Perversion - A Word That Is Becoming Increasingly Difficult To Use
Language, the English language especially, is in a constant state of flux, endlessly morphing and changing with the passage of time. New words and phrases enter the language while other words and phrases, some centuries-old, become obsolete or are simply expelled from common usage like unwanted exiles. Some words remain in the language, but their meanings and definitions alter so drastically that the original definitions become like neglected tombstones of long-forgotten ancestors buried in some distant land.
The word gay is perfect example of this. Mention gay today and nearly everyone will assume you are referring to homosexuality rather than happiness or joy (though for some individuals, the word could mean both simultaneously, but that's another story). In any case, you will have a difficult time convincing people gay once meant happy. When I was a high school teacher, I often had to explain the original definition of gay to a class after the word appeared in some nineteenth-century novel or other we happened to be reading. More often than not, my students simply could not accept that gay merely meant happy back then and implied no other connotations within the confines of the text. Thus, whenever the word appeared, they instantly assumed some sudden revelation of an author’s or a character’s sexual orientation; my attempts to counter this usually failed, especially when we read Oscar Wilde, but that’s a different matter entirely.
I think about words and their meanings quite often, especially perfectly straightforward words that seem to be on the cusp of losing their meaning, not simply through their ascription to other things, as in the example above, but rather through the transformation of society (though gay could qualify under this category, too). Put another way, some words are becoming increasingly meaningless because changes in society no longer reflect the meaning the word represents. The verb “to pervert” might be a perfect exemplar. The word continues to exist, but the boundaries of what it defines have blurred and it is often difficult to know in what situations or circumstances perversion can be appropriately applied.
Ten minutes of extremely hasty and sloppy internet research revealed the word pervert has undergone considerable transformations since it was incorporated into the English language. Originally from the Latin, the word is combination of per (meaning thoroughly or to an extreme degree) and vertere (to turn). Thus, the original Latin meaning of the word was an extreme or thorough turn. This matches the Proto-Indo-European wert, which means to turn or rotate. The word eventually found its way into French and then migrated to English, but the essential meaning of pervert - an inherently positive, natural, acceptable, or good thing being turned in the wrong direction, or being turned away from, or leading someone away from something considered good and acceptable - has remained intact regardless of which language it called home. As we shall see, what can be perverted tends to change as the perceived good, natural, and acceptable thing changes.
I imagine the Romans considered perverted anyone or anything that took an extreme turn away from the core values of fides, pietas, religio, disciplina, gravitas, dignitas, and virtus, known collectively as the mos mairorum, which roughly translates to “ancestral code.” Unlike the written law, the mos mairorum was more of less an unwritten set of principles that dictated virtues, behavior, and social practices. Oddly enough, the Romans had no qualms about their orgies, slavery, or gladiatorial games, none of which crossed the threshold of perversion in their minds.
When the word was employed in English in the thirteenth century, it was used almost exclusively to delineate the act of turning away or turning someone away from Christianity, which was considered the highest good at the time, reflecting the religiousness of the age. I imagine as the centuries passed, the definition of perversion expanded beyond the realm of religious belief at the same pace Christianity weakened, though this is merely speculation on my part. Whatever the real reason, perversion was slowly applied to any field in which a turning away from a right course or a proper state was observed. Subsequently, everything could, in essence, be perverted – law, justice, language, and yes, even sex. By the time we get to the Victorian Age, it seems the bulk of what was labelled perversion centered on sex, reflecting the rigid, normophilic mores of the time. By the twentieth century I imagine perversion had all but lost its original religious connotations and was used almost exclusively in reference to sex practices (kink, swingers, homosexuality, etc.) that turned away from normophilia Otherwise, perversion simply came to mean something similar to distortion or corruption when used in phrases such a perversion of justice.
In our contemporary world, it is becoming increasingly difficult to use the word perversion, be it in noun, verb, or adjective form. Though phrases like perversion of justice still appear now and then, they are growing scarcer as our definition of justice changes and blurs. The infrequency of the word perversion to describe a turning away from the good, the natural, and the acceptable has much to do with the current state of our culture and society, which has all but abandoned the good, the natural, and the acceptable of the past and Christianity in favor of the establishment of a new mos maiorum built upon the progressive philosophical and political movements of the past two hundred years alone.
I would argue Modern Western culture has not only turned away from its ancestral customs, mores, and religion, but is openly and vehemently hostile to them all. Unlike Ancient Rome, or Medieval Europe, looking to the past for guidance is considered backward and regressive. The past is a dungeon; its customs, behaviors, and religion – chains and barbaric torture devices. Progress dictates individuals and societies liberate themselves and others from the shackles of the past oppression and create new values, new principles, and new virtues. The good that once was is no longer good, but its opposite; accordingly, taking an extreme turn away from or leading people away these inherently malevolent and evil structures cannot, therefore, be considered perverted acts. Thus, what a mere century ago was considered perverted by the vast majority of society, is today not only accepted, but encouraged and celebrated, which makes using the word perversion tricky business indeed.
In the end, I believe perversion, both as a word and as a concept, will not lose its meaning. It will survive, and it will survive with its meaning intact. The only thing that has changed and continues to change is the definition of what constitutes the “good, natural, and acceptable.”
In light of this, one does not need to think too hard about possibilities to understand what will or already defines perversion today. The bigger question is how will those who embody the new mos mairorum, this more modern sense of what is good, natural, and acceptable ultimately deal with those who deviate from the course.
Thus far, the outlook for those turning away from this new good is rather bleak to say the least.
The word gay is perfect example of this. Mention gay today and nearly everyone will assume you are referring to homosexuality rather than happiness or joy (though for some individuals, the word could mean both simultaneously, but that's another story). In any case, you will have a difficult time convincing people gay once meant happy. When I was a high school teacher, I often had to explain the original definition of gay to a class after the word appeared in some nineteenth-century novel or other we happened to be reading. More often than not, my students simply could not accept that gay merely meant happy back then and implied no other connotations within the confines of the text. Thus, whenever the word appeared, they instantly assumed some sudden revelation of an author’s or a character’s sexual orientation; my attempts to counter this usually failed, especially when we read Oscar Wilde, but that’s a different matter entirely.
I think about words and their meanings quite often, especially perfectly straightforward words that seem to be on the cusp of losing their meaning, not simply through their ascription to other things, as in the example above, but rather through the transformation of society (though gay could qualify under this category, too). Put another way, some words are becoming increasingly meaningless because changes in society no longer reflect the meaning the word represents. The verb “to pervert” might be a perfect exemplar. The word continues to exist, but the boundaries of what it defines have blurred and it is often difficult to know in what situations or circumstances perversion can be appropriately applied.
Ten minutes of extremely hasty and sloppy internet research revealed the word pervert has undergone considerable transformations since it was incorporated into the English language. Originally from the Latin, the word is combination of per (meaning thoroughly or to an extreme degree) and vertere (to turn). Thus, the original Latin meaning of the word was an extreme or thorough turn. This matches the Proto-Indo-European wert, which means to turn or rotate. The word eventually found its way into French and then migrated to English, but the essential meaning of pervert - an inherently positive, natural, acceptable, or good thing being turned in the wrong direction, or being turned away from, or leading someone away from something considered good and acceptable - has remained intact regardless of which language it called home. As we shall see, what can be perverted tends to change as the perceived good, natural, and acceptable thing changes.
I imagine the Romans considered perverted anyone or anything that took an extreme turn away from the core values of fides, pietas, religio, disciplina, gravitas, dignitas, and virtus, known collectively as the mos mairorum, which roughly translates to “ancestral code.” Unlike the written law, the mos mairorum was more of less an unwritten set of principles that dictated virtues, behavior, and social practices. Oddly enough, the Romans had no qualms about their orgies, slavery, or gladiatorial games, none of which crossed the threshold of perversion in their minds.
When the word was employed in English in the thirteenth century, it was used almost exclusively to delineate the act of turning away or turning someone away from Christianity, which was considered the highest good at the time, reflecting the religiousness of the age. I imagine as the centuries passed, the definition of perversion expanded beyond the realm of religious belief at the same pace Christianity weakened, though this is merely speculation on my part. Whatever the real reason, perversion was slowly applied to any field in which a turning away from a right course or a proper state was observed. Subsequently, everything could, in essence, be perverted – law, justice, language, and yes, even sex. By the time we get to the Victorian Age, it seems the bulk of what was labelled perversion centered on sex, reflecting the rigid, normophilic mores of the time. By the twentieth century I imagine perversion had all but lost its original religious connotations and was used almost exclusively in reference to sex practices (kink, swingers, homosexuality, etc.) that turned away from normophilia Otherwise, perversion simply came to mean something similar to distortion or corruption when used in phrases such a perversion of justice.
In our contemporary world, it is becoming increasingly difficult to use the word perversion, be it in noun, verb, or adjective form. Though phrases like perversion of justice still appear now and then, they are growing scarcer as our definition of justice changes and blurs. The infrequency of the word perversion to describe a turning away from the good, the natural, and the acceptable has much to do with the current state of our culture and society, which has all but abandoned the good, the natural, and the acceptable of the past and Christianity in favor of the establishment of a new mos maiorum built upon the progressive philosophical and political movements of the past two hundred years alone.
I would argue Modern Western culture has not only turned away from its ancestral customs, mores, and religion, but is openly and vehemently hostile to them all. Unlike Ancient Rome, or Medieval Europe, looking to the past for guidance is considered backward and regressive. The past is a dungeon; its customs, behaviors, and religion – chains and barbaric torture devices. Progress dictates individuals and societies liberate themselves and others from the shackles of the past oppression and create new values, new principles, and new virtues. The good that once was is no longer good, but its opposite; accordingly, taking an extreme turn away from or leading people away these inherently malevolent and evil structures cannot, therefore, be considered perverted acts. Thus, what a mere century ago was considered perverted by the vast majority of society, is today not only accepted, but encouraged and celebrated, which makes using the word perversion tricky business indeed.
In the end, I believe perversion, both as a word and as a concept, will not lose its meaning. It will survive, and it will survive with its meaning intact. The only thing that has changed and continues to change is the definition of what constitutes the “good, natural, and acceptable.”
In light of this, one does not need to think too hard about possibilities to understand what will or already defines perversion today. The bigger question is how will those who embody the new mos mairorum, this more modern sense of what is good, natural, and acceptable ultimately deal with those who deviate from the course.
Thus far, the outlook for those turning away from this new good is rather bleak to say the least.
No comments have been added yet.
