Someone was criticized for using the phrase "tear you a new one" meaning "to be severely injured in a fight." This phrase is commonly heard in ways such as, "You'd better not mess with him. He'll definitely tear you a new one." The criticism was that the expression was crude seeing as how it's an abbreviation for something a bit more graphic. (I've been away for a while and am unsure of how the community standards are here these days or I'd spell it out for you.)

My feeling is that there's nothing offensive with the phrase in its abbreviated form. The question, however, is should someone take offense at something that isn't even uttered? I certainly think not but mine has been the minority opinion more than once.

Similarly, not long ago I heard a woman remark that she was not looking forward to some specific task but that she would do it because it was "her turn in the barrel." I thought this was a bit crude of her, especially considering the company present at the time, but while she was using the phrase correctly, it turned out that she did not know the meaning behind it.

I think that my lack of offense taken at the first phrase is a reflection of the greater and longer use of it in abbreviated form as compared to the second. Any thoughts?

"My turn in the barrel" has surely been around much longer, so it seems to me that you've got it backwards, CJ! Also, the barrel business might easily be construed in several ways, whereas "tear you a new one" is pretty obviously a statement that someone intends to modify one's anatomy in some painful manner! Well, at least it is to me, but then I work in a blue-collar world, so my point of view is skewed in that direction.

I think 'my turn in the barrel' is picturesque enough that it could be used on its own by someone who had heard it, and understood it, but didn't know the derivation: just as we'd say 'Buggins' turn' without knowing if there was ever a real Buggins or a story behind it. People pick up turns of phrase without thinking about them. Most 'etymology' queries are from members of the public asking 'why do we say "my turn in the barrel" ("the whole nine yards"/etc. etc.)?' -- that is, they say it, and don't need to analyse it or fully understand it to say it.

Er - what does 'my turn in the barrel' mean? I've never heard it.

You could write it in white if it's truly vile.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris J. Strolin:
Someone was criticized for using the phrase "tear you a new one" meaning "to be severely injured in a fight." This phrase is commonly heard in ways such as, "You'd better not mess with him. He'll definitely tear you a new one." The criticism was that the expression was crude seeing as how it's an abbreviation for something a bit more graphic. (I've been away for a while and am unsure of how the community standards are here these days or I'd spell it out for you.)

Similarly, not long ago I heard a woman remark that she was not looking forward to some specific task but that she would do it because it was "her turn in the barrel." I thought this was a bit crude of her, especially considering the company present at the time, but while she was using the phrase correctly, it turned out that she did not know the meaning behind it.

I think that my lack of offense taken at the first phrase is a reflection of the greater and longer use of it in abbreviated form as compared to the second. Any thoughts?

I've never heard the first phrase, so I didn't know what it meant until you said "meaning "to be severely injured in a fight."

As for the second, I definitely know what that means and it would cause me a fair bit of eyebrow raising if I heard a prim "lady" using such an expression.

quote:

Originally posted by Cat:
Er - what does 'my turn in the barrel' mean? I've never heard it.

You could write it in white if it's truly vile.

It's from an old joke about sailors who've been at sea for far too long. If you really want to know, I'll send you the explanation in a private message.

But wouldn't that be an empty barrel? (assuming I'm heading in the right direction)). How did it evolve into someone being in it?

Yes, PM me please. Now I'm even more confused

quote:

Originally posted by Cat:
But wouldn't that be an empty barrel? (assuming I'm heading in the right direction)). How did it evolve into someone being in it?

Yes, PM me please. Now I'm even more confused

OK, PM coming up . I didn't want to give a public explanation for fear of being thrown off these Forums .

This happens to be a term I don't know, so I can't comment on whether its beyond the pale, but I'd like to see it posted. It would be a shame for us to censor legitimate discussion of phrases, merely because they happen to be dirty phrases.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris J. Strolin:
"CJ's original question was, "Is it still dirty if I at least TRY to clean it up?" [For example,] "tear you a new one". My feeling is that there's nothing offensive with the phrase in its abbreviated form.

Sure it's offensive. If the speaker were really trying to clean in up, he would say "severely injure you". The "tear yourself" circumlocution is simply a way to communicate the offensive word without having to take responsibility for having uttered it. (Not that I'd personally object to that phrase, in appropriate circumstances and company.)

quote:

The question, however, is should someone take offense at something that isn't even uttered

What does "utter" have to do with it? The question is not whether the offensive thing is uttered, but whether it's communicated. For example, the one-finger salute is offensive, though not uttered.

quote:

(I've been away for a while and am unsure of how the community standards are here these days or I'd spell it out for you.)

No changes, CJ.

I haven't heard the barrel term, either, and would like to know it. Di, would you please send me a PM, too? What a good decision we made to start a separate site for the kids!

I thought this was a bit crude of her, especially considering the company present at the time, but while she was using the phrase correctly, it turned out that she did not know the meaning behind it.

That sounds like something I'd do!

Lol - I'm now a little bit less innocent than I was!

Ahhh, me too, Cat!

Why do we suddenly need PMs to talk about etymologies? Just post the durn thing and let us all be enlightened.

quote:

Originally posted by Caterwauller:
Why do we suddenly need PMs to talk about etymologies? Just post the durn thing and let us all be enlightened.

It's a very rude joke, which is why I was reluctant to post it.

This topic strays into the whole PC debate. Some words are and always will be offensive because that is their purpose in language. It is possibe to be insulting and offensive without resorting to any of them, but it takes more thought.
Language changes when wholy innocent words become stigmatised and lost to us. The strangest example I can recall is from an american sitcom where a well known saying was altered to "The pot calling the kettle flat". Since all meaning is lost why did they bother?

Trying to get my son, when he was pre-teen, to stop telling his sister to 'bug-off', I explained that there are so many other ways to say the same thing...'your presence isn't wanted',and others (way before pc was in vogue). His comment: "She knows what I mean, and it's fast and easy to say." Is THAT why some expressions are so commonly used? amnow

quote:

The strangest example I can recall is from an american sitcom where a well known saying was altered to "The pot calling the kettle flat". Since all meaning is lost why did they bother?

Quark, I hadn't heard that before. What sitcom? What was it supposed to have meant? Was it maybe a malaprop?

Why do we suddenly need PMs to talk about etymologies? Just post the durn thing and let us all be enlightened.

Has Di sent you the joke? I think once you've heard it, you'd agree.

No! I've not heard it yet and I'm feeling left out! LOL

CW, though I agree with you on general principles, I've now been informed of the reference and would have to agree that this particular one should not be posted. You'll understand this if you google the phrase "your turn in the barrel" (in quotes).

Okey dokey.

quote:

Originally posted by wordnerd:
... agree that this particular one should not be posted. You'll understand this if you google the phrase "your turn in the barrel" (in quotes).

I don't find this offensive at all, at least not this version of it. If someone thinks something is too objectionable for them to post, then they could just post a link to it, as I did, and let people decide for themselves whether or not they want to view it. Or they could just not say anything. It's not necessary to resort to PMs.

Look at some of the jokes we've posted in The world's funniest joke? Some of the best jokes were told by LadyBeth, such as this one . If you think about it, what it's talking about, if it were true, would be really awful. But I think the joke is funny, though I'm sure some would object. I agree with CW; there's no need to censor.

Tinman

Thanks, Tinman - I thought maybe it was just me. It's a funny joke. It's sexual. Big deal.

quote:

Originally posted by Caterwauller:
It's a funny joke. It's sexual. Big deal.

Speaking of which - Here's a cute article: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2005/05/09/international/i/104040D07.DTL

I have no idea what the show was , I only saw the trailer. The phrase is the pot calling the kettle black. Since both items are (or were in wood buring days) equaly black the criticism is redundant. If they wanted to drop the black reference they should have chosen two flat objects. The halibut calling the sole flat. The cd calling the DVD flat. etc.

quote:

Speaking of which - Here's a cute article:

The link doesn't work for me.

quote:

The strangest example I can recall is from an american sitcom where a well known saying was altered to "The pot calling the kettle flat". Since all meaning is lost why did they bother?

This would be unbelievable were it not true. It is a fact that words do change their meanings and acceptability over time but the present fear of using the word "black" in case it should upset anyone whose skin isn't white, seems to me to be the height of daftness. Why don't we stop using the word "white" so as not to upset those whose skin happens to be that colour?

And, tell me someone, do black people actually worry about being called black? Are they upset if I use the term "blackboard" instead of the now common and pc "chalkboard"? And why am I still allowed to talk about a "whiteboard" rather than a "felt-tip" board?

If anyone would like to form a political party for the politically incorrect, they can count on me as their first recruit!

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:

quote:

Speaking of which - Here's a cute article:

The link doesn't work for me.

It doesn't work for me either . I clicked on the link for the main search page here, but I don't know what I'm searching for .

quote:

Originally posted by tinman:

quote:

Originally posted by wordnerd:
... agree that this particular one should not be posted. You'll understand this if you google the phrase "your turn in the barrel" (in quotes).

I don't find this offensive at all, at least not this version of it. If someone thinks something is too objectionable for them to post, then they could just post a link to it, as I did, and let people decide for themselves whether or not they want to view it. Or they could just not say anything. It's not necessary to resort to PMs.

Look at some of the jokes we've posted in The world's funniest joke? Some of the best jokes were told by LadyBeth, such as this one . If you think about it, what it's talking about, if it were true, would be really awful. But I think the joke is funny, though I'm sure some would object. I agree with CW; there's no need to censor.

Tinman

I'm a newcomer and, since I wasn't sure of the protocol in here, I didn't want to get into trouble for posting up off-colour jokes, so I decided to play it safe - which is why I offered to send explanatory PMs to anyone who really wanted to know.

quote:

The link doesn't work for me.

It appears that they change the article daily. Since Sunflower sent it to me and I suggested she post it here, I'll inform you that it was about a town in Brazil that has established an Orgasm Day holiday! :-) Y'all come!

quote:

Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy:
... Orgasm Day holiday! :-)

Try this link. Or this one.

quote:

Y'all come!

But not too fast!

quote:

There's even a panel discussion on premature ejaculation.

Tinman

That's it, Tinman! Dunno why Sunflower's link didn't work. And YES, not too fast! The point of Orgasm Day is to make sure men satisfy their partners! Ya think Sunflower was trying to tell me sumpthin'?

quote:

What does "utter" have to do with it? The question is not whether the offensive thing is uttered, but whether it's communicated. For example, the one-finger salute is offensive, though not uttered.

Thanks again for an interesting discussion. I agree with wordnerd assessement above.

There was a similar situation involving film censorship in which a love scene was shot that showed a woman's reclining body from her head to about her navel. Her lover was shown kissing her face, her neck and shoulders, her breasts, her stomach and then, proceeding in this same general direction, he left the frame of the shot which remained on the woman. The film in question was labeled obscene for what was going on off camera! First off, this could be considered only fitting if you know the etymology of the word "obscene" and, secondly, this occurred some 50 years ago and, yes, standards have definitely changed.

As to unspoken portions of objectionable phrases, I agree that the unuttered words are still heard loud and clear by many and, as such, should be avoided. "Yo' mama" comes to mind.

quote:

I don't find this offensive at all, at least not this version of it. If someone thinks something is too objectionable for them to post, then they could just post a link to it, as I did, and let people decide for themselves whether or not they want to view it.

Tinman, CW, I am sorry; I just don't consider someone sending a PM about a very sexual joke "censoring." What on earth is wrong with PMs anyway? Some people, indeed, would find it offensive, though I will agree with Tinman that similar ones have been posted here before. I just don't get the distaste for using PMs.

The above is just the opinion of someone who loves PMs and who has been, on more than one occasion, called a prude.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

Oh, and I forgot one thing. In regards to "your turn in the barrel," when I orginally heard that joke, it was set in an isolated lumber camp and, for some reason, this made it far less ofensive. Possibly the smell of pine, I'm not sure.