Word: expressions
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...prefer a man to be glumly uncommunicative than to spill his guts at the drop of a hat. That (one recalls with a shudder) was the goal of the so-called men's movement of Robert Bly et al. in the 1980s and early '90s, which exhorted men to express their feelings. If anyone doubts the perils of men expressing feelings, he should watch The McLaughlin Group or Cable Monica...
...push for men to express their feelings presumes that we have feelings, and we do have a few, but they remain submerged, and the airing of them often violates their authenticity. We are, as a gender, as dull as we seem. Contrary to the claptrap of the men's movement, men gain power through not talking. "The strength of the genie," said poet Richard Wilbur, "comes from being in a bottle." I'm no biologist, but my guess is that the male human animal was programmed for silence. One can make us talk counter to our genetic makeup...
...within a product through the conscious use of "earthy vernacular" imagery. To explain his concept of inherent drama, Burnett repeatedly cited a 1945 print campaign for the American Meat Institute. After careful consideration, he related, "we convinced ourselves that the image of meat should be a virile one, best expressed in red meat." At the time it was highly unusual, even distasteful, to portray uncooked meat in advertisements. Enthusiastically breaking the code, Burnett produced full-page ads depicting thick chops of raw red meat against a bright-red background. "Red against red was a trick," he explained...
...Noah and I can only get so many votes, and it's the people we have working on our team, talking us up, that are getting us the votes. You need to have people who believe in your ideas, who believe in what you're saying and can express that to others," Redmond said...
...number of questions raised by randomization, particularly in light of race: Has randomization created more diversity among students? Did randomization break up important existing communities without replacing them in some way? These seemed to be very debatable questions that offered room for many viewpoints. Yet panelists did not express a wide variety of opinions. Instead, they staked out a safe "common ground" of discussion that they all could fit into, and conducted an essentially "closed" dialogue...