"An appraisal on Dec. 31 about David Levine, the caricaturist for The New York Review of Books who died on Dec. 29, may have left the incorrect impression that the Russian writer Aleksandr Pushkin, the subject of one of Mr. Levine's drawings, was homosexual. The description of Pushkin as "a gay man" was a reference to his demeanor, not his sexual orientation."
How Gay Nineties.
This is actually much more detrimental to my fantasy, which was contingent on his being dark and brooding, not his sexual orientation. It disturbs me greatly.
Whose complaint spurred this?
Pushkin-lovers.Pushkinites.I liked this very much when I first read it, not only for the deets on Levine, but the delicious stuff in the middle (the mention of the amazing Madame du Deffand, the digression into the matter of photography in art, and so on).
Pity the fey* adjective in an interesting and thought-provoking obit, whose readers must now suffer the edited version.
*M-W, 1-a
Poo, now I'm all paranoid that this will come off as offensive, rather than a defense of language against stupidity. Did not mean!
If I'm wrong, school me, please.
HO XOMO
Nobody got this? Seriously?
Cyrillic! Cute!
Please also note that in a Craig's List ad dated 12/31/2009, the description of Mr. Balk's enormous endowment was a reference to his physique and not his financial circumstance.
the new york times version of "no homo"
Somewhat convoluted and passive-aggressive, so yes.
I often confuse people when declining to hit a joint with 'I'm straight.'