"playboy" [Was: article on the name "America"]

[Jonathan Lighter]

I wouldn't think of ignoring BW.  Was he described as a "millionaire
playboy" from the beginning?  Or a "millionaire socialite"?  Or just a
"millionaire"?

JL

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Baker, John M. <JMB at stradley.com> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Baker, John M." <JMB at STRADLEY.COM>
> Subject:      Re: "playboy" [Was: article on the name "America"]
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>        I don't think you can ignore the influence of millionaire
> playboy Bruce Wayne, surely the most famous playboy of them all.  It's
> not always clear just what kind of "playing" Wayne does, but his status
> as a playboy seems to include personal wealth; high society connections;
> single status (i.e., neither married nor an exclusive relationship); and
> a reputation for frivolity, including a perceived love of parties
> (though he often misses them or leaves suddenly) and lack of serious
> interests.  (This last is quite true:  Although Bruce Wayne, as Batman,
> does take a deep interest in crime and justice, he largely ignores
> everything else, including his company, Wayne Enterprises.  Compare Tony
> Stark, a thoroughly committed industrialist.)
>
>
> John Baker
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf
> Of Jonathan Lighter
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:40 PM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: "playboy" [Was: article on the name "America"]
>
>  The pre-1920 "playboy" seems to have been primarily fun-loving (rather
> than
> "pleasure-seeking") and irresponsible, given (perhaps) to drinking,
> fighting, sporting, and whoring. The term seems to have carried some
> slight
> opprobrium.
>
> In contrast, the modern "playboy" is usu. well-to-do and socializes
> successfully with
> many women (who are not predominantly prostitutes).
>
> The condition about prostitutes is significant.  As I read it, a young
> man
> in the 19th C. who consorted regularly with prostitutes and was
> generally
> irresponsible, but was also seeking a wife, would very clearly be a
> "playboy."  Since the mid 20th C., however, the playboy doesn't want a
> wife.
> As OED suggests, he is also paradigmatically well-to-do. (Cue the Jordan
> Playboy.)  However, if his "sexual promiscuity" is chiefly with
> prostitutes,
> he is not a "playboy."  A playboy easily gets social dates with numerous
> women. He's still a "playboy" even if he's not having sex with them, and
> "playboy" usu. carries little or no opprobrium.
>
> "Sexual promiscuity" has never been a defining characteristic.
> Moreover,
> today's "playboy" need not be generally irresponsible at all. Many
> successful business executives and dedicated athletes are "playboys."
>
> JL
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>



--
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org