Talk:monster cock

monster cock
a monster cock is not a cock that is a monster such as a wherewolf or a demon, it is a cock that is huge so sum of parts it is not, plus it is a set term common in porn and erotica.Lucifer (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No different than, donkeydick, donkeycock, horsedick, supercock, superdick, or horsecock.Lucifer (talk) 00:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * See monster: + cock:. DCDuring TALK 01:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it means "creature" or "evil being" to most people. "unusually large" is an informal/slang usage and not the common meaning.Lucifer (talk) 06:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you're insulting 'most people' as you put it. Just because they know one meaning of a word doesn't mean they won't know any other meanings, 'monster' to mean large or big is informal but well-known. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * So this usage is not informal? It comes up in court and on the floor of Parliament? I don't think that people have any trouble understanding, say, monster truck, car; monster storm, blizzard, monster bass, catfish, trout (fish), etc. DCDuring TALK 10:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * "monster hand" is used in poker to mean a really great hand, but Oliver Stone said "any horror fan will be disappointed if he comes to this movie expecting a Jaws-like monster hand". I don't think the various uses of monster cock or monster hand will really confuse anyone. (Seriously, is any porn viewer going to pick up a movie box claiming the star has a monster cock and wonder if it's demonic or werewolf?)--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy-deleted by. Wrongly so, IMHO, since gets enough hits that I think this satisfies WT:COALMINE, but whatever, I can't say that I mind. ;-)  —Ruakh TALK 05:30, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, We have monstercock and it is well and durably cited, I have taken the time to add to Citations:monster cock and the citations really show that people are not comparing penises to creatures but rather a more metaphorical sense of a penis that has the qualities such as badass, large, adept at lovemaking, impressive, shocking and per coalmine and all words in all languages and the rich connotation this word has amount its prurient users we should undelete it.Lucifer (talk) 06:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Of the 5 Google Books hits for “monstercock”, 3 of them also feature “monster cock”, so there is a possibility I conclude that they are misspellings, delete . Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 06:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In that case, delete. Ƿidsiþ 05:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I object, it is a common literary practice to spell compounds as 1 and 2 words when synonyms are not readily available.Lucifer (talk) 10:05, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Like all Lucifer's claims, this one comes with no evidence and is probably false. Equinox ◑ 17:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * “monster cock” occurs up to the 32nd page of Google Books results (~320 occurences); “mosntercock” has only 5 hits.
 * Of the 5 books with “monster cock”, 3 also have “monster cock” (in equal or greater amount).
 * The is only one occurrence of “monstercock” in each book where it occurs without “monster cock”.
 * In one of the two occurrences it is written “Monstercock” (with italics); the writer was clearly emphasising monster as an adjective describing cock.
 * To me, this is all evidence that monstercock is a misspelling of the adjective + noun SoP + . Note that I only considered quotes that could be seen in a snippet; in reality all 5 books with “monstercock” yielded results when I searched for “monster cock”. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Keep. Dug up five Usenet cites of monstercock (see Citations:monstercock). This should now meet COALMINE. Astral (talk) 09:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)