The damage I would do to her/I would smash it...

...just saw this on another thread.

"Kate Beckinsale, the damage I would do to her".

And I'm wondering what, what damage would the poster do? Would he like to inflict a little internal bruising perhaps, or bleeding, maybe some resistance so he could slap or choke her.

Either way, it seems to me to be such a violent phrase, but one that is getting more popular, along with other apparently violent phrases like "I would smash it".

Is it time to tone it down? Or are these phrases not based on violence at all? Or were they always used? Or is it fine and nothing to see here?

tritium

Men (and women) have been making crude comments about the quantity and quality if sexual prowess they'd display with their object of desire for pretty much ever. Not really something to get too worked up about.

We really are scraping the bottom of the outrage barrel at this stage.

Gaygooner

empty vessels make most noise, people who use these phrases are likely to go to bed each night and have a lonely **** and a cry

pickarooney

It's not as ba as the latent cannibals who do be making comments about cute babies.

tritium

tritium wrote: »

Men (and women) have been making crude comments about the quantity and quality if sexual prowess they'd display with their object of desire for pretty much ever. Not really something to get too worked up about.

We really are scraping the bottom of the outrage barrel at this stage.

You say men and women have been using such phrases forever? Really? I didn't know that.

Could you tell me some phrase women used to describe sex with men and specifically the violence they would inflict from, say, the 1800s?

And who was "outraged"? To say something might be objectionable is not the same as saying one is outraged.

gramar

I only recently found out that 'bate it into her' was a sexual reference.

NachoBusiness

Oh for heaven sake. You're not meant to take it literally. If a person said: "I would love to have sexual intercourse with her and then kiss her mouth really passionately" they would sound odd. People exaggerate in the hope of conveying the level of their desire and perhaps add a little humour also. Not just with regards to sex, but many things. Like someone saying they are so hungry they are going to eat plate and all or a band saying they are going blow the roof off a venue. Intentional exaggeration is all it is.

strelok

and today on "why men are evil and must be stopped"

T-K-O

Are you for real, it's time to tone it up. Between this nonsense and the latest fad of 'toy guns create isis soldiers' let's all just sit at home and watch American gladiators.

MarkR

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You say men and women have been using such phrases forever? Really? I didn't know that.

Could you tell me some phrase women used to describe sex with men and specifically the violence they would inflict from, say, the 1800s?

And who was "outraged"? To say something might be objectionable is not the same as saying one is outraged.

The agony of bliss. Victorian term for orgasm. La petite mort. The little death, more orgasm talk.

Unga bunga. Possibly Neanderthal for sweet sweet love.

MarkR

MarkR wrote: »

The agony of bliss. Victorian term for orgasm. La petite mort. The little death, more orgasm talk.

Hasn't heard the former.

Neither phrase conveys any sense of violence inflicted on the other, do they?

Menas

Its a bloody outrage.

T-K-O

T-K-O wrote: »

Are you for real, it's time to tone it up. Between this nonsense and the latest fad of 'toy guns create isis soldiers' let's all just sit at home and watch American gladiators.

I don't even know what this means?

ISIS? American gladiators?

NachoBusiness

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Oh for heaven sake. You're not meant to take it literally. If a person said: "I would love to have sexual intercourse with her and then kiss her mouth really passionately" they would sound odd. People exaggerate in the hope of conveying the level of their desire and perhaps add a little humour also. Not just with regards to sex, but many things. Like someone saying they are so hungry they are going to eat plate and all or a band saying they are going blow the roof off a venue. Intentional exaggeration is all it is.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I know one is not meant to take it literally. Did you know that metaphors can convey violence? Evidently not. Well today you learned something new.

Avatar MIA

Menas wrote: »

Its a bloody outrage.

Only certain times of the month

sonny.knowles

Health and safety gone mad.

One eyed Jack

The raven himself is hoarse
That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan
Under my battlements. Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
Of direst cruelty. Make thick my blood,
Stop up th’access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
Th’ effect and it. Come to my woman’s breasts,
And take my milk for gall, you murd’ring ministers,
Wherever in your sightless substances
You wait on nature’s mischief. Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry ‘Hold, hold!’


- Lady Macbeth


(Now there was a woman with a certain way about her )

well spoken man

What about smashing in her back door.might be about the high rise in burglaries.......

racso1975

Gaygooner wrote: »

empty vessels make most noise, people who use these phrases are likely to go to bed each night and have a lonely **** and a cry

I can confirm this to be true

tritium

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You say men and women have been using such phrases forever? Really? I didn't know that.

Could you tell me some phrase women used to describe sex with men and specifically the violence they would inflict from, say, the 1800s?

And who was "outraged"? To say something might be objectionable is not the same as saying one is outraged.

Given Shakespeare has long been acknowledged as full of sexual innuendo and the Victorians notorious for repressing sexual imagery ( which there was plenty of) I'm not sure why you can't just use Google to answer this-i don't intend chasing my tail doing research you didn't before asking your somewhat pointless question on this thread

I've said about men "oh Jesus he'd destroy you", or "imagine the damage he'd do to you".

That means I think he's hot as fcuk and I would gladly have some vigorous sex with him. It does not mean that I want internal bruising or bleeding!

tritium

tritium wrote: »

Given Shakespeare has long been acknowledged as full of sexual innuendo and the Victorians notorious for repressing sexual imagery ( which there was plenty of) I'm not sure why you can't just use Google to answer this-i don't instead chasing my tail doing research you didn't before asking your somewhat pointless question on this thread

I love that old "no I can't think of one example so I'll say there are loads and you can find them yourself".

First used on day 2 of the internet.

Turtyturd

OP asks a load of questions.... proceeds to get pissy when he doesn't get the answers he wants.

Tarzana2

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it time to tone it down?

No.

Christ, I feel I've stumbled onto the set of a morning TV discussion show.

LittleLiar

OP, you have a filthy mind. Everyone knows the expressions you quoted refer to breaking a lady's heart.

You utter cad.

Alf Veedersane

Deleted User wrote: »

...just saw this on another thread.

"Kate Beckinsale, the damage I would do to her".

And I'm wondering what, what damage would the poster do? Would he like to inflict a little internal bruising perhaps, or bleeding, maybe some resistance so he could slap or choke her.

The phrase doesn't convey that the poster wants to or intends to do any damage to Kate Beckinsale any more than they want top or intend to actually 'pull the mickey off themselves' when Kate doesn't show up for her liaison dangereuse.

It's just a crude phrase.

Turtyturd

Turtyturd wrote: »

OP asks a load of questions.... proceeds to get pissy when he doesn't get the answers he wants.

Not in the slightest. Could you point to the posts you found "pissy" and we can have a look at the language in them?

DeanAustin

Ah sweet sufferin Jesus.

It's a turn of phrase. I've often said "Jaysus she'd destroy you", "she'd make bits of you" or "she'd laugh at your best".

None of them have actually happened to me or anyone I know. Ok, I lie. The last one happens to me regularly.

OP needs to get a grip. What a nonsense thread.

Also I have said "I would break him" in a situation where I'm quite strong and the guy would be athletic/long distance runner built - I.e. Skinnier than me.

That also means I think he's hot as fcuk and would like to have vigorous sex with him.

I don't want him to end up in a cast like.

Mmmmmm vigorous sex.

DeanAustin

Deleted User wrote: »

Not in the slightest. Could you point to the posts you found "pissy" and we can have a look at the language in them?

Stop taking yourself so seriously.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

The phrase doesn't convey that the poster wants to or intends to do any damage to Kate Beckinsale any more than they want top or intend to actually 'pull the mickey off themselves' when Kate doesn't show up for her liaison dangereuse.

It's just a crude phrase.

Oh very possibly true. I appreciate that it may not mean a specific desire to hurt by the poster using it, because it was probably unthinking. But that doesn't mean it's origins are not violent, or at least as you say crude.

DeanAustin

DeanAustin wrote: »

Stop taking yourself so seriously.

Thanks for the analysis!

Now...about the topic?

Turtyturd

OP completely ignores post from a woman talking about using such phrases.

Sex can be crude though, and sometimes rough if that's what you like, and that's ok!

Tarzana2

Deleted User wrote: »

Sex can be crude though, and sometimes rough if that's what you like, and that's ok!

Jaysus, sex on the BRAIN here. :pac:

This thread is having the exact opposite affect on me than it was probably meant to :pac:

Alf Veedersane

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh very possibly true. I appreciate that it may not mean a specific desire to hurt by the poster using it, because it was probably unthinking. But that doesn't mean it's origins are not violent, or at least as you say crude.

There's no thought put into saying it. No one says it and thinks they would genuinely cause damage if the day ever arises that Kate Beckinsale wants to have sex, vigorous or otherwise, with them.

There's no need to attach any more meaning to it than you would if they said "i'd love to treat her lovingly, bring her for dinner, then a stroll along the beach before having gentle sex listening to Lionel Richie"

Menas

Tarzana2 wrote: »

Jaysus, sex on the BRAIN here. :pac:

Hangover horniness!

racso1975

Deleted User wrote: »

Sex can be crude though, and sometimes rough if that's what you like, and that's ok!

Whoops given your 3 quick posts being very sexual I'd say you've an awful mornin horn on ya. You'd destroy me the mood your in!!!

Turtyturd

Turtyturd wrote: »

OP completely ignores post from a woman talking about using such phrases.

Huh?

Read the OP again, where was I gender specific?

"A woman said it, that means it's grand so". Was that really your point?

Be right back - going for cold shower.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

There's no thought put into saying it. No one says it and thinks they would genuinely cause damage if the day ever arises that Kate Beckinsale wants to have sex, vigorous or otherwise, with them.

There's no need to attach any more meaning to it than you would if they said "i'd love to treat her lovingly, bring her for dinner, then a stroll along the beach before having gentle sex listening to Lionel Richie"

Oh I certainly take the first point, that it may have been unthinking.

But it's still a violent metaphor. And one that I notice more and more, or it's said more openly. Was it Keyes and Gray who spoke of "smashing it" when they saw a female referee in a football match?

Turtyturd

OP appears to have difficulty reading and comprehending points.

Tarzana2

Menas wrote: »

Hangover horniness!

Yeah, my fella gets that whereas I find hangovers to be the greatest vadge-drier ever.

racso1975

Deleted User wrote: »

Be right back - going for cold shower.

God help the loofah brush....don't break it

Alf Veedersane

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh I certainly take the first point, that it may have been unthinking.

But it's still a violent metaphor. And one that I notice more and more, or it's said more openly. Was it Keyes and Gray who spoke of "smashing it" when they saw a female referee in a football match?

And?

I don't know what your point is other than it's used a lot.

Do you think it's increasing use normalises sexual violence?

Pac1Man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not in the slightest. Could you point to the posts you found "pissy" and we can have a look at the language in them?

Here you go. Instances where you come across sarky & smart.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I know one is not meant to take it literally. Did you know that metaphors can convey violence? Evidently not. Well today you learned something new.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I love that old "no I can't think of one example so I'll say there are loads and you can find them yourself".

First used on day 2 of the internet.

stoneill

Kate Bekinsales dad was in prison you know - known as Gobber inside - hard man, hung around with Fletcher.

Mantis Toboggan

Between the nanny brigade and the pc brigade the world is well and truly going mad. Maybe we can bring in legislation and prosecute people for saying such crazy things.

Op, have you thought about starting a petition?

Hemerodrome

stoneill wrote: »

Kate Bekinsales dad was in prison you know - known as Gobber inside - hard man, hung around with Fletcher.

I find this level of inaccuracy the most offensive thing about this thread. His name was Lenny Godber and he was a scared first timer, not a hard man. Be as wrong as you like about the increase in sexual violence, but Porridge is too important to get wrong.