to be tried at Nuremberg, any reluctance to include genocide as a separate count was understandable. Nothing quite like the International Military Tribunal (IMT) which convened at Nuremberg had ever been assembled and it was acknowledged at the time some of the matters with which the defendants were charged were based in retrospective law; they were being held to account for conduct which, at the time, was not unlawful.  Sensitive to this and the need to frame the incitements as close as possible to acknowledged legal norms, the prosecutors, mostly working lawyers for whom the primary concern was winning the case, tried as much as possible to avoid novelty in the incitement.  As it was, the document grew from a three-odd page draft in June to a final copy of sixty-five pages when served on the defendants.  The word genocide appeared just the once.

Genocide was in 1946 recognized as a crime under international law by the United Nations General Assembly and was codified as a crime in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention.  It expanded Lemkin’s definition, holding that genocide was “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(1) Killing members of the group.

(2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.

(3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.

(4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

(5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Genocide is defined in the same terms in the Rome Statute which created the International Criminal Court (ICC) as well as in the statutes of other international and hybrid jurisdictions.  Over one-hundred and fifty states have ratified the convention but the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has anyway ruled the convention embodies principles that are part of general customary international law so whether or not ratified, in legal theory, all states are bound by the principle that genocide is a crime prohibited under international law.  Many states have also criminalized genocide in their domestic law.  Technically, intent is the most contentious element in any genocide prosecution.  To succeed, intent must be a proven on the part of perpetrators physically to destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; cultural suppression or destruction is not genocide and nor is expulsion from territory. 

After Nuremberg, genocide was long applied only to the destruction of an ethnic group (as conventionally defined) although there has more recently been a debate about whether it applies only if killing of all members of the group is involved or if other means, such as dispersing the group to the point where shared cultural practices or identity are no longer possible also constitutes (an unqualified) genocide; the concepts of cultural genocide, linguistic genocide etc.  The crime has never needed to be absolute.  It has always been understood to include “systematic mass killing”, even if there’s not an intention absolutely to eradicate a group, thereby covering geographically localized events, the actions which in the Balkan wars of the 1990s came to be known as “ethnic cleansing”.  Where there is some purpose other than the actual destruction of a group, such as terrorizing the group or killing the population of a particular place irrespective of group membership, the more precise term is democide, the construct being the Ancient Greek δῆμος (demos) (people) +‎ -cide.  The conduct of the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia in the late 1970s, because it wasn’t inherently or exclusively based on ethnic division, is thus, technically, probably a democide although such was the enormity of the awfulness of what happened that most probably find this a fine and needless distinction.

As many passages in sacred texts (including the Koran and the Bible) indicate, genocide, as a political imperative and military strategy, has a long and cross-cultural history in human civilization.  Although most attention is devoted to the most modern events with the highest death-toll (such as the holocaust, the still disputed matter of the Armenians in 1915 and the events in Rwanda in 1994), in a global sense, the most recent genocide which went closest to succeeding was the genocide of the Moriori, the indigenous people of the Chatham Islands (which lie to the east of New Zealand).  Invaded by the Maori in 1835, the Moriori were subject to mass murder, enslavement and a policy of deliberate cultural repression; the population which had once numbered close to two thousand by the 1870s shrinking to under a hundred.  In a sense that act of genocide did succeed, the last pure-blooded Moriori dying early in the twentieth century.

Fishtail

Fishtail (pronounced fish-teyl)

(1) To swerve or skid from side to side, as the rear end of a car.

(2) In aviation, to slow an airplane by causing its tail to move rapidly from side to side.

(3) Such a maneuver.

(4) A gas burner having two jets crossing each other so as to produce a flame resembling a fish's tail.

(5) A device having a long, narrow slot at the top, placed over a gas jet, as of a Bunsen burner, to give a thin, fanlike flame.

(6) In jewelry design, a setting consisting of four prominent triangular corner prongs to hold the stone.

(7) In dance, a step in ballroom dancing in which the feet are quickly crossed

(8) In fashion design, a dress or skirt with a flowing, scalloped hemline sometimes longer at the back than at the front, flaring usually from about the knee.

(9) In hair-styling, a two-stranded braid.

1400–1450: From the late Middle English, the construct being fish + tail.  Fish the noun (strictly a vertebrate which has gills and fins adapting it for living in the water but the word came to be more widely applied, zoologically) was from the Middle English fisch, from the Old English fisċ (fish), from the Proto-West Germanic fisk, from the Proto-Germanic fiskaz (fish) (source also of the Old Saxon, the Old Frisian & the Old High German fisc, the Old Norse fiskr, the Middle Dutch visc, the Dutch vis, the German Fisch & the Gothic fisks) and related to the West Frisian fisk, the Danish, Norwegian & Swedish fisk, the Irish iasc & the Latin piscis; Root probably either the primitive Indo-European peysḱ- (fish) or pisk (a fish) but at least one etymologist, on phonetic grounds, has suggested it might be a northwestern Europe substratum word.  Fish the verb is from the Old English fiscian (to fish, to catch or try to catch fish), and was cognate with the Old Norse fiska, the Old High German fiscon, the German fischen & the Gothic fiskon, all derived from the noun.  In popular use, since Old English, fish has been used to apply to "any animal that lives entirely in the water," hence shellfish & starfish although, in English there’s an early fifteenth century document which describes fishes bestiales as "water animals other than fishes").  Today, water mammals like dolphins are presumed fish by some.  The plural is fishes, but in a collective sense, or in reference to fish meat as food, the singular fish is commonly used as a plural so, except for the pedants, that battle is lost.  Regarding the heavens, the constellation Pisces is from the late fourteenth century.

The figurative sense of the fish out of water "person in an unfamiliar and awkward situation" is attested from the 1610s, the use extended from circa 1750, usually with a modifier (strange fish, queer fish, cold fish) but from at least 1722 it was used in reference to a person considered desirable to "catch", a sense preserved in the phrase “plenty more fish in the sea”, a form picked up by one dating site.  To drink like a fish is from 1744 and the “fishy story” (an incredible or extravagant narration) was first noted in 1819, an US colloquial form based on the tendency of those who fish to exaggerate the size of “the one that got away”.  Having “other fish to fry” (having other things which demand one’s attention) is from the 1650s.  In optics, the fish-eye lens was patented in 1959.  Fish-and-chips seem first to have been advertised in 1876 and fish-fingers were first sold in 1962.

Tail was from the Middle English tail, tayl & teil (hindmost part of an animal), from the Old English tægl & tægel (tail), from the Proto-Germanic taglaz & taglą (hair, fiber; hair of a tail) (source also of the Old High German zagal, the German Zagel (tail), the dialectal German Zagel (penis), the Old Norse tagl (horse's tail) and the Gothic tagl (hair), from the primitive Indo-European doklos, from a suffixed form of the roots dok & dek- (something long and thin (referring to such things as fringe, lock of hair, horsetail & to tear, fray, shred)), source also of the Old Irish dual (lock of hair) and the Sanskrit dasah (fringe, wick).  It was cognate with the Scots tail (tail), the Dutch teil (tail, haulm, blade), the Low German Tagel (twisted scourge, whip of thongs and ropes; end of a rope), the dialectal Danish tavl (hair of the tail), the Swedish tagel (hair of the tail, horsehair), the Norwegian tagl (tail), the Icelandic tagl (tail, horsetail, ponytail), and the Gothic tagl (hair). In some senses, development appears to have been by a generalization of the usual opposition between head and tail.  The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) suggest the primary sense, at least among the Germanic tongues, seems to have been "hairy tail," or just "tuft of hair," but already in Old English the word was applied to the hairless "tails" of worms, bees etc.  The alternative suggestion is that the notion common to all is that of the "long, slender shape."  It served as an adjective from the 1670s.  A long obsolete Old English word for tail was steort.

The sense in common law of tail (limitation of ownership) which endures mostly in the law of real property began as a legal term in English in the early fourteenth century (late thirteenth in Anglo-French & Anglo-Latin); in almost all cases it was a shortened form of entail.  The verb tail dates from the 1520s and was derived from the noun, the sense originally "attach to the tail", the meaning "move or extend in a way suggestive of a tail" dating from 1781.  The meaning “secretly to follow" is a US colloquial creation from 1907, borrowed from the earlier sense of "follow or drive cattle”.  The saying "tail off” (diminish) was noted in 1854.

The tail of a coin (reverse side; opposite the side with the head, hence “heads or tails”) appears to have been first described that was in the 1680s.  The more predictable "backside of a person, buttocks" is recorded from circa 1300, the slang sense of "pudenda" is from the mid-fourteenth century and as a term to refer to an “act of copulation with a prostitute”, it was first noted in 1846.  From circa 1933 it was applied to mean "woman as sex object" is from 1933.  In printing and typography, tail was the technical term to describe the descending strokes of letters from the 1590s.  As “tails”, the formal dress for men (coat with tails), the first advertisements appeared in 1857.  The tail-race, the part of a mill race below the wheel is from 1776.  The phrase “to turn tail” (take flight) dates from the 1580s and was originally from falconry, later to be adopted by the Admiralty and the army.  The image of the “tail wagging the dog” is from 1907 and was part of the language of political science.

Lindsay Lohan in fishtail dresses.  Herbie: Fully Loaded premiere, El Capitan Theatre, Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles, June 2005; Vanity Fair Oscar Party, Morton’s West Hollywood, Los Angeles, March 2006; Liz & Dick premiere, Beverly Hills Hotel, Los Angeles, November 2012.

A fitted bodycon construction, the distinguishing feature of the fishtail dress is the flowing, scalloped hemline, often longer at the back and tending to flare from around the knee-line.  Because a successful implementation of the style depends most on length and volume, most fishtail dresses are floor length, many better described as gowns although some have tried shorter variations.  The bodice can vary but fitted waists are the most frequently seen.  The design was originally called the fishtail train and the early versions, fist seen in the 1870s, all featured the asymmetric extension at the back and it wasn’t until the turn of the century the flaring lowered from mid-thigh to the knee.  Prior to the Victorian era, trains were not unknown but they were then worn only as evening gowns and were really an addition to existing garments.

Some in the industry refer to the “fishtail” as the “trumpet” or the more charming “mermaid” and there are those who insist on distinguishing between the three, based usually from the point at which the flare begins but the distinction escapes the many who use the terms interchangeably, regarding all as variations on a theme.  However described, the great advantage of the lines is that they create, on a suitable frame, an hourglass figure and one with a range of definition, all determined by the point at which the flare begins and the volume of material chosen for the fishtail; done properly it can render a feminine and flawless silhouette, perhaps the most persuasive reason it’s chosen by so many brides.  Sore however are probably too easily persuaded, the fishtail really not suited to those either too short or too wide.  Successfully to wear a fishtail, it’s not necessary to be truly statuesque or actually thin but beneath a certain height, one starts to look like part of a condiment set and one has to be realistic about what a corset can achieve.  The recommendation is that the style can be worn by those of at least average height and it works best on those who are slim with small or medium size hips.  A good seamstress can adapt things to better suit other shapes but there’s a law of diminishing returns the more one is removed from the ideal; a deep but narrow cut can disguise only so much.

The fishtail braid is a variation of the French braid, both with a smoothly woven appearance, the fishtail dividing the hair into two sections instead of the French three.  The technique essentially is that a small piece of each section is passed over to the other, the process repeated until the braid assumes its shape; in the nineteenth century this was known as the "Grecian braid".  The fishtail braid appears intricate because it's built with small strands but hairdressers say it's a simple, and essentially repetitive, nine-step process.  On great advantage of the fishtail is it lends itself well to a looser braid, one which over a couple of days will tend usually (and gradually) to deconstruct into a deliberately messy look, the attraction is technical as well as aesthetic: the messy fishtail is uniquely suited to act as a framework for hair extensions.

(1) Split the hair into two equal strands

(2) Pick up a small section of hair on the right side of the right strand

(3) Cross the small section over and add it to the left strand

(4) Pick up a small section of hair on the left side of the left strand

(5) Cross the small section over and add it to the right strand

(6) Pick up a small section of hair on the right side of the right strand

(7) Cross the small section over and add it to the left strand

(8) Pick up a small section of hair on the left side of the left strand

(9) Cross the small section over and add it to the right strand

(10) Repeat steps 2-9 until the end is reached.

Intifada

Intifada (pronounced in-tuh-fah-duh)

(1) A historic Arabic word for a (usually violent) political uprising against the ruling or occupying power.

(2) Either of two revolts by Palestinian Arabs to protest Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (sometimes with initial capital letter).

1985: From the Arabic verb Arabic اِنْتِفَاضَة (intifāḍa)(translated variously as “a shaking off”; “a jumping up (in reaction to something)”; “tremor”; “shivering” or “shuddering”) and technically a derivative of fāḍa (to shake off) but is most rendered into English as “uprising”, “resistance” or “rebellion”.  Because of recent history, the best understood translation is now probably "Palestinian revolt".  The "problem of Palestine" is a long-standing thing: In February 1945 the Lebanese minister resident in Paris was in discussion with the British ambassador to France to whom he remarked: "Palestine should be an entirely Arab state".  The ambassador asked him about the status of Jews resident in Palestine under such an arrangement and the minister replied: "...if the British would only close their eyes for a few minutes the Arabs would soon settle the Jewish question."  The variations in spelling include intefadah, intifadah & Intifada.  Intifada & intifadists are nouns; the noun plural is intifadas.  

East of the Jordan, west of the Rock of Gibraltar

Although the concept dates back centuries, historians consider the 1952 left-wing revolt against the Hashemite monarchy in Iraq as the first modern instance even though it was preceded by Colonel Nassar’s revolution in Egypt.  The post-war wind of change which blew through the colonial world affected Africa and the Middle East with revolts in Sudan (1964), Bahrain (1965) and the Spanish Sahara (1970) but it’s the first (1987-1996) and second (2000-2005) intifadas in the occupied Palestinian territories which have defined use of the word.

Although the spasmodic incidents of unrest in the territories in 2014-2015 are sometimes referred to as intifadas none has been of sufficient intensity or duration to be labelled a third intifada.  Nor are other events in the region such as the 1990 Bahrain uprising, the 1991 Iraqi revolt, the 1999-2005 protests in Morocco or the 2005 revolution in the Lebanon remembered as intifadas because, in the West, the word is now almost exclusively associated with the two uprisings in the West Bank and Gaza.  It is only another action in the model of the earlier actions that will become known as the third intifada.  Indeed, the revolutionary wave which began on 18 December 2010 in Tunisia attracted the label Arab Spring and although the odd journalist or academic historian wrote of an intifada (with a couple of British specialists preferring “…a series of intifadas”) the more romantic Arab Spring prevailed.

Rubicon

Rubicon (pronounced roo-be-kon)

(1) A river, some 50 miles (80 km) in length in northern Italy, flowing eastwards into the Adriatic.

(2) A point of no return expressed as crossing the Rubicon (sometimes not capitalized; both considered correct).

(3) A penalty in piquet by which the score of a player who fails to reach 100 points in six hands is added to his opponent's total.

The Latin rubicō was derived from the adjective rubeus (red).  The river's name was from rubicundus (ruddy) and was a reference to the color of the soil on its banks.  Two-thousand odd years later, the mining company Rio Tinto similarly picked up its name from the river where copper was first mined.  Rio Tinto in Spanish translates as "colored river", the color caused by copper deposits leeching into the waters.  The figurative phrase "cross (occasionally "pass") the Rubicon" meaning "take a decisive step" or "past the point of no return" is from the 1620s, a reference to the crossing in 49 BC, in defiance of Roman law, when Julius Caesar (100-44 BC; Roman general and dictator of Rome 49-44 BC) left his province to attack Pompey.

The die it is cast

A kind of Mason-Dixon Line from Antiquity, during the Roman republic, the Rubicon marked the boundary between the Roman province of Cisalpine Gaul and Italy proper, controlled directly by Rome to the south.  Governors of Roman provinces were granted an essentially absolute executive authority in their territory, the governor serving as general of the Roman army within his province.  Roman civil law specified that only elected consuls and praetors could hold such authority within Italy so any provincial governor entering Italy at the head of his troops forfeited his office was therefore no longer legally allowed to command troops.  It was more than an administrative point because exercising military authority without authority was a capital offense and this extended to the soldiers under command.  The point of the law was to prevent generals with political ambitions from marching on Rome with their own army.

2015 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon.

In 49 BC, Julius Caesar led a single legion over the Rubicon from Cisalpine Gaul to Italy to make his way to Rome; in doing this, he deliberately broke the law and made war inevitable.   Writers at the time noted Caesar paused on the northern bank and waited a while, attributing this delay to his contemplation of the enormity of what he was about to do; a general needs to think a bit before committing mutiny.  As described by Suetonius Tranquillus (circa 69–circa 128), as he crossed the Rubicon, Caesar uttered the famous phrase ālea iacta est (the die has been cast).  The phrase crossing the Rubicon has endured to refer to individuals or groups committing irrevocably to a risky or revolutionary course of action.  It means the point of no return, what’s done is done and can’t be undone.

Julius Caesar and the Crossing of the Rubicon (1493-1494) by Francesco Granacci (1469-1543).

An insight into the tastes of those who actually paid for art during the Renaissance, the imagery presented in Granacci's work would have been far removed from how Caesar, a practical military man at the head of a legion, would have done a river crossing into hostile territory.  The painting does though reflect the influences from the art of Antiquity, especially in the representation of armors.  Granacci  trained in Florence, with Michelangelo (1475–1564), in the workshop of Domenico Ghirlandaio (circa 1448-1494), and the two then studied sculpture in the Medici garden at the Casino Mediceo di San Marco under the supervision of Bertoldo di Giovanni (circa 1420-1491).  One of the noted artists of the era and a long-time collaborator of Michelangelo, his best remembered work is probably the high altarpiece for the church of Sant'Apollonia, Florence (1530).

BeiBao Lindsay Lohan spare wheel cover on Jeep Wrangler Rubicon.

Caesar's swift military action forced the lawful consuls and a large part of the Roman Senate to flee Rome in fear, his subsequent victory in the civil war and takeover of the state ensuring punishment for the infraction would never be imposed.

Freckle

Freckle (pronounced frek-uhl)

(1) One of the small, brownish spots on the skin that are caused by a localized deposition of the pigment melanin and that increase in number and darken on exposure to sunlight.

(2) Any small spot or discoloration.

(3) To cover with freckles; produce freckles on.

(4) To become freckled.

(5) In Australia, a small, disk-like sweet consisting of a flattish mound of chocolate covered in hundreds and thousands.

1350-1400: From the Middle English freken & frekel, from the Old Norse (plural) freknur (freckles) (and related to the Old Norse freknōttr (speckled) the Swedish fräkna & fräknar, the Norwegian & Icelandic frekna and the Danish fregne & fregner), a variant of the Old English sprecel from the Proto-Germanic sprekalą (freckle) (and related to the dialectal Norwegian sprekla and the Middle High German spreckel), from the primitive Indo-European sp(h)er(e)g- (to strew, to sprinkle).  It was cognate with the Albanian fruth (measles).  The verb freckle (to cover with spots) dated from the 1610s, the adjective freckled existing since the late fourteen century in the sense of “spotted”.  Freckle is a noun & verb, freckled & freckly are adjective and the verbs (used without object) are freckled & freckling.  The noun plural is freckles and the long obsolete alternative form from the late fourteenth century was frecken.

The similar noun fleck (a mark on skin, a freckle) from the 1590s was presumably from the verb fleck or a related word elsewhere in Germanic, such as the Middle Dutch vlecke or the Old Norse flekkr (a fleck, spot); from circa 1750 meaning extended to "a small particle" and from 1804. "a patch, a spot" of any kind.  The technical term for a freckle is ephelis.  Ephelis is from the Latin ephēlis, from the Ancient Greek ἔφηλῐς (éphēlis) (a freckle), the construct being ἐπ- (ep-) (upon, over, (ie epi-)) +‎ ἥλῐος (hḗlios) (the sun) +‎ -ῐς (-is), the nominal suffix).  The plural is ephelides.  The freckle (ephelis) differs from a lentigo in that a lentigo is a pigmented flat or slightly raised lesion with a clearly defined edge.  Unlike an ephelis (freckle), it does not fade in the winter months and dermatologists define several kinds of lentigo. The name lentigo originally referred to its appearance resembling a small lentil and they’re often now referred to as beauty spots or marks, a la Marilyn Munroe.  To a dermatologist, freckle & ephelis are synonymous but in general vaguely related words include synonyms include blemish, blotch, mole, daisy, dot, lentigo, macula, patch, pepper, pigmentation, pit, pock, pockmark, speck, speckle, sprinkle & stipple.

A freckle is an area of the skin with more pigmentation than the surrounding area, a clustering of concentrated melaninized cells which appear more obvious on those with light skin.  Counter intuitively, the skin which manifests as a freckle doesn’t have any more melanin-producing cells (or melanocytes) than the surrounding skin but instead has melanocytes that overproduce melanin granules (melanosomes), thus darkening the color of the outer cells (keratinocytes).  In this, a freckle differs from a mole in that the latter is an accumulation of melanocytes in a small area.  One who is heavily freckled is said to be "lentiginous", a learned borrowing from Latin lentīginōsus (freckled).

#freckles: Lindsay Lohan out shopping.

Of the six skin types on the Fitzpatrick spectrum, (1) Pale white skin with blue or green eyes & blonde or red hair (always burns, does not tan), (2), Fair skin with blue eyes (burns easily, tans poorly), (3), Darker white skin (tans after initial burn), (4), Light brown skin (burns minimally, tans easily), (5), Brown skin (rarely burns, tans darkly & easily & (6), Dark brown or black skin, freckles appear most frequently and are most apparent upon types (1) & (2) but can exist on anyone.  Like just about everything, the existence of freckles ultimately dependent on genetics and related to a particular gene although geneticists note the presence of at least one of two or more versions of the MC1R gene is usually required for freckles to form, the genetic combination does not guarantee an instance and in their absence, freckles may still exist.  Thus those with the gene combination are much more likely to be freckled while in those without, the instance is rare.  The MC1R gene correlates even more strongly with the red hair which is, impressionistically, so associated with freckles and it is true the two are the most frequently seen combination among the freckled, most red-heads having two variants of the MC1R gene and almost all have one.  Freckling exists even among populations, such as those of East Asia, where there is no natural occurrence of red hair but there, while genetically determined, it’s a different gene from MC1R, intriguingly one found in European populations where any influence on pigmentation is rare.

Lindsay Lohan's fridge magnet.

For centuries, many with freckles have sought their removal and by the nineteenth century, demand meant the process was part of the beauty industry.  Hydrochloric acid (muriatic acid), ammonium, hydrogen peroxide and liquid carbon dioxide could be effective and were certainly safer (if used correctly) than bi-chloride of mercury which definitely worked although the inherent difficulty was that pigment cells exist under the horny cells of the epidermis so results were usually temporary.  Many resorted to sometimes quite drastic skin-peeling and the most popular agent was for centuries lemon juice which bleaches the skin, inducing peeling although those wanting faster results would later use a hydrogen peroxide solution which was applied immediately after the skin had been scrubbed with a strong alkali soap and ammonium water.  If a patient demanded it, dermatologists would sometimes use undiluted carbolic acid to induce a severe inflammation and consequent peeling but there was reluctance in the profession because even when used with the appropriate skill, it could cause scaring and certainly couldn't be used on sensitive skin.  For that reason, many preferred the less effective hydrogen peroxide, salicylic acid or resorcinol; the early experiments with electrolysis proved unsatisfactory.  Mercury compounds such as ammoniated mercury and bi-chloride of mercury (corrosive sublimate) were the basis of many over-the-counter "anti-freckle" compounds, often combined with zinc salts or bismuth sub-nitrate and although marketed as "bleaching creams’", chemically they were really desquamating agents.  Remarkably, although restrictions began to be placed on the use of mercury in cosmetics as early as the 1940s, it wasn't until the late 1970s that in the West it was effectively banned for this purpose.  The preferred method of freckle removal is now laser treatment although the traditional view of dermatologists that freckles are a normal part of the human condition requiring no treatment is now more fashionable and there are many who fancy freckles.

Chocolate Freckles.

Freckles form on the skin because of exposure to sunlight, certain parts of the spectrum activating the melanocytes which stimulate an increase in melanin production, cause them to darken and appear more obvious.  Cases exist in the literature of people who spent their early life in extreme northern latitudes developing freckles only after moving south and thus greatly increasing their exposure to sunlight.  In some cases, these people have presented to physicians seeking treatment for a skin disorder which freckles are not.  Freckles are instead something of a by-product of the migration of early humans, as long as 1.8 million years ago, from Africa, north to the lands around the Mediterranean and later beyond.  It was natural selection which, well over 100,000 years ago, produced the gene variants associated with pigmentation, induced by the advantaged gained by a lighter skin when living in northern latitudes; one which can absorb enough ultra-violet (UV) light to permit the body to sustain a healthy production of vitamin D.