fc
Offline
Melbourne, Australia

I'm not sure where this saying comes from, though Wiki tells me the UK. But it makes no damn sense. Even if taken as originally intended ("You can't keep your cake and eat it"/"You can't eat your cake and keep it") it's completely illogical, or at least impractical. Why would you want to KEEP a cake, but not eat it? Isn't the point of having a cake to eat it? Maybe not the whole thing, you're probably going to share it around or whatever. But really, what are you going to do with a stale/off cake?

Seriously, proverbs, you can do better...

Derris-Kharlan
Offline
Melbourne, Australia

I guess some cakes just kinda look too good to eat?

Last edited by Derris-Kharlan (January 30, 2014 11:41 am)

E-dub
Offline
Oklahoma City, OK, USA

It basically means that you can only eat a cake once because once you've eaten it it will be gone.  Still kinda silly, but it's supposed to be a metaphor.  Supposedly, it's more poetic than saying, "if you spend your money on junk today, you won't have it to pay your phone bill next week."

DataJanitor
Online
Portland, OR

It's like putting food on credit. The bill comes a month later, but you already shat it out weeks ago.

2PLAYER
Offline

i want to know what evil son of a bitch would give someone a slice of cake and not allow them to eat it.

kineticturtle
Offline
MJP

When you're gluten free, this happens all the time.

2PLAYER
Offline

sounds like you're...a gluten for punishment.




i'll see myself out.

Dwight Davis
Offline
The Wisconsin

The one that confuses me is "the straw that broke the camel's back". I mean, chances are that a load that heavy would've slid off the camel's back to the side. It at least would've broken the camel's legs. And, if the load on that camel is so heavy that it has 4 broken legs, motionless on the ground, waiting for a straw to break its back, then, there are several problems. The load is useless on the back of the camel as there is no way that the camel can move it. If there is that little difference between the breaking of the camel's back, then who cares about the straw, the camel probably would've broken it himself. If there is that much weight on the camel's back, chances are that his ribs and internal organs are crushed, and he is already dead, meaning that the straw is just superfluous. That one is just stupid in my opinion.
Also, supporting camel cruelty is wrong.

Phil Harmonic
Offline
The future

um. obviously the cake is a lie

fc
Offline
Melbourne, Australia
DataJanitor wrote:

It's like putting food on credit. The bill comes a month later, but you already shat it out weeks ago.

Best analogy.

fc
Offline
Melbourne, Australia
Edmund Snyder wrote:

It basically means that you can only eat a cake once because once you've eaten it it will be gone.  Still kinda silly, but it's supposed to be a metaphor.  Supposedly, it's more poetic than saying, "if you spend your money on junk today, you won't have it to pay your phone bill next week."

It's a terrible metaphor really. The whole purpose of cake is to eat (or, as Nathan points out, to decorate). I imagine an ornamental cake would start to smell bad after a couple of months.

Poetics are fine, but some grounding in reality would be nice, like your junk analogy.

Phil Harmonic
Offline
The future

anyways.. it's all right here..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Having_your_cake_and_eating_it_too  it does actually make sense.

fc
Offline
Melbourne, Australia

It makes no sense. I did read that (see OP).

Phil Harmonic
Offline
The future

dunno. it makes sense to me.. you cant eat your slice of cake twice. er well, maybe you can, but it wont look anything like cake.

fc
Offline
Melbourne, Australia

Of course you can't. The analogy falls apart with the implication that the purpose of cake is indeed to NOT eat it. What the hell else am I going to do with a cake?

Phil Harmonic
Offline
The future

well. you might give it to someone else you greedy bastard wink but you cant give it to someone else and eat it.