Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
EYEWASH Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of bethree5
posted
Do you use the expression “eye-wash”? I’d seen it rarely, & assumed it meant something like “hogwash,” until it was used in a context I didn’t understand the other day, so I finally looked it up. As I understand it, this characterizes a position that sounds good but disguises some personal agenda [implication is petty, just to make them look good]. So the idea would be, you use eye-wash when you’re hungover (or high!) to render your peepers a healthy white? I also found the word in Urban Dictionary, where it’s current slang describing a person who adds nothing of substance to a gathering (perhaps for adornment only?)
 
Posts: 2464 | Location: As they say at 101.5FM: Not New York... Not Philadelphia... PROUD TO BE NEW JERSEY!Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
That's new to me, but I don't get out much.

I did recently encounter an article on white appropriation of black slang, but this doesn't seem to fit that category.

https://www.thefader.com/2015/...1fa774644df1b216280f
 
Posts: 5610 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
not something I have heard


"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
 
Posts: 8752 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
I haven't heard of it, either, but I like it. I like the idea of a word that sounds good but disguises a personal agenda. For example, doesn't it sound good for Donald to worry about Twitter's freedom of speech, when actually he just wants his Twitter account back.
 
Posts: 24483 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of bethree5
posted Hide Post
Agree Kalleh-- so many applications to pols' posturings. Maybe that's why it's starting to show up.
 
Posts: 2464 | Location: As they say at 101.5FM: Not New York... Not Philadelphia... PROUD TO BE NEW JERSEY!Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Speaking of Donald and Twitter, I was so glad (and somewhat surprised) to see that FB upheld their ban on the poor Floridian.
 
Posts: 24483 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
Don’t like to be too political but it is objectively hilarious that his amazing new social media platform is an old style blog that any one of us could knock up in ten minutes using Wordpress or Blogspot. I wonder if his aides have just told him that it’s new and state of the art and he doesn’t know enough to know that it isn’t.


"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
 
Posts: 8752 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I'm also too stupid to know that, Bob! I'm a techno-ignoramus. For that matter, I didn't realize until a few weeks ago that the twitter logo wasn't some sort of religious symbol. I could have sworn that some religions use a bird as a peace sign.

Edit: I just looked it up, and they DO use a dove as a symbol of the holy spirit. No wonder I'm confused! Trump/anything holy - NOT!
 
Posts: 5610 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Geoff:
I'm also too stupid to know that, Bob! I'm a techno-ignoramus. For that matter, I didn't realize until a few weeks ago that the twitter logo wasn't some sort of religious symbol I could have sworn that some religions use a bird as a peace sign.


Really? You should run for office but you may be overqualified


"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
 
Posts: 8752 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Speaking on Twitter, I wonder if its activity has gone down after losing Donald. I know I am on it much less than I was before January 20th.
 
Posts: 24483 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
To get back to this thread's original topic, I might mention that one of the difficulties I find in regards to writing new limericks for The OEDILF is coming up with good topics to write on. When I read the first post here, by initial reaction was, "Aha! I bet we have the 'Visine' definition of eyewash already written on, but not the idiomatic one. Turns out, though, the opposite was true. With a little thought, I was able to cover both with one limerick:

"When your eyeball is soiled, you should clean it.
Does a cleanser exist? I've not seen it.
If you make your eyes wetter,
You're bound to see better."
"That's eyewash." "No, really. I mean it!"

Thanks for the inspiration.
 
Posts: 25Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
What's the difference between eyewash" and "whitewash?" Aren't both terms obfuscative?
 
Posts: 5610 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Great to see you here, CJ. I will have to drop by OEDILF - haven't been there in ages.

Nice limerick.

Geoff, I see your point, though I see a slight difference. "Eyewash" has an opposite meaning. On the one hand, it is something good (like my example above, freedom of speech), but on the other hand it is covering a negative hidden agenda (Donald wants back on Twitter). "Whitewash" means to conceal the negative facts. Very close, though, as you could say that the negative is concealed with "eyewash." Maybe they are the same. Other thoughts?
 
Posts: 24483 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright © 2002-12