TL;DR what everyone wants to know - 'cant' is not ye olde speak for 'cunt'. From the book [1] - Cant is old; Slang is always modern and changing. To illust

TL;DR what everyone wants to know - 'cant' is not ye olde speak for 'cunt'. From the book [1] - Cant is old; Slang is always modern and changing. To illustrate the difference: a thief in Cant language would term a horse a prancer or a prad,—while in slang, a man of fashion would speak of it as a bit of blood, or a spanker, or a neat tit. A handkerchief, too, would be a billy, a fogle, or a kent rag, in the secret language of low characters,—whilst amongst vulgar persons, or those who aped their speech, it would be called a rag, a wipe, or a clout. Cant was formed for purposes of secrecy. Slang is indulged in from a desire to appear familiar with life, gaiety, town-humour, and with the transient nick names and street jokes of the day. Both Cant and Slang, I am aware, are often huddled together as synonymes, but they are distinct terms, and as such should be used. [1] 'Cant' even at the time was not really believed to exist, book review in (1859) - https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/146567372 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/146567372 > “rhyming slang”, the Cockney dialect whereby “table” becomes “Cain and Abel” I always thought you took it one further i.e. He's a dropkick -> a dropkick is taking a punt -> he's a cunt. It's not subtle to just rhyme.