There are etiquette rules that suggest that it’s impolite in certain situation to say “I’m going to the toilet”, because of those reasons.
I don’t think that’s the reason, because if it was it would apply regardless of which words you use, whatever their literal meaning, so long as it’s reasonably unambiguous in the context (why would “the ladies’ room” or “talk to a man about a horse” be any less problematic, when the listener knows what you mean?), and it wouldn’t depend on which side of the pond you’re on (ISTM that “toilet” is less often replaced by euphemisms in BrE than in AmE).
I don’t think that’s the reason, because if it was it would apply regardless of which words you use, whatever their literal meaning, so long as it’s reasonably unambiguous in the context (why would “the ladies’ room” or “talk to a man about a horse” be any less problematic, when the listener knows what you mean?)
When a woman goes to the ladies room she might also go to fix up her makeup or hairstyle.
Secondly words matter. Words trigger thoughts. If you speak in deep metaphars you will produce less images than if you describe something in detail.
(ISTM that “toilet” is less often replaced by euphemisms in BrE than in AmE).
Americans are more uptight about intimicy, so that fits nicely. They have a stronger ban on cureswords on US television than in Great Britian.
I would also expect more people in Bible Belt stats to use suuch euphemisms than in California.
Fun fact: Brits and Americans actually use the word ‘toilet’ in very different ways. An American goes to the restroom and sits on the toilet; a Brit goes to the toilet and sits on the loo. When a Brit hears the word ‘toilet’, he’s thinking about the room, not the implement.
When a woman goes to the ladies room she might also go to fix up her makeup or hairstyle.
She can do the same things in the toilet too, can’t she?
If you speak in deep metaphars you will produce less images than if you describe something in detail.
But once a metaphor becomes common enough, it stops being a metaphor: if I’m saying that I’m checking my time, is that a chess metaphor? For that matter, “toilet” didn’t etymologically mean what it means now either—it originally referred to a piece of cloth. So, yes, words trigger thoughts, but they don’t to that based on their etymology, but based on what situations the listener associates them with.
(Why are specifying Great Britain, anyway? How different are things in NI than in the rest of the UK? I only spent a few days there, hardly any of which watching TV.)
She can do the same things in the toilet too, can’t she?
Yes, but that image isn’t as directly conjured up by the word toilet.
I’m also not saying that the term ladies room will never conjure up the same image just that it is less likely to do so.
Furthermore, if you are in a culture where some people use euphemisms while others do not, you signal something by your choice to either use or not use the euphemisms.
Of course what you signal is different when you are conscious that the other person consciously notices that you make that choice than when it happens on a more unconscious level.
(Why are specifying Great Britain, anyway? How different are things in NI than in the rest of the UK? I only spent a few days there, hardly any of which watching TV.)
I don’t think that’s the reason, because if it was it would apply regardless of which words you use, whatever their literal meaning, so long as it’s reasonably unambiguous in the context (why would “the ladies’ room” or “talk to a man about a horse” be any less problematic, when the listener knows what you mean?), and it wouldn’t depend on which side of the pond you’re on (ISTM that “toilet” is less often replaced by euphemisms in BrE than in AmE).
When a woman goes to the ladies room she might also go to fix up her makeup or hairstyle. Secondly words matter. Words trigger thoughts. If you speak in deep metaphars you will produce less images than if you describe something in detail.
Americans are more uptight about intimicy, so that fits nicely. They have a stronger ban on cureswords on US television than in Great Britian. I would also expect more people in Bible Belt stats to use suuch euphemisms than in California.
Fun fact: Brits and Americans actually use the word ‘toilet’ in very different ways. An American goes to the restroom and sits on the toilet; a Brit goes to the toilet and sits on the loo. When a Brit hears the word ‘toilet’, he’s thinking about the room, not the implement.
She can do the same things in the toilet too, can’t she?
But once a metaphor becomes common enough, it stops being a metaphor: if I’m saying that I’m checking my time, is that a chess metaphor? For that matter, “toilet” didn’t etymologically mean what it means now either—it originally referred to a piece of cloth. So, yes, words trigger thoughts, but they don’t to that based on their etymology, but based on what situations the listener associates them with.
(Why are specifying Great Britain, anyway? How different are things in NI than in the rest of the UK? I only spent a few days there, hardly any of which watching TV.)
Yes, but that image isn’t as directly conjured up by the word toilet.
I’m also not saying that the term ladies room will never conjure up the same image just that it is less likely to do so.
Furthermore, if you are in a culture where some people use euphemisms while others do not, you signal something by your choice to either use or not use the euphemisms.
Of course what you signal is different when you are conscious that the other person consciously notices that you make that choice than when it happens on a more unconscious level.
I didn’t intent any special meaning there.