offensive napoleon

maa32 · 17 Oct 2002, 17:42 · from urth-v0210.mbox · original

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: maa32 <maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu>
Subject: (urth) offensive napoleon
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:42:59 -0700
Message-ID: <urth-v0210-1874 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0210/1874.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Maybe I'm more juvenile than the rest of you, but I always assumed Napoleon=20
was trying to foster an erection all of the time because of his=20
well-documented impotence.

"In the 19th century, more complex considerations arose. Another royal peni=
s,=20
this one attached to the Emperor Napoleon, defied the best doctors of his=20
time. This was because its smallness and unwillingness to stand up when=20
required were the results of an endocrinal problem beyond the reach of 19th=20
century medicine. Later in the century Dr Freud revolutionised thinking abo=
ut=20
sex with his insistence that mental factors were the dominant influence."

Whatever.  I don't think this is particularly worth discussing, but that is=20
the interpretation I always had (and I think it might be guaranteed to offe=
nd=20
a few people, too).

Marc

--=20

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net