(n.)
Terminology related to the BDSM lifestyle. A "shrimper" is a person who derives sexual satisfaction from sucking toes.
Terminology related to the BDSM lifestyle. A "shrimper" is a person who derives sexual satisfaction from sucking toes.
by Siegfried Zaga June 07, 2005
Get the shrimpermug. Term used to describe people who don't particularly care who gets them off, so long as it happens as often as possible.
by Siegfried Zaga May 26, 2005
Get the bisexualmug. (adj.)
To describe something as "fabulous" in a way that mocks homosexuals.
The term is used often in Bret Easton Ellis' novel "Glamorama."
To describe something as "fabulous" in a way that mocks homosexuals.
The term is used often in Bret Easton Ellis' novel "Glamorama."
by Siegfried Zaga May 24, 2005
Get the Fagulousmug. by Siegfried Zaga May 23, 2005
Get the buttonsmug. War cry declared right before collision with an object. Similar to "cowabunga," "oh shit" and that George of the Jungle yell which-I'll-be-damned-if-I-can-spell-out.
The term was made famous on the internet by a photoshopped Spider-Man comic strip in which our hero mistakes an overturned truck for his long-term arch-nemesis and proceeds to assault the truck by rope-swinging straight into the side of it.
The term was made famous on the internet by a photoshopped Spider-Man comic strip in which our hero mistakes an overturned truck for his long-term arch-nemesis and proceeds to assault the truck by rope-swinging straight into the side of it.
Spidey: "My doctor's retarded. I don't have a brain tumor...say, if it isn't my old arch-nemesis, a truck!"
Narr: SPIDER-MAN GIVES CHASE!
(Spider-Man swings down toward the truck)
Spidey: "Fappo!"
(Spider-Man collides with truck)
Narr: SPIDER-MAN GIVES CHASE!
(Spider-Man swings down toward the truck)
Spidey: "Fappo!"
(Spider-Man collides with truck)
by Siegfried Zaga May 22, 2005
Get the fappomug. Of or relating to a "kill or be killed" mentality pertaining to the inherent fear that residents of crime-prone areas have of each other. This fear-thy-neighbor mentality causes individuals to feel they have no way of protecting themselves from crime or violence, except by killing anybody who threatens or harasses them.
Such mentality is usually the result of living in violent, crime-prone (typically inner-city) areas for long periods of time and/or watching too much television (no joke).
"Urban survival syndrome" has been used as a legal defense sporadically throughout American history but was first invoked in Texas (go figure) in 1993 by a black youth named Daimion Osby. Osby had been shooting craps with a group of people and had collected a hefty wad of cash ($400). Osby then violated the etiquette rules of street craps by trying to abandon the game without giving the other players a chance to win some of their money back.
Marcus Brooks, who had suffered considerable losses during the game, threatened to "get" Osby as he walked off. With the help of cousin Willie, M. Brooks attempted to shake down Osby during a basketball game, resulting in a fight that was ultimately broken up by police. Osby was again confronted by the duo while in his car sitting at a traffic light; the Brooks brandished a shotgun and tried to force Osby to pull over, but he fled. After a final uneventful confrontation in a public park, Osby purchased a .38 caliber handgun and started carrying it with him for protection.
While conversing with a woman on the curb one evening, Osby was accosted by the Brooks duo for one final time. The Brooks drove their car onto the curb, hitting Osby. They then got out of the car and began assaulting him using their fists. At this point Osby drew his gun and killed one of the Brooks cousins with a single shot to the head. As the surviving cousin attempted to retreat to the car to retrieve the handgun that was stored inside, Osby aerated his assailant's skull with a single shot to the head as well.
At his first trial his attorneys claimed the double homicide was an act of self-defense in the name of urban survival--if he hadn't shot them, they would have returned to threaten, harass or kill him later. Amusingly enough Osby's attorneys tried to convince the jury that anybody having to fight off black men would probably react similarly in fearing for their life; given the statistics, there's a lot of reason to believe black men are scary. But even more amusingly, the defense succeeded (to some degree).
There was no verdict; the jury was hung because one of two black jurors on the panel believed Osby had acted in self-defense. Prosecutors vowed a retrial.
The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution provides for protection against retrials; unless the defendant appeals a guilty verdict, he cannot be tried for the same crime twice (except being tried in both civil and criminal court). However, a hung jury does not prove conclusive--he was neither convicted nor acquitted, so he was fair game for a retrial.
The retrial was held and the "urban survival" plea was not repeated; Osby was found guilty and received an automatic life sentence, as prosecutors had decided before the second trial to not seek the death penalty.
Such mentality is usually the result of living in violent, crime-prone (typically inner-city) areas for long periods of time and/or watching too much television (no joke).
"Urban survival syndrome" has been used as a legal defense sporadically throughout American history but was first invoked in Texas (go figure) in 1993 by a black youth named Daimion Osby. Osby had been shooting craps with a group of people and had collected a hefty wad of cash ($400). Osby then violated the etiquette rules of street craps by trying to abandon the game without giving the other players a chance to win some of their money back.
Marcus Brooks, who had suffered considerable losses during the game, threatened to "get" Osby as he walked off. With the help of cousin Willie, M. Brooks attempted to shake down Osby during a basketball game, resulting in a fight that was ultimately broken up by police. Osby was again confronted by the duo while in his car sitting at a traffic light; the Brooks brandished a shotgun and tried to force Osby to pull over, but he fled. After a final uneventful confrontation in a public park, Osby purchased a .38 caliber handgun and started carrying it with him for protection.
While conversing with a woman on the curb one evening, Osby was accosted by the Brooks duo for one final time. The Brooks drove their car onto the curb, hitting Osby. They then got out of the car and began assaulting him using their fists. At this point Osby drew his gun and killed one of the Brooks cousins with a single shot to the head. As the surviving cousin attempted to retreat to the car to retrieve the handgun that was stored inside, Osby aerated his assailant's skull with a single shot to the head as well.
At his first trial his attorneys claimed the double homicide was an act of self-defense in the name of urban survival--if he hadn't shot them, they would have returned to threaten, harass or kill him later. Amusingly enough Osby's attorneys tried to convince the jury that anybody having to fight off black men would probably react similarly in fearing for their life; given the statistics, there's a lot of reason to believe black men are scary. But even more amusingly, the defense succeeded (to some degree).
There was no verdict; the jury was hung because one of two black jurors on the panel believed Osby had acted in self-defense. Prosecutors vowed a retrial.
The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution provides for protection against retrials; unless the defendant appeals a guilty verdict, he cannot be tried for the same crime twice (except being tried in both civil and criminal court). However, a hung jury does not prove conclusive--he was neither convicted nor acquitted, so he was fair game for a retrial.
The retrial was held and the "urban survival" plea was not repeated; Osby was found guilty and received an automatic life sentence, as prosecutors had decided before the second trial to not seek the death penalty.
by Siegfried Zaga July 15, 2008
Get the urban survival syndromemug. (n.)
Another word for extortion/blackmail, or the obtaining of a good or service through means of force, threats/intimidation, or abuse of power.
Another word for extortion/blackmail, or the obtaining of a good or service through means of force, threats/intimidation, or abuse of power.
Shakedown by force, threats and intimidation:
The Mafia would usually give small business owners "the shakedown," in which if the owner did not pay protection money (or "tribute") to the Mafia Don, their store would mysteriously be firebombed by vandals (read: Mafia thugs) who presumably would have been deterred if the owner had opted to partake in the Mafia protection plan.
Shakedown by abuse of power:
City councils are notorious for shakedowns by abuse of power. Suppose you bought a house for an inflated price of $50000, before property values started declining. The state wants to build a highway, and decides that your house is in the way. You don't want to move, but they offer you $25000 to pack up and leave. If you don't leave, the council will employ the eminent domain laws, which will simply *force* you to leave and *force* you to accept a measly compensation of $15000 (fair market value) for your property. While such practice is actually legal, it's still a shakedown, because if you don't agree to their initial unreasonable demands, you're going to be even worse off as a consequence--just like debating whether you want to drown in your own piss, or someone else's.
The Mafia would usually give small business owners "the shakedown," in which if the owner did not pay protection money (or "tribute") to the Mafia Don, their store would mysteriously be firebombed by vandals (read: Mafia thugs) who presumably would have been deterred if the owner had opted to partake in the Mafia protection plan.
Shakedown by abuse of power:
City councils are notorious for shakedowns by abuse of power. Suppose you bought a house for an inflated price of $50000, before property values started declining. The state wants to build a highway, and decides that your house is in the way. You don't want to move, but they offer you $25000 to pack up and leave. If you don't leave, the council will employ the eminent domain laws, which will simply *force* you to leave and *force* you to accept a measly compensation of $15000 (fair market value) for your property. While such practice is actually legal, it's still a shakedown, because if you don't agree to their initial unreasonable demands, you're going to be even worse off as a consequence--just like debating whether you want to drown in your own piss, or someone else's.
by Siegfried Zaga June 02, 2005
Get the shakedownmug.