As promised in Part One, I am providing you with the basics of a well-thought-out nomenclature system for the Cookies in my world. My young coworkers and I have taken the liberty of classifying each Cookie according to his physical characteristics. Disclaimer #2: Any and all accusations of our being shallow/ superficial/ discriminatory will not be well-received, as the cookie-based terminology is used purely for entertainment purposes only.
Cookie (formerly "Warm Cookie"): any young man who is strikingly handsome (and seemingly friendly... I can not stress it enough: an unpleasant demeanor does not a desirable Cookie make).
Fig Newtie (formerly "Fig Newton"): any young man who is slightly attractive and seemingly friendly. For example: a Nabisco Fig Newton is a cookie that I personally wouldn't turn down (because unfortunately, I've never met a cookie I didn't like), but I would probably never choose when there are other cookies available.
Pecan Sandy: a handsome older man. Pecan sandies are tasty cookies, yes, but generally more popular with the older generations.
The Bakery: the specific work location of a group of Cookies; any place where a group of Cookies gathers on a regular basis.
The following is a list of the specific Cookies we encounter on a daily (and semi-daily) basis. (Note: cookie-related nomenclature is given when applicable; however, many names are chosen simply because the appearance is not directly equatable to any baked good)
Green Hat (formerly known as Gray Hat): wears a green hat every day; once wore a hat of gray, now wears a green hat. Creative. I know.
Beardie Boy (formerly known as Bearded Cookie): young man with a beard; very shy.
The Mohican (formerly known as The Last of the Mohicans): strikingly handsome with dark hair and dark skin with very angular features-- similar in appearance to someone of Native American ancestry... which brings me to Disclaimer #3: This terminology is under no circumstances to be construed as racially discriminatory.
Fun Size Cookie: somewhat petite and very handsome.
Tattoos: slender, attractive, with tattoos along his arms (specifically the triceps). [Note: missing since approx. 08/01/10]
Tattoos #2: tattoos along his arms and up the back of his neck; occasionally wears glasses with black plastic frames.
Hot Tall Guy: dark skin and hair, slightly older; possibly of managerial ranking.
Hot Tall Guy #2: similar in appearance to Hot Tall Guy, with lighter skin; managerial status unknown.
Charlie Brownie: shorter in stature, with a round face similar to that of popular cartoon character Charlie Brown; constant smile.
Dream Boy: "Pecan Sandy" status (see above); shorter in stature. [Note: missing since approx. 11/08/10]
Prepackaged Cookie: very square in stature, reminiscent of the squares of cookie dough found in a Nestle Tollhouse prepackaged cookie dough bar.
Baker's Dozen: an unexpected new cookie.
Rocky Road: dark hair and slightly darker skin; similar in appearance to a young Sylvester Stallone.
Enable Your Cookies: noticeably enjoys sending/ receiving text messages (hence the technological name); similar in appearance to Robert Pattinson. [Note: missing since approx. 12/02/10]
Galleta: a handsome young man of Hispanic heritage (galleta: Spanish for "cookie").
Thin Mint (AKA "Hi-hello-howareyou"): tall and slender; friendly, enjoys using several greetings at once; appears to be approx. 14 years younger than he actually is.
The Situation: dark hair (heavily gelled), wears a gold chain, walks with an unmistakable stride, similar in appearance and demeanor to Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino of Jersey Shore. [Note: I am not a Jersey Shore fan.]
Ice Cream Cookie: employed at a local frozen custard shop.
Biscotti: employed at a local coffee shop.
Christmas Cookie: employed at a local Christmas tree farm.
Posts
I wonder if one of these cookies read your blog... would he recognize himself?
ReplyDeleteHaha, it's possible that he may recognize himself. Unfortunately, I've gotten to a first-name basis with only 2 of the aforementioned Cookies, and it's very unlikely that any Cookie is reading this blog. If said Cookie did recognize himself, it wouldn't be so terrible-- we only have pleasant things to say about them.
ReplyDeleteA) You're a very talented writer.
ReplyDeleteB) While I don't frequent SB3 every day, I am there enough that I hope I have earned "Cookie" status. I tried to guess from the descriptions above and believe I have been identified, but it's impossible to say for sure given the ambiguity.
C) What would you have guessed the odds to be that one of the Cookies would stumble across your blog? One percent? One in a million?
D) It turns out that your friends aren't the only quality "FB stalkers". :-)
E) Have fun on recess! Happy Holidays and best of luck with "Green Hat" - you seem excited.
Dear Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteA) Thank you for the compliment.
B) May I ask which "Cookie" you believe you are?
C) I would never have guessed that a Cookie would stumble across the blog. I'm not upset, just intrigued.
D) Are you saying you found me on Facebook?
E) Thank you for the good wishes.
F) Your message is awfully cryptic.
A) The compliment is well-deserved. Your blogs are entertaining to read, free of spelling errors, littered with correct homonyms (a rare ability to be certain), and written with the skill of a grammarian.
ReplyDeleteB) That would be far too bold right now. What if I was simply a "Fig Newtie", or worse, not a "Cookie" at all?
C) Life is full of surprises, and we all deserve a little intrigue.
D) Your identity may have been confirmed on Facebook. Isn't it a magnificent investigative tool?
E) You seem enamored with "Green Hat", so the well wishes seemed to be in order.
F) Cryptic indeed. Were you really expecting full disclosure from someone that is posting anonymously? However, I do find it a bit ironic that a person who defines the male eye candy in her workplace with ambiguous cookie descriptions finds my message cryptic.
G) Hopefully it doesn't take you another five days to respond. You wouldn't want the readers of your blog to feel unimportant. That's no way to build an audience. :-)
Dear Lanie,
ReplyDeleteThis is weird. No bueno petite schmetterling.
Dear Mr. Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteA) Thank you again. I enjoy well-written pieces. Though I may be jumping to conclusions (and I'm also running the risk of this being construed as a generalization), your impeccable grammar implies that you may not be a construction worker.
B) You apparently know exactly who I am, and I have (at most) a 1/20 idea of your identity. It doesn't seem fair.
C) Yes, I enjoy intrigue-- but I enjoy a closed case every so often as well.
D) I'm unsure as to how my identity could possibly have been confirmed via Facebook. Your stalking abilities are impressive.
E) I think "enamored" is a bit strong.
F) Touche. I guess I'm equally cryptic.
G) 6-hour response time. My track record is improving. Every reader is important, and I should tell you that your anonymous comments have roused a great deal of interest from my family and friends. If that was your plan, you have succeeded.
H) What color has SB3 recently been painted?
ReplyDeleteA) Not only a generalization, but what could be construed as a slight to an entire trade - and without your normal disclaimer.
ReplyDeleteB) I know your name, which allowed me to read your blog, nothing more, so saying I know exactly who you are is a bit of an overstatement. Of course, saying you might know 1/20 about me is also an overstatement, but life isn't fair and never will be.
C) Indeed, everyone desires resolution.
D) Really? No, really? It's quite easy to find virtually anyone on Facebook. Is it perhaps unfair that when your friend Facebook "stalks" it's impressive, but when another does the same, it is "weird"? But alas, those are the types of double standards one must conform to. Similarly, if I was to label the attractive women at work in the manner you did their counterparts, it would be construed as sexist or chauvinistic.
E) My apologies for the strong adjective. I was simply describing what I detected in your posts.
F) The word "cryptic" feels like it has a negative connotation to it, but I never viewed your blog in such a manner. If you looked at my responses negatively, I apologize.
G) Yes, your response time improved dramatically, but that will no longer be an issue. Sadly, this will be my last correspondence. The fact that your family and friends have become so engaged in my comments means that this has gone beyond what it was ever intended to be. That is especially true if all of them echo the sentiments of your friend that tried to speak three languages in the brief comment above. No good? Why so? It is somehow bad for a person to compliment one's writing ability on a public blog? If one reads carefully, he/she will observe that I never praised anything about you outside of the quality of your written creations. Ultimately, it is clear there is some level of discomfort, so "anonymous" is signing off now. I am sorry that you were unable to find the closure you desired, but wish you nothing but the best.
A) Not only a generalization, but what could be construed as a slight to an entire trade - and without your normal disclaimer.
ReplyDeleteB) I know your name, which allowed me to read your blog, nothing more, so saying I know exactly who you are is a bit of an overstatement. Of course, saying you might know 1/20 about me is also an overstatement, but life isn't fair and never will be.
C) Indeed, everyone desires resolution.
D) Really? No, really? It's quite easy to find virtually anyone on Facebook. Is it perhaps unfair that when your friend Facebook "stalks" it's impressive, but when another does the same, it is "weird"? But alas, those are the types of double standards one must conform to. Similarly, if I was to label the attractive women at work in the manner you did their counterparts, it would be construed as sexist or chauvinistic.
E) My apologies for the strong adjective. I was simply describing what I detected in your posts.
F) The word "cryptic" feels like it has a negative connotation to it, but I never viewed your blog in such a manner. If you looked at my responses negatively, I apologize.
G) Yes, your response time improved dramatically, but that will no longer be an issue. Sadly, this will be my last correspondence. The fact that your family and friends have become so engaged in my comments means that this has gone beyond what it was ever intended to be. That is especially true if all of them echo the sentiments of your friend that tried to speak three languages in the brief comment above. No good? Why so? It is somehow bad for a person to compliment one's writing ability on a public blog? If one reads carefully, he/she will observe that I never praised anything about you outside of the quality of your written creations. Ultimately, it is clear there is some level of discomfort, so "anonymous" is signing off now. I am sorry that you were unable to find the closure you desired, but wish you nothing but the best.
Hey "Anonymous" - I say GROW A PAIR and just post with who you are. Of course we are all intrigued with the commenting on yes, a public blog. If you really, REALLY, knew Melanie, then you would understand that she surrounds herself with intelligent, protective, strong, independent women. We all care for her and her safety. Your "stalking" is in fact just that, stalking. And it is to be construed as uncomfortable by those of us who are older and do not appreciate the ANONYMOUS invasion of privacy. Period. Get my drift? Just own up to your antics already and truly be done with it, and sign off, for good. Thank you.
ReplyDelete