Sunday, October 31, 2004

Homecoming

This was Morehouse & Spelman's Homecoming weekend! It was quite enjoyable. Dat Fuule came down and some other fellow alum attended the tailgatting, game, and alumni partiies. The Morehouse Marching band was quite unimpressive. The game against Albany State wasn't that much better. Both seemed like watching a High School game. But what do you expect. Who won game? Who knows... who cares.

The party that night was adventurous. You guys would be impressed, I was dressed very sharp! Since it was an alumni party, I fit in quite well as everyone else left their ghetto & hoochie gear in the closet. My smile was quickly erased when I felt something wet on back. I turned around quickly, and saw some girl accidently knock a full glass of wine out a guy's hand, onto the back of my clean shirt, down the back of my sharply pressed pants, splattered about my Italian shoes, then glass & wine splattering about the floor. I was wearing about $450 that night, so I think I had a very good reason to be upset. Don't worry, I didn't act a fool. I just tried to clean off as much as I can and tried to salvage the night. The culprits who blessed me with wine never apologized, just stared at me to see what I was going to do. It's OK. I forgave them. I got them back though. When i was staring at them, I mentally pimp slapped the girl for being a clutz, and I body slammed the dude for not being able to hold his liquor.

15 Comments:

At 7:41 PM, Blogger Call 2 Arms said...

There was an episode of Living Single. Regine went out to a club and saw someone wearing the same dress as she had on. She then proceed to accidentally bump into that person and spill her drink on the girl.

Perhaps the guy was jealous of your fit. Even if he wasn't I can't stand drunk folks who can't hold their liquor glass. There oughta be a law.

 
At 11:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can see why you'd be offput by getting a glass of liquid spilt over you, and an apology would be the least one could expect. You did say it yourself though, it was an accident... so to call4arms unless you're able to pass a law against that, these things will continue to happen.

It's good to see bourgeois snobbery knows no boundaries :)

 
At 11:13 AM, Blogger Call 2 Arms said...

My view is that people get drunk on purpose, any act you commit after getting drunk on purpose is not an accident it is reckless. There are laws against reckless behavior. That's why drunk drivers can get reckless manslaughter charges even though they "accidentally" killed the person. There should be a law against drunk clubbers, kick their sorry drunk useless a.. out the club and take their car keys.

 
At 2:15 PM, Blogger Rainmayun said...

how fascist.... a club without drunk ppl won't be in business for very long!

 
At 4:12 PM, Blogger Jez Chill said...

Wouldn't it depend on the type of folks you are trying to attract? If you want thugs & chicken headz, spilled drinks, fights... all expected, club will stay open. But I'm looking for that uppity, bougie spot where folks get G'd up, no ignorant shyt going on. I'm sure many will support that business.

 
At 8:10 PM, Blogger Karen said...

I feel you are mixing up a number of concepts here, in both the legal and moral sense. Certainly, the law prosecutes people for accidental acts that occasion harm whether or not they are under the influence of a drug (in this case alcohol). While drink-driving is a well established law that all drinkers should know about, there are also defensable arguments regarding dimished responsiblity (like it or loathe it) when under the influence of a drug for such crimes as murder; the argument being that while you intended to take the drug, you did not necessarily intend to commit the crime.

In this case, we weren't there, and my biggest question to you is why is the guy being lampooned for having a drink knocked from his hand. According to the story it was an accident and so perhaps the guy wasn't even drinking prior to that, the female took him by surprise and knocked the glass from his hand... And fortuanately, the crime in this case - perpetrated accidently by a female, who may or may not have been drunk - was against a reputedly spiffy suit and a pair of Eruopean shoes (enjoying their American holiday no doubt :) )

And by the way Dionysus needs his due, even the very rational ancient Greeks understood that. Look what happpened to Pentheus...

 
At 8:15 PM, Blogger Karen said...

Being in a rather privilidged postion, and having been invited to numerous high-classed non-thugs & chicken headz occasions... I would have to report, if in any accuracy, that drinks do get spilt even by the sober soda drinkers and even on less reputable suits :)

 
At 10:31 PM, Blogger Call 2 Arms said...

Karen- perhaps you've confused some laws. Dimished capacity could be a defense to murder bringing it down to manslaughter, which is why I said drunk driving would yield a manslaughter charge. I do realize that murder requires intent, which is why I labeled the act as reckless.

I hope that at your lovely high class functions, individuals offer some words of apology after causing anothers clothing to be wet and stained.

Perhaps the girl was only clumsy and not drunk, if she was just clumsy, she should have kept her two left feet at home or remained still. If a person knows they possess balance issues they have a duty to do their best not to cause others harm or inconvience, they should learn the word sorry and use it when appropriate. What could be the guys excuse for not saying sorry? I can't fathom not expressing sorrow at something that is a genuine accident.

Are you implying that Pentheus was rational? or just the ancient Greeks? I've enjoyed Greek myths since I was a child, the stories made a lot of sense, but what makes the people so very rational?

 
At 12:57 AM, Blogger Jez Chill said...

Cat Fight!!!!

 
At 9:07 PM, Blogger Karen said...

Then, in the case of a spilt drink, I would hardly consider the act of drink spillage as being as reckless a deed as the others described. I do realise there are some differences between our legal systems - American law seems to allow for a man to be found not guilty of crime and at the same time civilly culpibable which isn't possible here in Australia. People do get drunk 'on purpose' and sometimes they don't, so you are saying that the degree of recklessness relies on the intend of drunkedness of the drinker? An interesting situation and rather difficult to prove either way I suppose.

An apology would be the least expected, however there are situations where apologies aren't made because of variety of issues which may or maynot be justified. I could imagine situations in your beloved sitcoms that would present a circumstances where it wold be perfectly accepable to not apologise and even be considered an an empowering act of "justice" (considering such programs to be the epitome of contempory philosophy).

You are obviously in a unique position, having not EVER committed a clumsy act in your life... else your ass might never get to leave the house. Otherwise, I believe, an ancient philosophers words might be appropriate: "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

Responding to Greek rationality would of course take a very long time. Suffice it to say that the Greek way of life was based on human beings as being fundamentally rational, and that the story of Pentheus was Euripides' way of warning against rationality being taken too far which can then become it's own form of fundamental irrationality. By modern standards, of course the ancient Greeks can be attacked for "irrationality", and they themselves (due to their rational background) constantly attacked themselves; but this is the tradition that led to our own traditions of the rational exploration and questioning of our own assumptions, which is perhaps one of the chiefest virtues of Western civilisation.

Whether or not an apology was due, I might add, has absolutely nothing to do with the social value placed upon various articles of clothing which in itself appears to a prentention that almost deserves drink spillage.

 
At 9:10 PM, Blogger Karen said...

At 12:57 AM, Jez Chill said...
Cat Fight!!!!

This is just the sort of comment I'd have expected from the "thugs & chicken headz, spilled drinks, fights" crowd that you so detest :)

 
At 10:56 PM, Blogger Call 2 Arms said...

It's unfortunate that you don't reason before you respond. You shouldn't make assumptions and then comment based upon those assumptions. (I noticed you did that in a previous Jez Chill comment) You assume I have not EVER committed a clumsy act. Where did that come from? I'll ignore that baseless statement and let you know I always express my regret if someone is harmed by my actions. I would certainly not look at them expectantly.
As far as my "ass" is concerned- that is a chicken head comment. Were you rolling your neck as you typed it?
Regarding your lengthy explanation on the rational Greeks, I've always found that a person who understands something can explain simply and briefly. Your verbosity leads me to believe that perhaps you exceeded your understanding of the subject.
In your reference to sitcoms, are you suggesting that this incident might have been done intentionally? Are you also suggesting it was deserved because JezChill used his outfit to show off?
If we travel down the slippery slope would your theory make it okay for someone to destroy your property because you spent too much on it? Who defines what is too much? Is it part of your rational western civilized thinking to determine that someone's "pretention" justifies an unkind or accidental act commited upon them or their property? Furthermore, as you seem to be keen on the law, wouldn't the contact with his clothing which was on his body merit more than just a property tort, it then becomes a physical tort.
And your last assumption was that JezChill detest chicken head type crowds. When you read these blogs and comments you seem to bring your own negative energy into what you've read and respond accordingly. Take a relax pill and stop being so serious and annoying.

 
At 12:08 AM, Blogger Jez Chill said...

OK. It's way too clear y'all two are having a contest to see who's nipple's are the longest. It ends here!

 
At 12:25 AM, Blogger Karen said...

I find your abject hypocrisy both alarming and amusing. What you consider to be my 'assumptions' i'm taking from your posts. Please re-read them (all of them) before responding again. Particularly your take on my "verbosity" on an extremely complex subject that I tried to cut short, which you express with your own verbosity (which I have no problem with) is fascinating. You should perhaps read more widely on the subjects and you would discover that many very enlightening words are written with great complexity (mine is written for a child's intellect at best compared to these).

I have addressed apology/regret appropriateness for a 'clumsy act' although I would hardly consider a drink spillage which occasioned no physical harm (heck we don't even know if the clothes were stained) to be a reason to keep "her two left feet at home or remained still".

"Are you also suggesting it was deserved because JezChill used his outfit to show off?"

I was suggesting exactly what I was suggesting, re-read at your leisure. Try to avoid assumptions. I was not making a personal reference. I was also NOT saying that the monetary value should make any difference more or less. That was my exact point. I enjoy the clash of
your apparant socialist values (re: anti-bushism etc) with rabid libertarianism. I won't elucidite any further in case I'm charged with further verbosity...

"Furthermore, as you seem to be keen on the law, wouldn't the contact with his clothing which was on his body merit more than just a property tort, it then becomes a physical tort."

An interesting legal point regarding torts and certainly there is plenty of room for lawyers in our narcisstic culture to play around with. Fantastic. Another sitcom script in that I think...

Just regarding my further 'assumption' I think this might help your further reading:

"At 4:12 PM, Jez Chill said...
Wouldn't it depend on the type of folks you are trying to attract? If you want thugs & chicken headz, spilled drinks, fights... all expected, club will stay open. But I'm looking for that uppity, bougie spot where folks get G'd up, no ignorant shyt going on. I'm sure many will support that business."

I mean really.. he does say it himself.

And to close, you (the party fascist) have the audacity to tell me to take a relax pill and stop being so serious when I'm the one saying to go out and have a drink and, yeah, there may be spillages... If you don't want to risk an accident happening that may not get an appropriate reaction from the perpetrator, then stay home and look at yourself in the mirror while taking all the relax pills you want.

 
At 8:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do you know about marching bands, fool?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home