|  | 
 A few days ago I bought something new: on-line content. I now have an 
account with Slate, a "magazine" I've 
been checking almost daily since it started up over a year ago. Although 
it's owned by Microsoft (who Lord knows can afford it), as of last Monday 
they're charging admission... I was planning on trying to just forget about 
the thing (because I think Salon 
is better anyway) but after reading this Katz 
article 
I decided to pay up, to support the concept. Plus they're sending me an 
atlas CD-ROM, a useful item since I currently have no such reference - I 
left my out-of-date 1984 "National Geographic" atlas back east 
(and that thing's to big to lug around anyway). 
 Speaking of novelty, I saw something yesterday morning in the locker room 
which was new to me - a warrant officer, suiting up in his dress uniform, 
had garters. I've seen in old illustrations mens' garters from days 
of yore - unlike the rigs for women, familiar to all of us who know our way 
around pornography; rather than a belt around the waist with little straps 
leading down to the stocking-tops the male variant was one per leg: a 
band fitting around the upper calf held the straps which held the socks 
up. I heard recently <1> 
that these went out of fashion due to the stylish Duke of Windsor, the 
abdicated King 
Edward VIII who left the throne for Mrs. Simpson. He stopped 
wearing the things, going for a slack-sock look the fashionable set of the 
1930's eagerly embraced, and which the rest of the male world 
eventually adapted; rather like President Kennedy and 
hats. <2> 
Anyway, the only garters I've ever worn were these ridiculous components of 
the Boy Scouts' summer uniform, minimally adjustable elastic bands strapped 
around the upper calf with the very long socks folded over them, exposing 
only these silly green tassels attached to the garter, correctly oriented 
to the outside of the leg. (Although I'm not sure, I doubt seriously that 
today's Scout wears these.) But this officer's garters were merely separate 
straps which he attached to his sock-tops, then to his shirt tails. Not a 
bad system, if you find the thought of a glimpse of that naked area below 
the trouser-cuff intolerable, should you cross your legs while sitting. 
(Doug C, my lost now but close friend during Jr & Sr High, thought that 
sight disgusting.) 
 N and his wife Q are now reading these entries; no longer is my toil 
secret, the cat's out of the bag. He rather likes being identified merely 
by an initial, like the characters in "Men In Black" - but wonders why he 
didn't get another, more similar to his real name. I had to explain that I 
couldn't use "I" or "A" due to possible confusion with the same 
words-of-one-character in the English language, and that not everybody 
got their real initials anyway. A different method for him to relate to 
his identity initial might be our young nephew M, who sometimes calls me 
Uncle You and him Uncle No (or maybe that's Uncle Know). |