Pussy

Pussy (pronounced poos-ee or puhs-ee)

(1) In informal use, a cat, especially a kitten (also as puss & pussy-cat).

(2) In colloquial use (now rare), an affectionate term for a woman or girl, seen as having characteristics associated with kittens such as sweetness or playfulness.

(3) Anything soft and furry; a bloom form; a furry catkin, especially that of the pussy willow

(4) An alternative name for the tipcat (rare).

(5) In slang, a disparaging and offensive term referring to a timid, passive person (applied almost exclusively to men).

(6) In vulgar slang, the vulva (used as an alternative to the many other slang terms which includes beaver, box, cunt, muff, snatch, twat poontang, coochie, punani, quim & slit); considered by some to be the least offensive and probably the one most used by women.

(7) In vulgar slang, sexual intercourse with a woman

(8) In vulgar slang of male homosexuals, the anus of a man who is the passive participant in gay sex (ie “the bottom” as used by “the top”).

(9) In slang, a disparaging and offensive term for women collectively, a form of reductionism which treats women as sex objects.

(10) In medical use (pronounced puhs-ee), something puss-like or something from which puss emerges; containing or resembling pus.

(11) As pussybow (or lavallière, pussycat bow or pussy-bow) a style of neckwear worn with women's blouses and bodices. A bow, tied (usually loosely) at the neck, the name is though derrived from the bows owners sometimes attach to their domestic felines (pussy cats).

1580s: The construct was puss +‎ -y (the diminutive suffix).  It may be from the Dutch poesje, a diminutive of poes (cat; vulva), akin to the Low German pūse (vulva) and the Old English pusa (bag).  Puss was probably from the Middle Low German pūs or pūskatte or the Dutch poes (puss, cat (slang for vulva)), ultimately from a common Germanic word for cat, perhaps ultimately imitative of a sound made to get its attention and therefore similar in origin to the Arabic بسة (bissa).  Some sources declare puss in the sense of "cat" dates from the 1520s but this is merely the earliest known documented source and use probably long predates this instance.  The same or similar sound is a conventional name for a cat in Germanic languages and as far off as Afghanistan; it is the root of the principal word for "cat" in the Rumanian (pisica) and secondary words in the Lithuanian (puž (word used for calling a cat)), the Low German (puus) and the Irish puisin (a kitten).  It was akin to the West Frisian poes, Low the German Puus & Puuskatte, the Danish pus, the dialectal Swedish kattepus & katte-pus and the Norwegian pus.  The form is known in several European, North African and West Asian languages and may be compared with the Romanian pisică and Sardinian pisittu; there is also a Celtic thread, the Irish pus (mouth, lip), from the Middle Irish bus.  The noun plural was pussies.

The French village Pussy sits on the eastern slope of Mont Bellachat above the left bank of the Isère, 5½ miles (9 km) north-west of Moûtiers; it is part of commune of La Léchère in the Savoie département of France.  The name is from Pussius, the owner of the region during the Roman occupation of Gaul.

Pussy was first used as a term of endearment for a girl or woman in the 1580s and (by extension), was soon used disparagingly of effeminate men and) and applied childishly to anything soft and furry.  The use to refer to domestic cats & kittens was exclusive by the 1690s but as early as 1715 it was applied also to rabbits.  The use as slang for "female pudenda" is documented from 1879, but most etymologists don’t doubt it had long been in oral use; perhaps from the Old Norse puss (pocket, pouch) (related to the Low German puse (vulva)) or else a re-purposing of the cat word pussy on the notion of "soft, warm, furry thing.  In this it may be compared with the French le chat, which also has a double meaning, feline and genital.  The earlier uses in English are difficult to distinguish from pussy, “pussie” noted in 1583 being applied affectionately to women.  Pussy-whipped in the sense of "hen-pecked" seems to date from 1956, a gentler form perhaps than the fifteenth century Middle English cunt-beaten (an impotent man).  Despite the feeling among many that the history in vulgar slang is long, etymologists note the rarity (sometimes absence) of pussy in its ribald sense from early dictionaries of slang and the vernacular before the late nineteenth century and the frequent use as a term of endearment in mainstream literature.

Lindsay Lohan in a Michael Kors (b 1959) pussy-bow, polka-dot silk blouse with Valentino sneakers, about to enjoy a frozen hot chocolate, Serendipity 3 restaurant, New York, January 2019.

The pleonastic noun pussy-cat (also pussycat) which describes a domestic cat or kitten dates from 1773 and came soon to be applied to people although there appears to be no written record prior to 1859.  By the early twentieth century it came to be applied to smoothly running engines, the idea being they “purred like a pussycat”.  The noun pussy-willow was by 1835 a popular name of a type of common American shrub or small tree, so-called for the small and very silky catkins produced in early spring; in the 1850s the tree was also referred to as a pussy-cat but use soon faded.  To “play pussy” was World War II Royal Air Force (RAF) slang for "take advantage of cloud cover, jumping from cloud to cloud to shadow a potential victim or avoid recognition."  The medical use, the other (disgusting) adjectival forms of which are pussier & pussiest, dates from circa 1890 although in this sense Middle English had the mid-fifteenth century pushi, a variant of the Latin pus (definite singular pussen or pusset) which in pathology describes the yellowish fluid associated with infected tissue.

Kate Moss in pussy-bow blouse on video link.

As a set-piece event, about the only thing which could have added to the spectacle of the Depp v Heard (John C Depp II v Amber Laura Heard (CL–2019–2911)) suit & counter-suit defamation trial in Fairfax County, Virginia, might have been Ms Heard (b 1986) afforcing her legal team with Rudy Giuliani (b 1944).  Whatever difficulties Mr Giuliani has had with judges, he was good with juries and may have been better at persuading the tribunal assembled in Virginia to ignore the many irrelevant revelations which so tantalized those running commentaries on social media.  As it was, there was something in the trial for just about everyone and one thing claimed by some to have exerted a subliminal influence on judge and jury was what model Kate Moss (b 1974 and appearing as a character witness for Mr Depp (b 1963) which whom she’d enjoyed a predictably well-publicized relationship during the 1990s) wore for her brief testimony.  That she appeared at all was because Ms Heard made the mistake of mentioning her name during testimony, thereby permitting Mr Depp's counsel to call her as a witness.  Looking stunning as expected, her appearance was quickly deconstructed and pronounced as crafted to convey “authority and authenticity”, the key points being (1) a simple hair-style, (2) an “authoritative jacket”, (3) “natural make-up” and (4) a blouse with a pussybow “casually tied” to avoid the appearance of a contrived “court appearance look”.  In other words, she’d been styled to look like a witness appearing in court, not an actor playing a witness appearing in court.  Her three minutes on the stand via a video link should not, according to some lawyers, have been treated by the jury as substantive but what attracted most comment was her choice of a white, spotted pussybow blouse, a feature described in one gushing critique as “…subtly subversive” with an origin as a kind of feminist battledress for those beginning the march through the institutions of male space; a challenge to the “traditional dress codes”.

Lindsay Lohan in black, semi-sheer pussy-bow blouse, Saint Laurent fashion show, Paris Fashion Week, February 2019.  Clearly, Ms Lohan likes polka-dots.

Items recognizably pussybowish had been worn for centuries but the re-purposing to an alleged political statement is traced to the early 1960s when Coco Chanel (1883-1971) added more voluminous bows to silk blouses, the bulk and projection of the fabric off-setting the more severe linens and tweeds with which they were paired.  From there, the pussybow as feminist statement is held to have become overt in 1966 with the debut of Yves Saint Laurent's (1936-2008) Le Smoking design which legitimized the presence of the pantsuit in catalogues and, increasingly, on the catwalk.  The 1966 piece was a revived tuxedo, tailored to the female form, in velvet or wool and notable for being softened with a silk pussybow blouse which was interesting in that had it been combined with the traditional tie worn by men (which wouldn’t then have been anything novel), it would probably have been condemned, not as subversive but as a cliché.  As it was, the pussybow lent sufficient femininity to the redefined pantsuit for it to be just radical enough to be a feminist fashion statement yet not be seen as too threatening.  Despite the claims of some, it wasn’t the first time the pussybow had been paired with trousers but it was certainly the first appearance at a mainstream European show and it proved influential although YSL, so pleased with his models, perhaps didn’t envisage the look on latter-day adopters like crooked Hillary Clinton.

Whether the judge or jury in Virginia were pussybow-whipped into finding substantially for Mr Depp isn’t known but it was certainly interesting Ms Heard lost in the US but won in the UK in 2020 despite both trials being essentially about the same thing: Did Mr Depp subject Ms Heard to violence and other forms of abuse?  Technically, there were differences, Mr Depp in the UK suing not his ex-wife but The Sun, a tabloid newspaper which had published a piece with a headline describing Mr Depp as a "wife beater".  By contrast, the US case revolved around an article in The Washington Post written by Ms Heard, the critical passages being three instances where she alleged she had been a victim of domestic abuse.  Mr Depp sued not the newspaper but Ms Heard, claiming her assertions were untrue and (although he wasn’t explicitly named as the perpetrator), that he’d thus been defamed.  The jury agreed Ms Heard (1) had indeed implied she was the victim of Mr Depp’s violence, (2) that her claims were untrue, (3) that purposefully she was being untruthful and (4) that her conduct satisfied the legal standard of “actual malice”, a critical threshold test in US law (dating from a ruling by the US Supreme Court in 1964 in New York Times v Sullivan) which imposes on public figures the need to prove statements (even if anyway technically defamatory) were made with the knowledge they were false or with reckless disregard of whether they were false or not, before damages may be recovered.

Melania Trump (b 1970, US First Lady 2017-2021 and since 2025) in pussybow blouse, Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention (anti-cyber-bullying) summit at the Health Resources and Service Administration, Rockville, Maryland, 20 August 2018.

More significant still was probably that in London, the trial took place before a high court judge who ruled on both matters of law and fact.  By contrast, in the Fairfax County Courthouse, the judge ruled on matters of law but it was the jury which alone weighed the evidence presented and determined matter of fact.  Thus in London one legally trained judge assessed the evidence which hung on the issue of whether Mr Depp subjected Ms Heard to violent abuse during their brief and clearly turbulent union.  The judge found he had whereas seven lay-people, sitting as a jury concluded he had not.  The two processes are difficult to compare because judges provide written judgments (comprising the ratio decidendi (the reasons for the finding) and sometimes some obiter dictum (other matters of interest not actually critical in reaching the decision)) whereas juries operate in secret and what was discussed in the three days they took to deliberate isn’t known although there are hints in the list of questions they presented to the judge before delivering the verdict.  Those hints however hardly compare with Mr Justice Nichol’s (b 1951) ruling of some 67,000 words.

Sue Lyon (1946-2019) in pussybow blouse in the film Lolita (1962) (left) and with pussy (right) in an image from a pre-release publicity set for the film, shot in 1960 by Bert Stern (1929-2013).

What happened in the two trials was not exactly comparable.  In the US, much was made of several statements earlier made by Ms Heard which, although not directly concerned with the matters being litigated, once proved untrue, were used by Mr Depp’s legal team to undermine Ms Heard’s credibility.  The matter of the US$7 million divorce settlement was for example mentioned by Mr Justice Nichol as an example of Ms Heard’s credibility because she didn't profit from divorcing Mr Depp, citing her announcement that she would donate the settlement to charity.  That she failed to do and perhaps remarkably, it wasn’t something at the time challenged by Mr Depp’s lawyers so the judge accepted it as fact.  Whether, had the judge known the truth, his findings would have be different will never be known.  Of interest too is that as a matter of law, Ms Heard's lawyers were not allowed to tell the jury the result of the UK trial and that in London Mr Depp's lawyers had made it clear they felt it unfair they were compelled to sue the newspaper and not Ms Heard.  In Virginia, as a defendant, Ms Heard became the focus and it did seem much of what was presented to the jury discussed her credibility, not of necessity relating to the substantive matters of the case but also of previous statements and conduct.

When the judgment in London was appealed, that was rejected by two judges of the Court of Appeal which may encourage Ms Heard.  Proceeding with an appeal in the US is a high-risk business and there are financial impediments even to lodging the papers but it is something which will not involve a jury, decided instead on points of law and procedure by judges less likely than jury members to be influenced by films they’ve seen, pussybows or other extraneous material.

Pussy Riot band members Yekaterina Samutsevich (b 1982), Maria Alyokhina (b 1988) and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova (b 1989) in glass-walled dock during a court hearing, Moscow, Friday 17 August, 2012.

My darling Pussy: The letters of Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson, 1913-1941, (1975), edited by the English historian Alan John Percivale (A.J.P.) Taylor (1906–1990).

Even though it was well into the twenty-first century and the nation had long since succumbed to decadence, Boris Johnson (b 1964; UK prime-minister 2019-2022) still raided a few eyebrows when he and his girlfriend moved into No 10 Downing Street, the Tory Party’s few remaining blue stockings outraged because not only were they the first couple to take up official residence there without benefit of marriage but he was at the time still married to his second wife and the mother of four of his children.  History however recalls things had been more debauched, David Lloyd George (1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922) sharing the house during his premiership with not only his wife bit also his mistress, Frances Stevenson (1888–1972), the former usually ensconced upstairs in the prime-ministerial bed while her husband enjoyed his younger companion’s affections a few floors down.

The very modern-sounding arrangement was made possible by Ms Stevenson having been appointed by Lloyd-George as his secretary while he was chancellor of the exchequer, a job offer which was conditional upon her accepting concubinage as part of the job description and it’s never been doubted Lloyd-George was an earlier adopter of KPIs (key performance indicators).  The press were aware of the situation but things were done differently then and not a word of the unusual domestic setup appeared in the papers and surprisingly, even foreign journalists turned a blind eye when Lloyd George attended the Paris Peace Conference (1919) in the company of Ms Stevenson and though the rumor mill among the diplomats would have worked as efficiently then as now, the fiction she was “just his secretary” publicly was maintained by all.  In the lovers’ private conversations, she was his “Pussy” and he her “Tom Cat”, the feline theme taken up in his son’s 1960s biography when he noted of his father: “…with an attractive woman, he was as much to be trusted as a Bengal tiger with a gazelle.”  In 1975, Weidenfeld and Nicolson published My darling Pussy: The letters of Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson, 1913-1941, edited by A.J.P. Taylor.

Ffion Hague, Baroness Hague of Richmond, DBE.

Flawed like us all, Lloyd George was one of the great characters of twentieth century politics and one of the more noted political machinators, his life continuing to attract historians.  In writing The Pain and the Privilege: The Women in Lloyd George's Life (2008) Ffion Hague (b 1968 and the wife of William Hague (b 1961; leader of the British Conservative Party 1997-2001)) was, as a Welsh nationalist, perhaps biased and in much the same way A.J.P. Taylor’s hero-worship of Lord Beaverbrook (Maxwell Aitken, 1879-1964) made his 1972 biography of the press lord so vivid, Lady Hague’s views are not so much between the lines as the lines themselves but this is not a criticism of what is a most readable text.  Whether or not Lady Hague was a feminist was something some once felt compelled to debate although there is little to suggest she much dwelt on the matter but in declining to censure Lloyd George for his exploitive sexual relationships with women, she doubtlessly disappointed some of the sisterhood.  Her take on his many conquests was that things were really symbiotic; the women involved being well-informed individuals who knew what they were doing and ultimately gained from the relationships, brief though often they proved.  Her book was certainly a change from the tradition of treating Lloyd George’s proclivities as cynically and shamelessly transactional but, of course, as has long been known, there may also have been something of the physiologically deterministic in it.  When Albert James (A.J.) Sylvester (1889–1989; principal private secretary (PPS) to Lloyd George, 1923-1945) in 1947 published The Real Lloyd George, drawn from his diaries, the entry which drew most comment an admiring comment about the Welsh Wizard’s penis: “…the biggest I have ever seen.”  Disappointing some, Mr Sylvester didn't burden his readers with the details or extent of the observational history which made his comparison possible but it's presumed he was on some basis an empiricist.

CHAZZ Pussy Chips.

Formed in 2018, CHAZZ Chips is a Lithuanian company with origins in the Trakai district.  The operation describes itself as a “crazy young team” which was inspired to enter the potato chip (crisps in some places) business because of “totally boring and unhealthy snack shelves!”, thus the goal to “bring a variety of bold flavours and offer a healthier alternative to snacks.”  Using potatoes, beetroot and carrots grown on Lithuanian farms, the range of flavours is wide including some the company describes as being “things that most people probably wouldn't even dare to think about!”  That approach (“different, bold, inventive, proactive”) yielded the “first and only Putė and Pimpalo flavored chips in the world” but CHAZZ became most famous for their skandalingi-produktai (scandalous products) such as the (1) the Virginity Set (including Pussy flavor and Dick flavor), (2) the Naughty Valentine Set, a gift box which included the Virginity range as well as ChoClits and Sparkling Willies and (3 & 4) a brace of Libido Booster chips, the two recipes advertised as “for him” and “for her” which seems anachronistic given both could be gifts for him or her depending on their proclivities and some might enjoy both.  There is much science to the development of taste and smell in the food business but CHAZZ unfortunately don’t document the processes involved in creating (and presumably taste-testing) the Pussy and Dick flavours. 

Rococo

Rococo (pronounced ruh-koh-koh or roh-kuh-koh)

(1) A style of architecture and decoration, originating in France about 1720, evolved from Baroque types and distinguished by using different materials for a delicate overall effect and by its ornament of shell-work, foliage etc.

(2) A homophonic musical style of the mid-eighteenth century, marked by a generally superficial elegance and charm and by the use of elaborate ornamentation and stereotyped devices.

(3) In fine art (with initial capital letters) noting or pertaining to a style of painting developed simultaneously with the rococo in architecture and decoration, characterized chiefly by smallness of scale, delicacy of color, freedom of brushwork, and the selection of playful subjects as thematic material.

(4) In sculpture, a corresponding style, chiefly characterized by diminutiveness of Baroque forms and playfulness of theme.

(5) Of or pertaining to, in the manner of, or suggested by rococo architecture, decoration, or music or the general atmosphere and spirit of the rococo.

(6) Ornate or florid in speech, literary style etc.

(7) In the abstract (almost always derogatory), relating to old traditions, which may be seen as foolishly outdated; archaic, old-fashioned, obsolete or backwards.

1797: From the French rococo, a blended word from rocaille (an eighteenth century artistic or architectural style of decoration characterized by elaborate ornamentation with pebbles and shells, typical of grottos and fountains from the Vulgar Latin rocca stone) and barroco, pejoratively to denote a "rock" style which fell from fashion; coined by French Neoclassical painter Pierre-Maurice Quays (1777-1803), a pupil of Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825).  David and Quays, devotees of an austere neoclassical ascetic, were influential in nudging high-culture taste in the dying days of the Ancien Régime back from the frivolity of what they came to describe as the rococo.  Their efforts had little impact on the middle-class fondness for decoration and intricate ornamentation.  The adjective appears to have come into use in English in 1836, a direct borrowing from the French and was being used as a noun by 1840 and the general sense of "tastelessly florid or ornate" is from 1844, extended by abstract to just about anything by the 1860s.

Rococo has long been used as a word of disparagement.  It is a critique of stuff excessively ornate or fussy, things which rely on layers of ornamentation to conceal a poverty of elegance in the basic design.  It’s much associated with pretentiousness but that said, there’s often much to admire in the craftsmanship needed to product work of such intricacy and while the taste might be questionable, in painting, engraving, porcelain, stone-masonry etc, there can be a quaint, decorative charm.

Rococo inside and out.

Rococo fashion: Lindsay Lohan in a Gucci Porcelain Garden print gown (the list price a reputed £4,040) at the launch of the One Family NGO (non-governmental organization), Savoy Hotel, London, June 2017.  Although neither cutting-edge nor retro in the conventional sense of the word, the gown generally was well-received.  Some thought it Rococo and perhaps thematically it could have been done with just a ruffled collar, the pussy bow a detail too many, but the patterning was clever and accentuated the lines.  It was one of those designs where a color change would have been transformative, a rendering in scarlet probably would have been less aesthetically pleasing but would have been eye-catching; the blue was a good choice.

Reprobate

Reprobate (pronounced rep-ruh-beyt)

(1) A depraved, unprincipled, or wicked person; degenerate; morally bankrupt.

(2) In Christianity (from Calvinism), a person rejected by God and beyond hope of salvation and damned to eternal punishment in hell, forever hearing only their own screams of agony, smelling only their own decaying flesh and knowing only the gnashing of their decaying teeth.

(3) Rejected; cast off as worthless (archaic).

1400-1450: From the late Middle English reprobaten (condemn, disapprove vehemently; rejected as worthless) from the Latin reprobātus (disapproved, rejected, condemned), past participle of reprobāre (to reprove or hold in disfavour).  The construct was re- (back, again (here indicating probably "opposite of, reversal of previous condition")) + probare (prove to be worthy).  Used often in the form reprobacioun (rejection), the usual spelling in Church Latin was reprobationem (nominative reprobation (rejection, reprobation), the noun of action from the past-participle stem of reprobāre.  A doublet of reprove.

Notorious dispensationalist and reprobate, crooked Hillary Clinton in pantsuit.

The earliest use in English was as a verb meaning "to disapprove”; the specific religious meanings were adopted in the mid-fifteenth century, the general sense of an unprincipled person emerging decades later.  The sense of "reject, put away, set aside" dates from circa 1600 and the meaning "abandoned in character, morally depraved, unprincipled" is attested from the 1650s.  The specifically religious idea of "one rejected by God, person given over to sin, from the adjectival sense was from the 1540s whereas the generalized "abandoned or unprincipled person" was noted from the 1590s.  The use in theology was more specialised still.  The meaning "the state of being consigned to eternal punishment" was used since the 1530s and from the 1580s, this extended to any "condemnation as worthless or spurious" the more broad sense of "condemnation, censure, act of vehemently disapproving" used since 1727.  Other nouns once used in English include reprobacy (1590s), reprobance (c. 1600), reprobature (1680s, legal); never common, most are now archaic except a technical, historic terms.  Although the word has many synonyms (tramp, scoundrel, wastrel, miscreant, wretch, rascal, cad, rogue, outcast, pariah, wicked, sinful, evil, corrupt) it has always attracted authors who enjoy detailing the reprobacy of the habitually reprobative.

You are a heartless reprobate, sir; a heartless, thankless, good-for-nothing reprobate.  I have done with you.  You are my son; that I cannot help - but you shall have no more part or parcel in me as my child, nor I in you as your father.

Anthony Trollope (1815-1882), Barchester Towers (1857)

The fate of all reprobates.  The Harrowing of Hell (c 1499), by Hieronymus Bosch (1450–1516)

Christians are much concerned with the fate of reprobates, all of whom should be condemned.  Israel Folau (b 1989), a Tongan-born Australian football player (of the country’s three oval-ball codes) however attracted some condemnation himself when he posted on Instagram: “Warning – Drunks, Homosexuals, Adulterers, Liars, Fornicators, Thieves, Atheists, Idolaters. HELL AWAITS YOU. REPENT! ONLY JESUS SAVES”.  There were many who rose to defend the homosexuals but all seemed oblivious to the feelings of the others on his list, the chattering classes content to let drunks, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolaters rot in Hell.  Noted drinker and adulterer Barnaby Joyce (b 1967; thrice (between local difficulties) deputy prime minister of Australia 2016-2022) must have felt put-upon. 

Some have been more expansive on the matter of reprobates than Mr Folau, Loren Rosson on his Busybody page detailing in three tiers, the worst of the sins committed by man, according to Pastor Steven Anderson (b 1981), preacher & founder of the New Independent Fundamentalist Baptist movement and pastor of Faithful Word Baptist Church, Tempe, Arizona.  Anderson first came to national attention in August 2009 after preaching a sermon in which he prayed for the visitation of the Angel of Death to Barack Obama (b 1961; US president 2009-2017).  In what he may suspect is a a conspiracy between the Freemasons and the Jews, Anderson has been denied entry to South Africa, Botswana, Jamaica, Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union, the Republic of Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.

Tier 1: The irrevocably damned. Those beyond redemption, God having rejected them eternally.

(1) Homosexuals/pedophiles.  Note the absent ampersand; in Anderson’s view the two are inseparable, it being impossible to be one without being the other; they are the worst of the worst.  Anderson believes sodomites are not only sinners, but actual reprobates, based on the Book of Romans, God having tired of them, he turned them into sodomising perverts:  “God gave them up to vile affections” (Romans 1:26); “God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (Romans 1:28); “God gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts” (Romans1:24).  This, Anderson argues, is the explanation for homosexuality and surprisingly he’s in agreement with the gay view that “God made me like this” though not “born like this” faction, God making them that way only when they rejected the truth and the light; God “discarding them by turning them into homos.”  As reprobates, sodomites, unlike most sinners (those in tiers 2 and 3), cannot possibly be saved, nor should anyone want to try saving them: “He that is filthy, let him be filthy still” (Revelation 22:11).  The internal logic is perfect, God turned them into sodomites because of their God-hating hearts and it’s all their fault.

(2) Bible translators and scholars.  Anderson condemns these folk as irredeemable reprobates because of the Revelation 22:19, which damns all who tamper with the Word of God, ie altering the original text of the King James Bible (KJV 1611).

Tier 2: Especially wicked sinners:  These offenders are at least capable of being saved, if they accept Christ the Lord as their savior.

(3) Physicians who perform abortions, pro-choice crusaders; women who obtain abortions.  Anderson’s view is that all those involved in the abortion industry, the medical staff, the proponents and the women who procure the operation are simply those who murder the most innocent and vulnerable; they are reprobates. 

(4) Zionists.  Israel is the most ungodly nation on the planet according to Anderson and he calls the formation of the state of Israel in 1948 a diabolical fraud.  The Jews are not God’s chosen people and have not been so for two millennia, replacement theology a basic premise of the New Testament: “If the kingdom of God is taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof, you’ve been replaced! You were the people of God, you were that holy nation of the Old Testament, but now you have been replaced. And today, the physical nation of Israel has been replaced by believers, by a holy nation made up of all believers in Christ, whether they be Jew or Gentile, no matter what the nationality.” According to Anderson, Zionism is more anti-Christ than any other of the major world religions.

(5) Modalists.  Anderson hates and despises modalists more even that the atheists who deny the very holiness of Christ.  Modalism is a heresy that denies the trinity and maintains God is only one person or entity (there are factions) who has three modes (or faces, or masks) which do not exist simultaneously, and that He changes modes by assuming whatever mode circumstances demand.  Thus to modalists, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all the same person or entity, there not being the three in one but just one who shifts modalities as required.  This is of course heresy because Christianity teaches the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinct. There is of course but one God but within God there are three entities which Christians call trinity.

(6) Atheists & evolutionists.  It’s not entirely clear if Anderson regards these two as interchangeable but it’s probably a tiresome technical point, both equally at risk of becoming reprobates who, if they persist in their rejection, God will turn into sodomites.

(7) Litterbugs.  Anderson might find some sympathy for this category.  Anderson hates those who drop litter whether on city streets or in the wilderness and can quote scripture to prove God too disapproves.

(8). Men who piss sitting down.  Anderson identifies this sin as one especially prevalent among Germans and other secular Europeans but any man who allows himself to be pussy-whipped into effeminate behavior in the loo is suspect.  Although among the less well-known passages in the Bible (KJV; 1611), “him that pisseth against the wall” (1 Samuel 25:22; 1 Samuel 25:34; 1 Kings 14:10; 1 Kings 16:11; 1 Kings 21:21; 2 Kings 9:8), it's known to Anderson who cites as a symbol of proper manliness.  However, the original translators may have been a little more nuanced, scholarship suggesting it’s best understood as “able-bodied men”.  Anderson condemns preachers, presidents & potentates who “pee sitting down” and demands leadership of the country be restored to those “who want stand up and piss against the wall like a real man.”  Anderson assures his congregation he’s a "stand and piss man".  For men wishing to score points with God and obtain redemption, this is one of the sins most easily forever renounced.  However, don’t lie, for God knows how you pee.

(9) Physicians and technicians who perform in vitro fertilization; women who undergo the treatment.  Anderson explains those who conceive using IVF instead of waiting naturally to fall pregnant are stealing babies from God, a concept he expresses more graphically in sermons as “ripping babies from the hands of God”.

(10) Male gynecologists.  Anderson says men who do this are disgusting perverts; their medical qualifications are irrelevant

Tier 3:  Sinful Christians. Those who preach or espouse these views could either be false Christians, or simply misguided believers in Christ who need to be educated.

(11) Pre-tribbers.  Anderson is actually on sound historical and theological ground here.  The idea that Christians will, on the day of the rapture, be taken bodily up to heaven before the apocalyptic tribulation is a wholly un–biblical notion unknown before the mid-nineteenth century and barely known before being spread in pop-culture.  It seems to have begun as a way of marketing Christianity as something more attractive.  As the Book of Revelation makes clear, Christians not only expected to suffer the tribulation before they were raptured, that suffering lies at the core of their holy duty.  Pre-tribulation is an un-Christian cop-out.

(12) Dispensationalists. Anderson is also correct that dispensationalist is another nineteenth century heresy and a kind of cultural relativism and while he doesn’t dwell on it, thinks cultural relativists are among the worst reprobates).  Anderson asserts that God never changes, noting “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).  The Old Testament carries the same moral imperatives it always did, and the God of the New Testament aligns completely with it.

(13)  Calvinists, and others who deny free will.  It matters not to Anderson whether one cites a theological or biological basis for rejecting the doctrine of man’s free will; both are wrong.

(14) The lazy box-tickers. It’s not enough just occasionally to walk the neighborhood streets and leave in the mailboxes a flyer about Jesus, at least twice a week a Christian must go about their district, knocking on doors and spreading the word of the Lord.

US screenwriter & film director Paul Schrader (b 1946) really knows how to hurt someone's feelings.

Cammer

Cammer (pronounced kham-ah)

(1) A content-provider who uses a webcam to distribute imagery on some basis (applied especially to attractive young females associated with the early use of webcams).

(2) Slang for an engine produced in small numbers by Ford (US) in the mid-late 1960s.

(3) A general term for any camera operator (now less common because the use in the context of webcam feeds prevailed.

1964: A diminutive of single overhead cam(shaft).  Cam was from the sixteenth century Middle English cam, from the Dutch kam (cog of a wheel (originally, comb)) and was cognate with the English comb, the form preserved in modern Dutch compounds such as kamrad & kamwiel (cog wheel).  The association with webcams began in the mid-1990s, cam in that context a contraction of camera.  The Latin camera (chamber or bedchamber) was from the Ancient Greek καμάρα (kamára) (anything with an arched cover, a covered carriage or boat, a vaulted room or chamber, a vault) of uncertain origin; a doublet of chamber.  Dating from 1708, it was from the Latin that Italian gained camera and Spanish camara, all ultimately from the Ancient Greek kamára and the Old Church Slavonic komora, the Lithuanian kamara and the Old Irish camra all are borrowings from Latin.  Cammer was first used in 1964 as oral shorthand for Ford’s 427 SHOC (single overhead camshaft) V8 engine, the alternative slang form being the phonetic “sock” and it became so associated with the one item that “cammer” has never been applied to other overhead camshaft engines.  The first web-cam (although technically it pre-dated the web) feed dates from 1991 and the first to achieve critical mass (ie “went viral”) was from 1996.  Cammer is a noun; the noun plural is cammers. 

Lindsay Lohan on webcam in Get a Clue (2002) a Disney Channel original movie.

The word came be used for photographic devices as a clipping of the New Latin camera obscura (dark chamber) a black box with a lens that could project images of external objects), contrasted with the (circa 1750) camera lucida (light chamber), which used prisms to produce an image on paper beneath; it was used to generate an image of a distant object.  Camera was thus (circa 1840) adopted in nineteenth century photography because early cameras used a pinhole and a dark room.  The word was extended to filming devices from 1928. Camera-shy (not wishing to be photographed) dates from 1890, the first camera-man (one who operates a camera) recorded in 1908.  The first webcam feed (pre-dating the public availability of the worldwideweb (www) which permitted feeds to the wild), dates from 1991.  

jennicam.org (1996-2003)

xcoffee cam-feed of Trojan Room coffee pot, University of Cambridge, 1991-2001.

It wasn’t the internet’s first webcam feed, that seems to have been one in started in 1991 (before the worldwideweb was available to the public) aimed at a coffee machine in a fourth floor office at the University of Cambridge's Computer Science Department, created by scientists based in a lab the floor below so they would know whether to bother walking up a flight of stairs for a cup, but in 1996, nineteen year-old Jennifer Ringley (b 1976), from a webcam in her university dorm room, broadcast herself live to the whole world, 24/7.  With jennicam.org, she effectively invented "lifecasting" and while the early feed was of grainy, still, monochrome images (updated every fifteen seconds) which, considered from the twenty-first century, sounds not interesting and hardly viral, it was one of the first internet sensations, attracting a regular following of four-million which peaked at almost twice that.  According to internet lore, it more than once crashed the web, seven million being a high proportion of the web users at the time and the routing infrastructure then wasn't as robust as it would become.  Tellingly, Ms Ringley majored in economics which explains the enticingly suggestive title "jennicam" whereas the nerds at Cambridge could think of nothing more catchy than "xcoffee".  

Jenni and pussy.

Although there were more publicized moments, jennicam.org was mostly a slideshow of the mundane: Jennifer studying at her desk, doing the laundry or brushing her teeth but it hinted at the realisation of earlier predictions, Andy Warhol's (1928–1987) fifteen minutes of fame and Marshall McLuhan's (1911-1980) global village.  While not exactly pre-dating reality television, jennicam.org was years before the genre became popular and was closer to real than the packaged products became.

The 1964 Ford 427 SOHC (the Cammer)

1964 426 HEMI in Plymouth race-car.

There was cheating aplenty in 1960s NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) racing but little so blatant as Chrysler in 1964 fielding their 426 HEMI, a pure racing engine, in what was supposed to be a series for mass-produced vehicles.  Whatever the legal position, it was hardly in the spirit of gentlemanly competition though in fairness to Chrysler, they didn't start it, NASCAR for years something of a parallel universe.  In 1957, the Automobile Manufacturers Association (AMA) had announced a ban on auto-racing and the public positions of General Motors (GM), Ford and Chrysler supported the stand, leaving the sport to dealer and privateers although, factory support of these operations was hardly a secret.  NASCAR liked things this way believing the popularity of their “stock cars” relied on the vehicles raced being close to (ie "in stock") what was available for purchase by the general public.  Additionally, they wished to maintain the sport as affordable even for low budget teams and the easy way to do this was restricting the hardware to mass-produced, freely available parts, thereby leveling the playing field.  The façade was maintained until the summer of 1962 when Ford announced it was going to "go racing".  Market research had identified the competitive advantage to be gained from motorsport in an era when, uniquely, the demographic bulge of the baby-boomers, unprecedented prosperity and cheap gas (petrol) would coalesce, Ford understanding that in the decade ahead, a historically huge catchment of 17-25 year old males with high disposable incomes were there to be sold stuff and they’d likely be attracted to fast cars.  Thus began Ford's "Total Performance" era which would see successful participation in just about everything from rally tracks to Formula One, including four memorable victories at the Le Mans twenty-four hour classic.

1963 Chevrolet 427 "Mystery Motor".

The market leader, the more conservative GM, said they would "continue to abide by the spirit of the AMA ban" and, despite the scepticism of some, it seems they meant it because their racing development was halted though not without a parting shot, Chevrolet in 1963 providing their preferred team a 427 cubic inch (7 litre) engine that came to be known as the "mystery motor".  It stunned all with its pace but, being prematurely delivered, lacked reliability and, after a few races, having proved something, GM departed, saving NASCAR the bother of the inevitable squabble over eligibility.

1961 Ford Galaxie Starliner (left) & 1962 Galaxie with “distinguished hardtop styling” (aka “boxtop”, right).

Ford stayed and cheated, though not yet with engines.  The aerodynamic qualities the 1960-1961 Galaxie Starliner possessed by virtue of its gently sloping rear roof-line generated both speed and stability on the NASCAR ovals; that made it a successful race-car but in the showrooms, after some early enthusiasm, sales dropped so it was replaced in 1962 with an implementation of the “formal” style which had been so well-received when used on the Thunderbird.  As the marketing department predicted (or, more correctly, worked out from the results of their focus-group sessions), what they called “distinguished hardtop styling” proved more commercially palatable but while customers may have been seduced, the physics of fluid dynamics didn’t change and the “buffeting” induced at speeds above 140 mph (225 km/h) limited performance, adversely affected straight-line stability (especially when in close proximity to other cars) and increased fuel consumption.  What the distinguished hardtop styling had done was make the Galaxie less competitive on the circuits, the loss of up to 3 mph (5 km/h) in top speed the difference being winning and losing; Ford’s NASCAR teams dubbed the look the “boxtop”, boxes not noted for their fine aerodynamic properties and years later, Chrysler too would discover just how significant at high speed is the slope of the rear glass.

Beware of imitations: Images from Ford's 1962 Galaxie Starlift "brochure" which didn't fool NASCAR.  

Quickly to regain the lost aerodynamic advantage, Ford fabricated a handful of detachable fibreglass hard-tops which could be “bolted on”, essentially transforming a Galaxie convertible back into something as slippery (and even a little lighter) as the previous Starliner.  Having no intention of incurring the expense of designing and engineering them to an acceptable consumer standard (which they knew few anyway would buy) Ford simply gave the hand-made plastic roof the name “Starlift”, allocated a part-number and even mocked-up a brochure for NASCAR to read.  Although on paper it appeared a FADC (factory-authorized dealer accessory) like any other (floor-mats, mud flaps et al), an inspection of the device revealed it was obviously phoney, the rear passenger glass on each side not fitting the sloping C-pillar, demanding the use of a pair of tacked-on plastic fillers to close the gap and it was obvious the thing wasn’t close to being waterproof.  NASCAR outlawed the scam.  However, because five Starlift-equipped Galaxie convertibles had qualified for a postponed event at Atlanta before the ban, they were permitted to run in the re-scheduled event and on the only occasion it was raced in NASCAR competition it won, the 100% win-record ranking it among the sport’s most successful models.

The 483 cid Galaxie Starlift at speed, Bonneville, October 1962. 

Banned from the circuits though it was, Ford did manage to give the Starlift one final fling.  In October 1962, one fitted with an “experimental” version of the FE V8 with a displacement of 483 cubic inches (7.9 litres) was taken to Bonneville where it was used to set a slew of international speed records, clocked at 182.19 mph (293.21 km/h) and averaging 163.91 mph (263.79 km/h) over 500 miles (804.67 km).  Noting the big numbers, NASCAR took the opportunity to impose a 7 litre (usually expressed as 427 cid) displacement limit, one rule that was easy to enforce.

Galaxies with "sports hardtop" roofline, Firecracker 400, Daytona International Speedway, July, 1963.

Hobbled by the distinguished hardtop styling, Ford managed to win only another four races in a season dominated by Pontiac but the engineers solved the problem in early 1963 with the “sports hardtop” roofline which pleased both the pubic buying cars and the teams racing them.  Remarkably, the revision to the roofline, in conjunction with increasing engine displacement from 406 cubic inches (6.6 litres) to 427 (strictly speaking it was 426 (7.0)) created one of the era’s more improbably successful race cars which enjoyed great success in saloon car events in England, Europe, South Africa, Australia & New Zealand until the lighter and more nimble Mustang became available.

1964 427 SOHC (Cammer).  Note the famously long timing chain.

Ford, which while enjoying great success in 1963 had actually adhered to the engine rules, responded to Chrysler’s 426 HEMI (which had dominated the 1964 season) within a remarkable ninety days with a derivation of their 427 FE which replaced the pushrod activated valves with two single overhead camshafts (SOHC), permitting higher engine speeds and more efficient combustion, thereby gaining perhaps a hundred horsepower.  The engine, officially called the 427 SOHC, was nicknamed the Cammer (although some, noting the acronym, called it the "sock").  The problem for NASCAR was that neither the 426 HEMI nor the 427 Cammer was in a car which could be bought from a showroom.

1964 Chrysler 426 HEMI DOHC prototype.

Not best pleased, NASCAR was mulling over things when Chrysler responded to the 427 Cammer by demonstrating a mock-up of their 426 HEMI with a pair of heads using double overhead camshafts (DOHC) and four valves per cylinder instead of the usual two.  Fearing an escalating war of technology taking their series in an undesired direction, in October 1964, NASCAR cracked down and issued new rules for the 1965 season.  Although retaining the 427 cubic inch limit, engines now had to be mass-production units available for general sale and thus no hemi heads or overhead camshafts would be allowed  The rule change had been provoked also by an increasing death toll as speeds rose beyond what was safe for both tyres and on circuits.

1965 Ford 427 FE.

That meant Ford’s 427 FE was eligible but Chrysler’s 426 HEMI was not and a disgruntled Chrysler withdrew from NASCAR, shifting their efforts to drag-racing where the rules of the NHRA (National Hot Rod Association) were more accommodating (while it's not clear if Chrysler complied even with those, the NHRA welcomed them anyway).  In 1965, Chrysler seemed happy with the 426 HEMI's impact over the quarter-mile and Ford seemed happy being able to win just about every NASCAR race.  Not happy was NASCAR which was watching crowds and revenue drop as the audience proved less interested in a sport where results had become predictable, their hope the rule changes would entice GM back to motor-sport not realised.  NASCAR audiences were a tribal lot and to attract the "Ford people", "GM people" and "Chrysler people", competitive cars from each needed to be fielded.

1966 Chrysler 426 Street HEMI.

It was 1967 before everybody was, (more or less) happy again.  Chrysler, which claimed it had intended always to make the 426 HEMI available to the general public and that the 1964 race programme had been just part of engineering development, for 1966 introduced the 426 Street HEMI, a detuned version of the race engine, a general-production option for just about any car in which it would fit (almost the 11,000-odd made between 1966-1971 went into two door coupés but there were also some 200 convertibles and in the first year of availability a a reputed five were installed in Dodge Coronet four-door sedans (the industry legend being two were special orders for the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) although Chrysler did decline one request for a Street HEMI station wagon).  NASCAR responded quickly, announcing the HEMI now complied with the rules and was welcome, with a few restrictions, to compete.  Ford assumed NASCAR needed them more than they needed NASCAR and announced they would be using the 427 Cammer in 1966.  NASCAR was now trapped by its own precedents, conceding only that Ford could follow Chrysler’s earlier path, saying the 427 Cammer would be regarded “…as an experimental engine in 1966… (to) …be reviewed for eligibility in 1967."   In other words, eligibility depended still on mass-production (ie "mass" as defined by NASCAR's minimum annual production threshold of 500 and "production" meaning available to the general public in showrooms).

427 SOHC installed in a replica (by ERA) of a 1966 Shelby American AC Cobra 427 S/C (Semi-Competition).

Ford, although unable easily to create a 427 Street Cammer, recalled the Starlift trick and announced the SOHC was now available as a production item.  That was, at best, economical with the truth, given not only could nobody walk into a showroom and buy a car with a 427 Cammer under the hood but it seemed at the time not always possible to purchase one even in a crate.  Realising the futility of kicking the can down the road, NASCAR decided to kick it to the umpire, hoping all sides would abide by the decision, referring the matter to the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (the FIA; the International Automobile Federation), the world governing body for motor-sport, at that point not yet the byword for dopiness it would become.  Past-masters at compromise, the FIA approved the 427 Cammer but imposed a weight handicap on any car in which it was used.

Cutaway Ford FE V8s: the 427 (left) and 427 SOHC (right).

Ford called that not just unfair but also unsafe, citing concerns at the additional stress the heavier vehicles would place of suspension and tyres, adding their cars couldn’t “… be competitive under these new rules."  Accordingly, Ford threatened to withdraw from NASCAR in 1966 but found the public’s sympathy was with Chrysler which had done the right thing and made their engine available to the public.  Ford sulked for a while but returned to the fray in late 1966, the math of NASCAR’s new rules having choked the HEMI a little so the 427 FE remained competitive, resulting in the curious anomaly of the 426 Street HEMI running dual four-barrel induction while on the circuits only a single carburetor was permitted.  Mollified, Ford returned in force for 1967 and the arrangement, which ushered in one of the classic eras of motorsport, proved durable, the 427 FE used until 1969 and the 426 HEMI until the big block engines were finally banned after the 1974 season, three years after the last 426 Street HEMI was sold.

Ford 427 Cammer in 1967 Fairlane.

While the 426 HEMI DOHC never ran (the display unit's valve train was electrically activated), the 427 Cammer was produced for sale in crates and although the number made remains uncertain, most sources suggest it was probably as high as several-hundred and it enjoyed decades of success in various forms of racing including off-shore power boats.  Whether it would ever have been reliable in production cars is questionable.  Such was Ford’s haste to produce the thing there wasn’t time to develop a proper gear drive system for the various shafts so it ended up with a timing-chain over six feet (1.8m) long.  For competition use, where engines are re-built with some frequency, that proved satisfactory but road cars are expected to run for thousands of miles between services and there was concern the tendency of chains to stretch would impair reliability and tellingly, Ford never considered the 427 Cammer for a production car, a breed which, unlike racing engines, attract warranties.  Even some sixty years on there’s still a mystique surrounding the cammer and if one can’t find an original for sale (one sold at auction in 2021 for US$60,000), from a variety of manufacturers it’s possible still to buy all the bits and pieces needed to build one (in a quirk of timing and the overlap of simultaneous product development, some of the very early SOHCs used the top oiler block although most were side oilers and the third party reproductions over the years have always been the latter).  Although the production numbers have never been verified (which seems strange given Ford's accounting system recorded everything which emerged with a serial number), what all agree is the horsepower of a stock SOHC was somewhere over 600, the number bouncing around a bit because there were versions with single and dual four barrel carburetors, different camshaft profiles and variations in the cylinder heads and while it never made it into a production car, it remains the ultimate FE.