"To the pure, all things are pure" -- and vice versa?

[commasense]

@Sangahyando

Tangentially: I gather that there is a small town in Pennsylvania called Intercourse – which name, needless to say, has people in fits of laughter. One is given to understand that the name derives from the town’s being, when it was founded, located between two racecourses.

Cite? I’ve been to Intercourse many times and have never heard that explanation. Nor does the local historical society (via Wikipedia) support it:

Intercourse was founded in 1754. The community was originally named Cross Keys, after a local tavern. Intercourse became the name in 1814. The village website gives several theories for the origins of the name.

Another theory concerns two famous roads that crossed here. The Old King’s highway from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh (now the Old Philadelphia Pike) ran east and west through the center of the town. The road from Wilmington to Erie intersected in the middle. The joining of these two roads is claimed by some to be the basis for the town ‘Cross Keys’ or eventually ‘Intercourse’.[1] A final idea comes from the use of language during the early days of the Village. The word ‘intercourse’ was commonly used to describe the ‘fellowship’ and ‘social interaction and support’ shared in the community of faith, which was much a part of a rural village like this one.[1]

[Gatopescado]

@Penfeather

Masturbate. A tosser is a wanker.

Go toss a salad.

[eschereal]

@Derleth

You should indeed read more Shakespeare, where nothing was certain to be impure, country matters least of all; why, you can even speak of such quaint things in mixed company these days, even in the very presence of a man’s stables, and none will raise their pistol at you, or other wise try to get you to die.

Do you mean nothing as in not anything, or as in the Elizabethan vernacular?

[Derleth]

@eschereal

Do you mean nothing as in not anything, or as in the Elizabethan vernacular?

The whole post is an Elizabethan English sex joke.

Especially the parts you think aren’t sex jokes.

[Sangahyando]

@Penfeather

Not a criticism; it’s certainly distinctive.

Thanks ! “Horses for courses” is, one feels, a good maxim.

[Sangahyando]

@Ann_Hedonia

When I was in high school I was in a theatrical production that was some low-rent no royalty version of the King Arthur / Lancelot story.

So there was the big sword battle scene towards the end - not onstage but described by the performers watching. Lots of dialogue about Lancelots magnificent weapon and his mighty powerful thrusts. Then I was supposed to deliver my line, a comment on the deadliness of the battle … my line was “ there will be many stiff from this” . Delivering that line with a somber face was possibly the most difficult thing I’ve ever done. And I’m pretty sure it was all unintentional - just based on the horribleness of most of the high school plays.

They were horrible because we couldn’t perform most works because the school would have to pay royalties. So the teachers found all this royalty free stuff. Most of it sucked.

(My bolding) – reason to suspect that the royalty free stuff’s perpetrators deliberately loaded it – in the hope of much comedy / mayhem ensuing – with double-entendre-fodder.

[Sangahyando]

@Ashtura

I think “come” needs an alternate nowadays. Yes, sadly, “I’m coming” just doesn’t sound right anymore.

As you say, sadly. Supports my contention that this whole thing has got wildly out of hand (an expression which can itself be seen as having a dirty meaning, if one is sufficiently hell-bent on finding same).

[Sangahyando]

@commasense

Cite? I’ve been to Intercourse many times and have never heard that explanation. Nor does the local historical society (via Wikipedia) support it:

All I can do for a “cite” for the “two racecourses” thing is, “I read it once – forget where”. Whatever the derivation of the town’s name – it seems certain that in naming it, the town’s founders did not have sex on their minds.

[Acsenray]

@Sangahyando

present-day tendency

This is where you’re wrong. This isn’t a present-day tendency.

You’re making the same mistake that all nostalgists make. The past you long for never existed. You just think it did because you are making assumptions about that time based on unrepresentative data.

[astorian]

Back in high school, when we had to read “Red Badge of Courage,” we were constantly cracking up at the way Stephen Crane used “Ejaculated” to mean “shouted.”

[Sangahyando]

@Acsenray

This is where you’re wrong. This isn’t a present-day tendency.

You’re making the same mistake that all nostalgists make. The past you long for never existed. You just think it did because you are making assumptions about that time based on unrepresentative data.

I think you’re using too broad a brush here. I reckon it admissible and accurate to state that at – whatever past time – a particular thing was better, from one’s particular point of view, than nowadays; even if a couple of dozen other things were indisputably worse then, than nowadays.

[Sangahyando]

@astorian

Back in high school, when we had to read “Red Badge of Courage,” we were constantly cracking up at the way Stephen Crane used “Ejaculated” to mean “shouted.”

This chimes in with one of my examples in my OP. I can’t help envying the Victorians and Edwardians for being able to use “ejaculate” to mean “utter loudly and vehemently”: which one cannot do in these times – the sniggerers go automatically into ridiculing mode, homing in on the word’s sexual-biological significance. I feel that the English language is being impoverished, through this particular mania’s being so very widespread.

[Acsenray]

@Sangahyando

I think you’re using too broad a brush here. I reckon it admissible and accurate to state that at – whatever past time – a particular thing was better, from one’s particular point of view, than nowadays; even if a couple of dozen other things were indisputably worse then, than nowadays.

Unless you are talking about a very narrow topic, one that is within your direct experience, and one that is appropriately narrowed based on the data you have available to you, then no, your assertion is negligible.

In other words, I’ll accept as a valid data point “Thirty years ago, Taco Bell’s tortillas and refried bean paste tasted better to me than they do now and I believe that it’s because they used X, Y, and Z ingredients and A, B, and C food handling and preparation techniques.”

Unless you’re wiling to qualify your assertion to that degree, then your views on the past are worthless.

And in this particular thread, it’s a trivial matter to disprove and dismiss your baseless ideas about the prevalence of ribald humor among English-speaking people in past times.

Add that to your choice of verbal persona and it’s not hard to realize that your opinions are based purely on your personal misconceptions and biases, and can’t be relied on to understand society, either in our present time or some past time that you imagine you would prefer.

[Penfeather]

Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie did it best: “Arse-bandit! Perfectly decent couple of words, used to use them every day. ‘Would you care to have a go on the arse-bandit?’ Quite innocently!”