|
|
Post by batman on Feb 5, 2022 18:32:48 GMT
I connect all such euphemisms with Victorian super-sensitivity over legs, ankles, bodily functions, sexual acts, and death. Thus the failure to use and to value the graphic Saxon words shit and fuck which are compact and useful but now regarded as off limits and coarse. With death the words to use are dying, dead and deceased. All else is foolish nonsense. How on earth can we persist with such phrases as :- use the bathroom powder her nose wash my hands passed on passed over sleeping with making love dating It is all so prudish, childish and just damned silly. But there will be no shifting any of it. Sometimes the more empathetic bird catches the worm Carlton. "making love" is a more accurate description of what I try to do than "fucking". Sleeping with also means more.. These days "wash my hands" means exactly that. Otherwise I agree There have always been euphemisms though. Old folk songs are full of them; "cuckoo's nest", "thyme", "blacksmith with his hammer in his hand looked quite clever" a little too much information possibly |
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473 
|
Post by peterl on Feb 5, 2022 20:42:39 GMT
I'm all for calling a spade a spade, but it does depend on context. This is a forum populated by mature people who can deal with being literal. If talking around children for instance, euthamisms can be helpful. They can also be used to differentiate situations. "Dating" for instance does not nessecarily mean sleeping with.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 5, 2022 21:38:33 GMT
I connect all such euphemisms with Victorian super-sensitivity over legs, ankles, bodily functions, sexual acts, and death. Thus the failure to use and to value the graphic Saxon words shit and fuck which are compact and useful but now regarded as off limits and coarse. With death the words to use are dying, dead and deceased. All else is foolish nonsense. How on earth can we persist with such phrases as :- use the bathroom powder her nose wash my hands passed on passed over sleeping with making love dating It is all so prudish, childish and just damned silly. But there will be no shifting any of it. Sometimes the more empathetic bird catches the worm Carlton. "making love" is a more accurate description of what I try to do than "fucking". Sleeping with also means more.. These days "wash my hands" means exactly that. Otherwise I agree There have always been euphemisms though. Old folk songs are full of them; "cuckoo's nest", "thyme", "blacksmith with his hammer in his hand looked quite clever" Yes. Follow that. I did inadvertently overstate my position and you are correct on 'Make Love' and that the bald use of 'Fuck' does not meet all occasions or even most occasions. But I don't like 'Sleeping With', as the act really concerns a greater involvement than the mere act of passive sleeping. My complaint is with the nature and background to the generality of euphemisms altogether. Whatever hoops one passes through the bodily function activities and the nature of death remains unchanged and we speak of the same subjects and acts and cannot avoid the centrality of what we actually mean. It does seem foolish and silly. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Feb 5, 2022 22:10:41 GMT
Sometimes the more empathetic bird catches the worm Carlton. "making love" is a more accurate description of what I try to do than "fucking". Sleeping with also means more.. These days "wash my hands" means exactly that. Otherwise I agree There have always been euphemisms though. Old folk songs are full of them; "cuckoo's nest", "thyme", "blacksmith with his hammer in his hand looked quite clever" Yes. Follow that. I did inadvertently overstate my position and you are correct on 'Make Love' and that the bald use of 'Fuck' does not meet all occasions or even most occasions. But I don't like 'Sleeping With', as the act really concerns a greater involvement than the mere act of passive sleeping. My complaint is with the nature and background to the generality of euphemisms altogether. Whatever hoops one passes through the bodily function activities and the nature of death remains unchanged and we speak of the same subjects and acts and cannot avoid the centrality of what we actually mean. It does seem foolish and silly. I agree that "sleeping with" can be euphemistically avoiding mention of the sex act, but it can also usefully describe a stage in a relationship in between casual sex and "living with". What you don't do is ask someone like Bill Clinton "Did you sleep with her" since the denial would be meaningless. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Feb 6, 2022 20:01:33 GMT
I connect all such euphemisms with Victorian super-sensitivity over legs, ankles, bodily functions, sexual acts, and death. Thus the failure to use and to value the graphic Saxon words shit and fuck which are compact and useful but now regarded as off limits and coarse. With death the words to use are dying, dead and deceased. All else is foolish nonsense. How on earth can we persist with such phrases as :- use the bathroom powder her nose wash my hands passed on passed over sleeping with making love dating It is all so prudish, childish and just damned silly. But there will be no shifting any of it. I don't see what's prudish or childish about the word "dating". It describes a romantic relationship which has yet to reach the point of either engagement or moving in together, regardless of whether the couple are having sex. The only alternative terms for this kind of relationship I can think of are "going out" (which is probably more of a euphemism, but is less American), and "courting" (which implies an intention towards marriage which is rare among the non-religious majority). |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Feb 6, 2022 22:10:56 GMT
I connect all such euphemisms with Victorian super-sensitivity over legs, ankles, bodily functions, sexual acts, and death. Thus the failure to use and to value the graphic Saxon words shit and fuck which are compact and useful but now regarded as off limits and coarse. With death the words to use are dying, dead and deceased. All else is foolish nonsense. How on earth can we persist with such phrases as :- use the bathroom powder her nose wash my hands passed on passed over sleeping with making love dating It is all so prudish, childish and just damned silly. But there will be no shifting any of it. I don't see what's prudish or childish about the word "dating". It describes a romantic relationship which has yet to reach the point of either engagement or moving in together, regardless of whether the couple are having sex. The only alternative terms for this kind of relationship I can think of are "going out" (which is probably more of a euphemism, but is less American), and "courting" (which implies an intention towards marriage which is rare among the non-religious majority). Going out with someone was what we used to say before American culture took over. We never went out on "a date" when I was young. Courting had gone out of fashion though. And even now, I might say "let's make it a date" for a work meeting with no romantic implications whatsoever. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 7, 2022 10:53:38 GMT
I don't see what's prudish or childish about the word "dating". It describes a romantic relationship which has yet to reach the point of either engagement or moving in together, regardless of whether the couple are having sex. The only alternative terms for this kind of relationship I can think of are "going out" (which is probably more of a euphemism, but is less American), and "courting" (which implies an intention towards marriage which is rare among the non-religious majority). Going out with someone was what we used to say before American culture took over. We never went out on "a date" when I was young. Courting had gone out of fashion though. And even now, I might say "let's make it a date" for a work meeting with no romantic implications whatsoever. Courting, Going Out With, Having A Follower, Going On A Date, all implied younger people in various stages of a pre-marriage pairing process, probably leading up to a formal Proposal, then Engagement and then a Church Wedding. The expected inferences being general chastity until the Marriage Night, but probably an understood concept of the male being at least slightly 'experienced' from association with 'Girls That Do'! All rather false in many respects because of the implication that it was permissible for young men to 'gain experience' but pretty close to social and religious opprobrium for decent young women to do so. All a bit amoral and understood but lacking in any sort of real ethics. Even within this rigid system there were many and frequent infractions in many families and in all classes, but as usual the upper classes and the lower orders often left the straight and narrow needing strategies to deal with the 'bastard child'. Plenty of those in royalty and thus the many 'Fitz' prefix surnames for upper class families spawned from royal bastardy, and indeed my Father's quite upper class friend at Winchelsea, Miss Bastard, said to be a direct descendant of Hugh the Bastard, henchman to William the Conqueror, and a French royal bastard. The middle classes and the respectable (probably churchy?) poor were the families to whom sex out of wedlock and bastardy really mattered and were a major meltdown occasion. But that changed with the invention of the bicycle and railways making independent transport to a neutral place easier. Then the social changes accompanying two world wars with the attendant thought of 'I may never see him again' and/or I may be dead tomorrow myself so why not live life as if it were short and has no rules other than those one makes for oneself. Then the advent of cheap means of prevention readily available and the Pill, removed the last physical sanctions, and chastity as a concept was over entirely within two generations at the most. And we moved from family visits of fully adult couples not married being in separate rooms, to schoolgirls having boyfriends at home on sleepovers in their own beds. Dating as a verb usage is I feel an American import and when applied to fully adult couples does not mean entering into early courtship, but just that they are in 'a relationship' which may or may not (usually a may not) lead to a marriage. In fact most relationships now are always sexual from infancy and do not lead to marriage. So our terminology has not caught up with the new morality nor the new status quo for relationships. On balance I prefer 'In A Relationship' or 'An Item' to other more euphemistic formularies. Many such relationships are about sex. The couple maintain separate housing arrangement, don't envisage or want children and will probably not marry. The nation seems to be fairly at ease with that and so am I. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 6, 2022 20:49:32 GMT
I'm a little confused by the final bit about "Hutchinson and her supporters"... I get it she's unhappy with her successor, but surely she wasn't seeking to succeed herself? I remember Ancoats as basically a boarded-up ghost town from when I stayed in a hostel there in 2001... though I notice the pub around the corner has changed, not for the better, but is still trading under the same name. I haven't been to Manchester since 1996. Ancoats and Beswick were utter slums at that time, as indeed was virtually the whole the area around the city centre. It seems weird to hear it described as 'trendy' now Ancoats was home to the Cardroom estate, which was a pretty rough place. Great Ancoats Street was always a place whose boozers were best avoided. Now the place looks completely different. Although it also just filled with the same generic hipster magnets as you'd find in every large European city now. Beswick remains grim. I'll be careful what I say, but I don't entirely disagree with suggestions of social cleansing. Quite a few people who lived in the Cardroom never got the promised flats in the shiny new blocks, but ended up being sent further down the A57. |
|
