You need to be careful when googling “intercourse island,” lest you get results for a raunchy, x-rated reality show. Or, a ‘please explain’ from your institution asking what you are doing with their computers. I was all prepared to answer with “I promise, it’s for an article.”

The giggle factor of the name is undeniable and baffling and so I spent weeks searching online for answers. 

The Intercourse Islands are a group of islands located in the Dampier Archipelago, off the coast of the Burrup Peninsula (or Murujuga) in Australia’s north-west. The five islands are West Intercourse, West Mid Intercourse, Intercourse, East Mid Intercourse, and East Intercourse Island. 

If there was another name used by local or historic indigenous groups, it is not publicly listed.

The islands are also not included on tourism documents found on City of Karratha’s website, or mentioned on the Murujuga National Park Visitor Guide, or the Australia’s North West Explore page on the Dampier Archipelago.

‘Intercourse’ has two definitions — the first, according to Oxford’s Learner’s Dictionary, refers to “the physical activity of sex, usually describing the act of a man putting his penis inside a woman’s vagina.” 

The second, aptly described by the dictionary as ‘old-fashioned’ is: “communication between people, countries, etc.”

UWA linguist Amanda Hamilton-Hollaway said of the modern use of the word: “It certainly seems to be that this word is now used much more often in the sense of sexual intercourse. It seems virtually unused in the sense of communication.”

So, where does a name that could be straight out the mouth of a pre-teen boy after his first sex-ed class come from?

According to an article in a 1977 edition of Hammersley News titled ‘Naming of the Intercourse Islands’, the naming goes back more than 200 years to Captain Philip Parker King’s survey of the western and north western coasts of the continent.

This account was captured in King’s book, Narrative of a Survey of the Intertropical and Western Coasts of Australia, published in 1827. King described three encounters on the Intercourse Islands with varying successes in early 1818.

The first encounter involved King’s crew capturing an indigenous man to make contact: “seizing him by the hair … and dragging him into the boat, against which he resisted stoutly.” King’s account described giving the man sugar water and tools as a peace offering. 

The second encounter referred to the same group the man they’d forcibly pulled aboard had come from. King’s crew again tried to exchange gifts, although the gifts were left behind.

The third encounter was with a more wary group, who warded off King’s crew’s attempts to communicate.  

King said of these interactions, “In consequence of the communication that we had with these natives, the group between Lewis Island and the main was called The Intercourse Islands.”

Although King refers to the communication between his group and the indigenous tribes, one wonders if there was a tongue in cheek moment in using the word ‘intercourse’.

An excerpt from Jonathon Green’s book The Vulgar Tongue: Green’s History of Slang notes the term ‘sexual intercourse’ was used as far back as 1753 – more than half a century before King’s expedition. It’s not unreasonable to wonder if there was a school-boy’s mind at work here.

There is little mention of the islands by name in modern documentation.

Rio Tinto’s Dampier Salt operations use East Mid Intercourse Island, and their Iron Ore operations use East Intercourse Island. Of note, Rio Tinto referred to East Intercourse Island and East Mid Intercourse Island as EII and EMI respectively in its Port Handbook and professional communications, but did not use acronyms for any of the other islands or sites in the area they operate on. 

The islands are not mentioned on tourism sites, despite mentions of other islands in the Dampier Archipelago. In fact, the only use of ‘intercourse’ on the Australia’s North West travel site is listed under ‘Important Travel Tips’: “always use protection when having sexual intercourse.”

WA’s lands department, Landgate, referred us to the City of Karratha when queried about past or present petitions for name changes. The City of Karratha did not respond.