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.

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 pussybow 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.

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 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, Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova in a glass-walled cage during a court hearing, Moscow, Friday 17 August 2012.

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 he 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.  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.  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” 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 (258 pp; ISBN-13:‎ 978-0297770176).

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.

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.

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 then-president Barack Obama.  In what is presumably 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 lie 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.

Notorious cultural relativist and reprobate, crooked Hillary Clinton in pantsuit.

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 into the wild (pre-dating the worldwideweb (www), dates from 1991.  

jennicam.org (1996-2003)

It wasn’t the internet’s first webcam feed, that seems to have been one in 1991 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 "coffee pot camera".  

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 had been 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 petroleum 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 mean it because their racing development was halted.  Not without one parting shot though, 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.

Beware of imitations.  1961 Ford Galaxie Starliner & 1962 Starlift (brochure).

Ford stayed and cheated, though not yet with engines.  Their streamlined two-door, the 1961 Galaxie Starliner, possessed the aerodynamic qualities needed on the big ovals and was a successful race-car but, after early enthusiasm, sales dropped so it was replaced in 1962 with a more palatable notchback roofline.  That sold well but lacked the slipperiness of the Starliner so performance on the track suffered.  To regain the lost aerodynamic advantage, Ford fabricated a handful of fibreglass detachable hard-tops which essentially transformed a Galaxie convertible back into a Starliner.  Not wishing to incur the expense of actually offering them as an option they knew few would buy, Ford gave the plastic roof the name “Starlift”, allocated a part-number and even mocked-up a brochure for NASCAR to read.  Only three had been built with one race won when NASCAR, not fooled, rapidly issued a ban.  After Ford took one of the black-balled Starlifts, now fitted with a 483 cubic inch (7.9 litre) engine, to the Bonneville salt flats and set a number of international speed records, NASCAR took the opportunity to impose a 7 litre (usually expressed as 427 cid) displacement limit, one rule that was easy to enforce.

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

Ford, which while enjoying great success in 1963 had actually adhered to the engine rules, responded to Chrysler’s newly dominant 426 HEMI 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 (though it's not clear if Chrysler complied even with those though the NHRA welsomed 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.

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.  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.

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 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 (FIA), the world governing body for motor-sport.  Past-masters at compromise, the FIA approved the 427 Cammer but imposed a weight handicap on any car in which it was used.

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 seems to be uncertain, most sources suggest it may have been as high as three-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 timing-chains to stretch would impair reliability and tellingly, Ford never considered the 427 Cammer for a production car.  Production cars, unlike racing engines, attract warranties.  The 427 Cammer attracted a following and, even today, it’s possible to buy all the parts needed to build one.

Dick-pic & Slot-shot

Dick-pic (pronounced dik-pik)

A picture of a human’s penis, if taken and disseminated in a certain context.

Dick became the pet-form name circa 1550 (though some etymologists suspect it had earlier been in use) for Richard via being the rhyming nickname for Rick, Richard's original affectionate diminutive.  Richard being (1) among the commonest English names and (2) exclusively male, it quickly become a synonym for "fellow; lad" and thereby a generally used word to refer to men, individually and collectively; from this connection came the use of dick as slang for that exclusively male body part.  Anything claimed to be an authoritative list of the slang senses must be viewed with scepticism because many forms are very old and the surviving written records are not a comprehensive catalogue of what was often an exclusively oral dialect so the date of origin is uncertain.  The meaning "penis" is attested from 1891 in a dictionary of farmer's slang and was said (predictably) to have been well-known British army slang but, perhaps regionally, the use could date back a century or more.  Most sources note "dick" in this context is thought now less offensive than once it was but for those still disturbed, there's a goodly number of alternatives. 

Pic of a Dick: The honorable Richard Face, former News South Wales Minister of Gaming & Racing (1995-2003).

The vulgar slang nouns dickhead & dickface (a stupid or contemptible person) are attested only from circa 1969 so Richard Face’s parents can't be accused of making what might now be thought an unwise choice.  Interestingly, although presumably not unaware of the linguistic possibilities his name offered, Richard Face was either indifferent or saw some political advantage in brand-name awareness because he chose to remain a Richard despite actually being christened Jack Richard Face.  Whether he ran the usual focus groups to find which worded best (Dick Face or Jack Face) isn't known.  In time, he did live up to his name, in 2004 fined Aus$2500 for lying to the NSW Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC), the magistrate's rationale for not imposing a custodial sentence being (1) he was no longer a police officer and therefore "not directly involved in the administration of justice", (2) had an "exemplary record of public service", (3) had been under stress, was depressed and a heavy drinker at the time of his lie, (4) had shown remorse and pleaded guilty, (5) had "not committed perjury" or "sworn false evidence" and (6) "did not engage in persistently false swearing over sustained periods of time."

Pic was first recorded circa 1885 as a shortening of picture (image, likeness, photo, etc).  Picture was from the Middle English pycture, from the Old French picture, from the Latin pictūra (the art of painting, a painting), from pingō (I paint); a doublet of pictura.  The plural is pics but pix is common in casual & commercial use so the accepted alternative plural of dick-pics would be dick-pix. 

Slot-shot (pronounced slot+shot)

A picture of a human female’s genitalia, if taken and disseminated in a certain context.

Slot in the sense of a "bar or bolt used to fasten a door, window etc" entered Middle English circa 1300 from the Middle Dutch or Middle Low German slot, from the Old High German sloz & German Schloss (bolt, bar, lock, castle), from the Proto-Germanic stem slut- (to close).  The anatomical use to describe the "hollow at the base of the throat above the breastbone" was a late fourteenth century adoption from the Old French esclot (hoof-print of a deer or horse) of uncertain origin, but this sense is probably obsolete except in historic references.  Slot meaning a "a narrow, elongated depression, groove, notch, slit, or aperture, especially a narrow opening for receiving or admitting something" dates from the 1520s, the idea later developed to suggest putting something "where it belongs" but this seems to have been adopted only in the mid-1960s.

Shot (in the sense of the firing of a bow (later applied to firearms etc)) was from pre-900 Middle English, from the Old English sc(e)ot & (ge)sceot and was cognate with the German Schoss & Geschoss.  It was related to the Old Norse skot and the Old High German scoz (missile).  The sense of shot as the "view from a camera" isn't attested until 1958 although it had been used in the cinematic sense since 1922 to describe the process of recording movies (mov(ing picture) + -ies) since 1922 and may thus have enjoyed earlier use.  As used to refer to individual pictures, printed usually on cardboard or special photographic paper, it dates from the late 1930s, the specialized use in law enforcement (as mugshot) began in the US in 1950.

Of context

The dick-pic, the practice of someone (usually male) sending another (usually female) an unsolicited picture of (what is usually their own) penis isn’t a recent invention but the extraordinary latter day spike in the numbers sent is a genuine cultural phenomenon.  It’s socially and technologically deterministic, something made possible by (1) the permissive social attitude of the participating demographic, (2) the ubiquity of their possession of high-definition cameras, (3) the removal from the process of third-parties (especially those who once developed and printed the physical images), (4) the extent of digital connectivity between members of the demographic and (5), the marginal financial cost of the transactions.  It’s an interesting development in that in the West, the history of the depiction of nudity is overwhelmingly female so “pictures of genitalia sent by phone” is a genre in the annals of the nude (technically probably the naked) untypically dominated by the male body.

Generally uncontroversial if either requested or welcomed by a recipient with whom an appropriate level of emotional capital has already been built, dick-pics are notorious for the negative emotions induced in those receiving them as something unsolicited and unwelcome.  So, unless the intention is actually to shock, offend or upset (and among the demographic, that is sometimes a thing) they’re best avoided; good rarely seems to come of them and in some jurisdictions, there are circumstances in which sending a dick-pic can be an offence which can result in the sender being placed for life on a sex-offender’s register; it depends on the context.

Dick-pic detail from Michelangelo Buonarroti’s (1475–1564) David (1501-1504), Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence.

Michelangelo’s David, a six-ton, 17-foot (5.2 m) tall symbol of divine victory over evil is art as a sculpture or in depiction and, despite the visible penis, in the West is usually thought not obscene.  In another context it can be, the erection of some inventive interior decorating required to conceal the offensive bits when a 3D-printed replica was displayed at the 2021 Dubai Expo.  It happens in the West too.  In the nineteenth century the Grand Duke of Tuscany presented Queen Victoria with a full-sized replica of the original which she found so confronting that hurriedly a proportionally accurate fig leaf was crafted, kept in readiness for any royal visits to be hung from two strategically placed hooks.  Even in the twenty-first century, replicas have attracted complaints, the argument being the context of a museum which people choose to visit being different for places where encounters may happen by chance.  Obscenity and offensiveness thus are situational constructs and a dick-pic exchanged between consenting adults is different from discovered in other circumstances; it depends on the context.

The Svakom Siime Sex Selfie Stick.

It’s assumed because there are few reports of women sending pics of their genitalia that the practice is notably less common than the dick-pic and while that’s not an accepted way to draw a definitive conclusion from two data sets, few doubt it’s true.  There are surely many reasons that’s the case and the paucity of examples is probably the reason a standardized female equivalent of “dick-pic” seems not to have evolved.  Suggestions have included “gash-flash”, “trap-snap” and “clamagram” but the most phonetically pleasing are probably “pussy-portrait” and “slot-shot”, the latter a metaphor which references the slot on a machine which is a perfect fit for coins of a certain denomination.  For women who find artistically limiting the idea of a static slot-shot, for US$149, there’s the Svakom Siime Sex Selfie Stick (SSSSS), a USB-rechargeable video-recorder-vibrator which offers, especially for those with basic video-editing skills, the chance to create a clip of an organism from the inside.  Thus the "clit-clip", a bit of digital one-upmanship (that may not be quite the right noun) on any "dick-pic".  

Available in violet, khaki & black, she can be connected to the USB port of a PC or Mac and there's a downloadable app for MacOS, Windows (XP SP2 onwards), iOS and Android.  The camera is a seemingly modest .3 megapixel unit but given the environment in which she'll be operating, that's more than adequate; videos are saved in the mp4 format, the product & software manuals are both downloadable and there's an instructional video on the Svakom website.  Whisper-quiet to ensure privacy, battery-life is said to be around two hours of "continuous use" so one can understand why women might prefer such a device to most men.  The manufacturer refers to the SSSSS as "she" rather than "it" (or even "he"), an interesting assignment of notional gender given the anatomical emulation.

L'Origine du monde (The Origin of the World (1866)), oil on canvas by Gustave Courbet (1819-1877), Musée d'Orsay, Paris.

The recumbent female has, off and on, been a staple of Western art since Antiquity but there was something about French artist’s Gustave Courbet’s L'Origine du monde which was so provocative that publicly, it wasn’t exhibited for 120 years.  A slot-shot writ large, it’s still a work which many institutions avoid, even those sanguine about female nudity (and nakedness) in artistic and other contexts, one columnist noting recently the painting “… if indeed it can be called erotic…” was “…still unsuitable for publication in a paper with a general readership.”  Perhaps it’s because it so differs from the long traditions of the nude, a study more gynecological than artistic or maybe it’s the lush and untended growth of pubic hair, something which seems often to disturb though it may be anatomically accurate: One Russian gynecologist was asked whether the model was a virgin and, after casting his professional eye, answered with an emphatic “Nyet”.  There’s also the objectification, the decapitation of the subject reducing the work somehow to a slot-shottish case-study for the male gaze, a reductionism which has for decades attracted criticism from feminists.  When depictions of L'Origine du monde have appeared in bookshops and galleries, there’s often been controversy, sometimes requiring the summoning of the gendarmerie although the Musée d'Orsay reports the work appears on one of their gift-shop’s best-selling post-cards so there's that.

The head presumptive (publicized in 2013).

Commissioned by Ottoman-Egyptian diplomat Halil Şerif Pasha (Khalil Bey 1831-1879) as an addition to his famous collection of erotica, ever since first it was seen, historians of art have debated among themselves the identity of the model, their short-list with some glee referred to as Les suspects habituels de Gustave (Gustave’s usual suspects).  No conclusion has ever been agreed although the factions promote their theories, one based on an analysis of the joining edges of the respective canvases, an allegedly matching upper-section displayed in 2013.  The Musée d'Orsay issued a statement saying L'Origine du monde is, as it exists, a complete work and not part of a larger whole.  The mystery continues.