I think only adults tend to find these "disturbingly violent." As Petra (#1) correctly says, many of these were secret messages in rhyming slang (many nonsensical rock / rap lyrics today are full of similar phrases that have hidden meaning only to those "in-the-know"). To kids, they're just fun little songs. By the time they're old enough to start analyzing them, they're already too old to find them all that enjoyable.

And some were indeed cautionary tales about various hazards, or satirical ditties about dysfunctional people or political scandals.

"Yankee Doodle," a song known to all U.S.-born children, is actually a very raunchy song, originally sung by British soldiers to mock the Continental army and its leaders. Keeping that in mind, its "hidden meanings" become pretty obvious to adults. But apparently enough people in early America figured out that the kids who parroted this coarse soldiers' song had absolutely no idea what it meant, that it was not suppressed. It didn't take long before adults came to think of it as a children's song, and to this day there are people who grow old without ever giving "Yankee Doodle" a second thought.

"Prioritize." Not a word, folks! "Set priorities" is probably what these incoherent morons are trying to say.

"Over-qualified." Used only by those who are under-qualified.

"Package," when used to mean "the way something is presented / presents itself" or "what is included," especially when applied to a person. "She's got the whole package."

"Market" when used as a verb. Verbing weirds language.

"Rubric" as it is now used in schools. The same institutions that put limits on vocabulary-building so that the average student can barely hold an intelligent conversation, have the gall to use the word "rubric"? It turns out it means... instructions. Steps for completing the assignment. I find words to be rather delightful, but there's no need to fix what ain't broke. Replacing "instructions" with "rubric" does not impress me.

The legality of it all is certainly questionable. However, the first thing that crossed my mind upon reading this was the Child Catcher from the movie "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang"...

Another bit of "Psycho" trivia: Although the slow pull-back from Janet Leigh's open eye after her murder creeped out many viewers, at least one proto-nerd (a doctor) wrote a letter to Hitchcock in which he pointed out a problem with her pupils. Pupils dilate at death, and hers were shrunken to pinpoints under the bright studio lights. The doctor suggested that in the future Hitch apply belladonna drops to the eyes of his "victims," to dilate the pupils. The director took his advice, probably most noticably in "Frenzy."

Two reasons for the chocolate syrup "blood": One, although MPAA ratings didn't exist yet, and Technicolor red "blood" had appeared in movies before (An example of a kid-appropriate film to do this would be the delightful 1940 "Thief of Bagdad," which contains a brief shot of a guy with his cheek slashed open in a sword fight), the context and quantity of blood would have pushed "Psycho" onto the Censorship Board's black-list had it been red. Two, some B/W film stocks don't translate certain colors well. Fake blood thinned in water into a pale pink, nearly invisible on film; chocolate syrup provided better contrast.

Despite the recent scandal of manufactured Chinese "fossils," China is still yielding plenty of legitimate fossils. Modern turtles and tortoises may be descended from chelonians, fossils of which have been found that are at least 200 million years old. Interestingly enough, like sharks, these reptiles have remained virtually unchanged all that time.

A 100-million-year-old turtle fossil is not a new discovery, although it may be the first or oldest fossil found of a particular species of turtle, or the best-preserved specimen. As for its head, it could have been bitten off, but more likely it was pulled inside, since the rest of the body is intact. Nice fossil!

... And starring Wednesday the 9th as Alice the Maid.

Wow, arguments break out easily here. My two bits re: spanking... If done judiciously, with clear understanding on the part of the child that he or she knowingly broke a rule and that this is the punishment, it hardly constitutes abuse. When children know that Mom & Dad mean business, they are more likely to listen and obey. Balance this with opportunities for fun outings and treats (which can be witheld by the parents as non-corporeal punishment if necessary), and a healthy parent-child relationship ensues, with the children causing a minimum of grief. The kids, knowing that they might lose their trip to the mall on Thursday if they misbehave, will have a vested interest (albeit rooted in hedonism) in pleasing their parents.

And now on to swaddling. In Medieval and Renaissance England, so I've learned, babies were often swaddled and kept wrapped up all week long! Each Sunday the wrap would be changed. This of course resulted in horrible diaper rash that probably left lasting scars. I imagine that the occasional bare-butt one sees in period movies probably looks much smoother than the real thing (Same goes for those straight teeth).

This just in: Scientists warn of a circle-circle-dot-dot-resistant strain of cooties that has devastated much of the area by the jungle gym.

A supercomputer in a chapel...

Programmer to omniscient supercomputer: Is there a God?

Supercomputer: There is now.

Oh --- by the by, I believe Badiuk's Polish comment translates into English as "...but, being a native European, I know [that Europe's a continent]; most Americans [probably don't know this because they're foreigners]." If that's correct, it's a fair enough admission; we all are more likely to know more about our own region than about places that are distant.
I admit that my Polish is about as good as a Polish two-year-old's at this point, so I apologize if I'm too far off the mark. (I also don't know how well Badiuk phrased his comment; it might be well-written, or it might be the Polish equivalent of the cryptic "well I dont but you know what I mean" that some kid sent me after hacking into my ex-fiancee's e-mail account: something that defies translation and is a baffling non-sequitur even to native speakers of the language. [The e-mail I had sent to my fiancee at the time simply asked her when she expected to get off work that day, and that I looked forward to seeing her that evening. She had checked her e-mail on a library computer and forgotten to log off, so a kid who got on next read her e-mails and sent prank replies.])

Re: Badiuk - I've got a very nice "pen-pal" who may be a neighbor of yours (lives in Opole, in the Silesia), who when she first wrote to me took care to specify that Poland is located between Germany and Russia (I'm not sure if Belarus & the Ukraike had become independent states yet; I'll have to look that up). Apparently, United Statesian geographic ignorance is "common knowledge" in Poland! I thanked her for the tip, but assured her that I didn't let my schooling interfere with my education; I know quite a bit about geography, and don't mind learning more.

Although I teach, it's hard for me to tell how many United Statesians are profoundly geographically ignorant like this woman on the TV show (a program I've seen but do not care for, as much of it seems staged. Also people tend to forget things they haven't studied recently; this has little to do with how "smart" someone is). I don't doubt that some of the ignorance can be blamed on the schools --- but schools usually fail only if the community forces them to. If the parents openly discourage "book-learnin'" or waste time constantly trying to fine-tune the educational system at the expense of letting teachers do their jobs, then of course most kids won't learn. The kids will either get the message that education is worthless, or will sit back and enjoy the drama of watching their officious parents interfere with the teachers. Kids aren't stupid. But if certain values (like learning and minding your own business) aren't a part of their education, the rest of it's not going to do them much good, and ultimately they'll become stupid. A closed brain is a stupid one, and brain-closing is what most kids learn in that kind of environment.
Anyway, I've seen elementary-school kids who can tell you right away where certain countries are in relation to each other, as well as high-school kids who ask dumb questions when they see a globe like "Is there people in Australia? Then what keeps them from fallin' off?" People tend to learn things that interest them... but I've never been avidly interested in geography, and yet I apparently know more than many people my age. I attribute this to the fact that my parents got me a globe and a two-sided puzzle that was a map of the USA on one side (each state was a piece) and a world map on the other when I was little, and made sure that I did my homework instead of making up excuses for me or letting me slack off. Yeah, I hated doing schoolwork (I still hate working for no pay) --- but I LEARNED.
And my "pen-pal" and I have kept up a delightful and intelligent correspondence for years. I've been studying Polish in what little spare time I have, and we hope to meet soon.

Actually, while the ad does reflect a generally patronizing attitude toward women, it does not depict common practice. It was actually meant to be humorous and possibly even a little "naughty" (hence the conspiratorial smile on the woman's face).

Yes, there have always been abusive spouses. But from what I've seen, a loutish husband is more likely to slap his wife around or punch her. Spanking was a punishment reserved for children (and that is what's being referred to here). If a man spanked his wife... more likely that was a "kinky" bit of sex play, not discussed in mixed company at the time. (If you were aware of this little bit of "deviant" behavior, it made the ad spicier; otherwise, the sexual connotation went right past you.) There was more of this raciness in women's magazines than a lot of people nowadays realize.

We tend to have a rather distorted view of the 1950s, shaped by old TV shows and "stodgy" older relatives. Admittedly, today's TV shows and movies tend to be more explicit than those of the '50s, which were restricted by heavy censorship rules. However, a look at (usually print) media aimed specifically at adults reveals that there was already a lucrative market for sexually-oriented products and fiction directed at both men and women. The TV soap opera began in the 1950s as a means of entertaining hausfraus with stories of illicit affairs. Ladies' magazines included similar stories, but with greater detail. Their purpose was to entertain, and perhaps to provide some sort of gratification so these stuck-at-home-all-day ladies would be in fact LESS likely to cheat on their spouses (but still be "in the mood" when he got home). A perusal of magazines in the checkout lane at the local supermarket shows us that not much has changed except the language and amount of visible skin.

As for whether it's funny or not, that's pretty subjective. Societal attitudes have changed enough that fewer people nowadays would find this as funny as it once was. More people today either misconstrue it, or need it explained, or "get" it but just don't personally find it funny (that would be me). My parents were both in their late teens when this ad was run. It's possible that, had they been a little older, they would have found it funny --- back then. Remember, just because someone was alive in the 1950s doesn't mean they're stuck there (and not everyone in the 1950s had the same attitude either); both supported the Women's Lib movement, and found corporal punishment vastly inferior to constructive communication. By the 1970s, they probably would have found it dated and rather embarrassing.

Pol x's lengthy German word must be a new record! That's pretty long even for German.
One of my sisters invented several words when she was very young, one of which was so original and apropos-sounding that it really SHOULD become part of the English language. Here's the context of its creation:
My sister told Mom she wanted to dress herself, so Mom let her do so. Some time later, she proudly announced that she'd dressed herself, and Mom inspected her. "Very good!" Mom said. "Except that your shirt's on backward... and inside-out."
My sister laughed and said, "I put it on 'gackaway'!"
Ever since then, "gackaway" has been a family word for "inside-out & backward." Isn't it perfect?

Do they contemplate their belly buttons, too?