Good morning.
From thread #2
Thoughtfox:
"Horsing Around" is one of the most juvenile excuses for bullying.
I didn't mention this yesterday because I thought it might be too picayune but in the light of (a new) morning I decided to throw it into the mix.
Yesterday, after hearing the words "horsing around" tossed around all day long in the news, I decided to look up the etymology of the phrase "horse around." As would be expected, most of the entries were in keeping with what Sandusky, his attorney, Paterno and (apparently) Schultz and Curley were trying to portray: to be active in a silly way (thefreedictionary.com); however, there
is a darker meaning to the expression, as indicated in the book Watch your language! Mother Tongue and her Wayward Children (Robert M. Gorrell).
From page 35: "To horse around often has sexual implications."
http://books.google.com/books?id=dq...&resnum=1&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Also, from another site (see link below). There are four definitions/citations and the first three are sexual in nature.
http://www.definition-of.com/horse around
One reason I decided to bring this up today was based on what Mike Krzyzewski was quoted as having said in the NY Times blog about Paterno:
"I think one thing you have to understand is that coach Paterno's 84 years old," Krzyzewski said, per Vin Bernstein of the New York Times. "I'm not saying that for an excuse or whatever. The cultures that he's been involved in both football - wise and socially, have been (seen?) immense changes and how social issues are handled in those generations are quite different. http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/krzyzewski-paterno-a-great-man-in-horrific-situation/
Based on the above I looked for the meaning of "horse around" using 1940s as one of the search terms. One entry that came up was Cassell's Dictionary of Slang (Google books). Note the use of time periods in the definitions:
http://books.google.com/books?id=5G...onepage&q="horse around" 1940s sexual&f=false
I bring all this up for a couple of reasons. One being the use of doublespeak. I have wondered all along if this was Paterno's way of conveying an awful truth to Curley without coming out and using words such as sodomize, rape, molestation. If you look at the slang definition for the phrase throughout the years this becomes a distinct possibility (in my mind). Note: I am
not excusing Paterno's actions in this matter on any level.
Additionally, I wonder if the use of doublespeak in Sandusky's case isn't part of a splitting process, i.e.:
It may be that child abusers, particularly those considered suitable for referral to a psychotherapy clinic, need to be seen to be leading normal lives in order to be in a position to carry out their acts, whether it be within the family or in social settings (for example as school-teachers, scoutmasters and so on). This may be facilitated by the extensive use of splitting — this is a mechanism whereby apparently contradictory attitudes can coexist. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/179/6/482.full
I guess one reason this case has caught my attention to the extent that it has is because my father was a head football coach. In fact, he was a head football coach born in the same year as Joe Paterno - 1926. As such, I have found myself looking at this situation through two different lenses - the first being my own, based on the social mores of the generation I'm a part of - and the second being a blurrier lens based on my observations over the years of a parent who was born the same year as Paterno and who spent many years in the same occupation. I have a feeling that's what Krzyzewski was getting at with his commentary about generational differences. He's more than a decade older than I am (and in the coaching profession) so he is probably even more acutely aware of it than I am.
Again, none of that is an excuse for ignoring and/or sweeping such heinous acts under the blue and white rug of Penn State.