Here's a baffling turn of phrase: tit-for-tat. As used in yesterday's NY Times, "...two Iranian diplomats in a tit-for-tat response..." Is this akin to something like toys-for-tots? If so, who are these alleged tats and why are they getting all the tits? Are tats really the tit-deprived population of our society, warranting the need for the donation of tits?
Or is tit-for-tat closer in meaning to something like a money-for-guns program? If so, then where can I go to exchange my tats so I can get more tits? I would like to make good on this truly beneficial program.
And when we talk about tat, are we actually just abbreviating the skin mural better known as a tattoo? If that's the case, then I more readily understand a tat-for-tit, as in one made for a tit like perhaps a bullseye tattoo or maybe a one-eyed smiley, but tit-for-tat is a little more baffling. Is it that there are certain kinds of tits that are better suited for tattoos? Do the colorful employees of Miami ink look at a pair of chesticles and just declare, "Now that's a tit-for-tat!" and immediately endow the set with an ink masterpiece?
...In other news, it's been recently discovered that daytime drinking heavily degrades the quality of blog-writing...
No comments:
Post a Comment