Subject:
|
Re: Clearly those Canadians are concerned about censorship...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Apr 2004 00:40:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
236 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Etymologically, the origin of “dirty” words in English stems largely from the
conquest of 1066 and the resulting scism between Anglo-Saxon and Norman ways
of referring to things. But beyond that, it seems to me that puritanism
seems to abhor the realization that human beings are animals that (among
other things) fornicate and excrete. The whole drive to declare some words
or images “profane” seems to stem from a need to sanctify the human body, or
at least to divorce it from its animal nature.
It’s all ridiculous, if you ask me. Janet’s ornamented breast or Howard’s
racy questions or Jolene Blalock’s bared Vulcan butt are only verboten
because of prudish fears that we would all destroy ourselves if we suddenly
remembered that we’re flesh and blood.
|
Luckily, we all have Jerry Springer every day on TV to remind us.
Yep, even here in Australia.
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
22 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
