Well, if you are going to define prurience so broadly that it loses all meaning, or all distinctness that separates it from other literary uses or evocations of sexual imagery, you're going to have to invent other words that are sexual, or sexy, or sex-related, but aren't (what I would call) 'prurient.' I mean, the reason we have LOTS of words, is because we want to be able to make distinctions. Substitute 'prurient' for 'sexual' in many contexts, and you'll see they have different connotations.
The bellhop peeking through the newlyweds' keyhole is not "celebrating" sex, in my way of speaking. (One could engage in a certain sort of philosophical discussion here, but let's not bother.)
I feel 'prurience' in the very use of euphemisms, sometimes. In double entendres, usually. And usually, also, in sexual vulgarity, which is different from prurience, but a close relative of it.
I notice that vulgarity is often offensive, to me, personally, but I am rarely offended by goodnatured obscenity.
You know what? This is very personal stuff. In a way, not subject to argument. We can all just declare what turns our stomach and what delights or amuses or interests or excites us; and then we get to hang out with those of like mind, while we wonder at the oddness, or childhoods, of those of unlike minds.
It seems to me that in a way, you are saying that if it makes you feel hot, it's prurient. That appears to be shalom's and Bob's position, but they seem to become more unhinged by their easily triggered sexual responses than you do. |
