Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
'Foul' Language and the Modern Internet

By UncleMikey in Op-Ed
Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 03:55:18 AM EST
Tags: Internet (all tags) 		Internet

This began as a comment on the 'Attacking Iraq Not Justified' article; at wiredog's suggestion, I've decided to post it on its own to see what people think.

There was a time when 'foul' language was relatively rare on the nets, or at least frequently bleeped out. Some of this was, I think, a matter of who was on the net -- mostly computer professionals and other highly educated types, with a smattering of college students from those schools who got 'enlightened' early. In the Jargon File, Eric S. Raymond even makes a point of saying, in the entry for 'fuck me harder', that such language is extremely rare in the hacker community.

Those days of a relatively 'clean' Internet, however, are long past. One need only skim any random K5 article's comments to see this.

ADVERTISEMENT
Sponsor: rusty
This space intentionally left blank
...because it's waiting for your ad. So why are you still reading this? Come on, get going. Read the story, and then get an ad. Alright stop it. I'm not going to say anything else. Now you're just being silly. STOP LOOKING AT ME! I'm done!
comments (24)
active | buy ad
ADVERTISEMENT

With a few exceptions, the Seven Deadly Words are pretty much taken in stride, here, along with dozens of others that would not be considered tolerable in 'polite' company.

Some would probably say that this is part of a wider trend in society at large. Certainly, I do see a greater tolerance for 'bad' words now that I did growing up.

I have a theory, however, that this is, rather, one more way in which we who ride the 'Net compensate for the lack of 'inflection' possible even in HTML text. Lacking the ability to convey shades of meaning (particularly negative meaning) with tone of voice, profanity, obscenity, and scatology have become a fairly common substitute.

What, for example, conveys strong disagreement more clearly: "I'm sorry, sir, but I just don't think you've hit the nail on the head." or, "Excuse me? That's the most fucked up piece of shit I've ever heard in my life."

Or, for another example, both of the following phrases describe K5's late-November, early-December experience:

The old machine and it's array were a bit fragile, and when they got moved (without rusty knowing about it), they broke.

vs.

The old K5 shit the bed when some jack-off moved it. They didn't even fuckin' tell rusty they were moving it until after it was broken. What assholes.

The latter, however, more completely conveys the exasperation which many of us here felt at the situation. Tone of voice is easier to reader to infer (and easier for the writer to imply).

This is not a call for a Kinder, Gentler 'net -- oh, fuck no :-). I know that some people, even here at K5, dislike the use of such language. Some even hide behind their dislike, refusing to answer someone's points and instead wasting their time on a language complaint. I don't necessarily see any need for K5ers to suddenly start moderating how they express their opinions. And anyway, that wouldn't make the 'Net more kind and gentle, all by itself, anyway. Read the polemics from the era of America's War for Independence, sometime, and you'll see just how well one writer can flame another without resort to such language.

No, this is just a quest for thoughts on why blue langauge should come so easily to our lips -- or fingers, rather -- without any attempt to gloss it over, when even five years ago we would at least have thrown in a few f**king asterisks. :-) I've told you my hypothesis, above. What's yours?

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Should K5ers strive for cleaner language
o Yes. 21%
o Not necessarily. 26%
o Fuck no. 52%

Votes: 165
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Jargon File
o fuck me harder
o hacker
o Seven Deadly Words
o Also by UncleMikey

Display: Sort:
'Foul' Language and the Modern Internet | 150 comments (140 topical, 10 editorial, 1 hidden)
Profanity (3.71 / 7) (#1)
by damiam on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 05:29:12 PM EST

I've never understood what people's problem is with profanity. Since the words themselves don't hurt anyone. it must be the meanings behind them. But those same meanings can almost always be expressed differently (for example darn, crap, f*ck) and no one has a problem with that. You can even say the same words in with different meanings (for example, 'Satan lives in hell', 'Sinners are eternally damned', 'The bitch had three puppies') and no one takes offence either.

So there's no problem with the meanings, and no problem with the words themselves, but there is a problem when you put them together? That just doesn't make sense to me.

overuse of profanity (4.62 / 16) (#2)
by Delirium on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 05:37:27 PM EST

The latter, however, more completely conveys the exasperation which many of us here felt at the situation. Tone of voice is easier to reader to infer (and easier for the writer to imply).
But at the same time, the latter sounds like it was written by a middle-school kid who just learned how to curse. The former more completely conveys the actual situation, rather than forcing us to infer what happened from an exasperation-filled string of expletives.

Now certainly profanity may serve a useful communicative purpose, but its overuse destroys any benefit it might've had. And in this particular example, I disagree entirely with your view - the non-profanity-filled version is far superior.

To those who deplore profanity (4.09 / 32) (#3)
by rusty on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 05:45:34 PM EST

I only say, get off your lovemaking high horse and shut the intercourse up already. We have more than enough of that excrement about "proper manners" in the rest of our lives without rectal sphincters like you trying to ram that bovine-produced fertilizer down our throats here, too. In conclusion, please consume fecal matter and shuffle off this mortal coil.

PS: It ain't what you say, it's how you say it. ;-)

____
Not the real rusty

Saying Vs. Typing (3.28 / 7) (#5)
by delmoi on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 05:57:18 PM EST

I sware in writing all the fucking time. But, I hardly every use those kinds of words while speaking. This was made pretty apperant to me in a fiction writing class I took this summer. When it came time to read my paper, I found that I really didn't want to say the swarewords out loud. So I didn't.

Of course, everyone had a copy that they could read from, so they knew I was coping out. But whatever.
--
"'argumentation' is not a word, idiot." -- thelizman
As George Carlin put it: (2.77 / 9) (#7)
by onyxruby on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 06:04:29 PM EST

Here's a transcript of how one Mr George Carlin put it ever so eloquently several years ago in what might be his most famous monologue:

The big seven words you weren't allowed to broadcast were: Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker and Tits.

"I love words. I thank you for hearing my words. I want to tell you something about words that I uh, I think is important. I love..as I say, they're my work, they're my play, they're my passion. Words are all we have really.

We have thoughts, but thoughts are fluid. You know, [humming]. And, then we assign a word to a thought, [clicks tongue]. And we're stuck with that word for that thought. So be careful with words. I like to think, yeah, the same words that hurt can heal. It's a matter of how you pick them.

There are some people that aren't into all the words. There are some people who would have you not use certain words. Yeah, there are 400,000 words in the English language, and there are seven of them that you can't say on television. What a ratio that is. 399,993 to seven. They must really be bad. They'd have to be outrageous, to be separated from a group that large. All of you over here, you seven. Bad words. That's what they told us they were, remember? 'That's a bad word.' 'Awwww.' There are no bad words. Bad thoughts. Bad Intentions.

And words, you know the seven don't you? Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker, and Tits, huh? Those are the heavy seven. Those are the ones that will infect your soul, curve your spine and keep the country from winning the war.

Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker, and Tits, wow. Tits doesn't even belong on the list, you know. It's such a friendly sounding word. It sounds like a nickname. 'Hey, Tits, come here. Tits, meet Toots, Toots, Tits, Tits, Toots.' It sounds like a snack doesn't it? Yes, I know, it is, right. But I don't mean the sexist snack, I mean, New Nabisco Tits. The new Cheese Tits, and Corn Tits and Pizza Tits, Sesame Tits Onion Tits, Tater Tits, Yeah. Betcha can't eat just one. That's true I usually switch off . But I mean that word does not belong on the list.

Actually, none of the words belong on the list, but you can understand why some of them are there. I am not completely insensitive to people's feelings. You know, I can dig why some of those words got on the list...like cocksucker and motherfucker. Those are...those are heavy-weight words. There's a lot going on there, man. Besides the literal translation and the emotional feeling. They're just busy words. There's a lot of syllables to contend with. And those K's. Those are aggressive sounds, they jump out at you. CocksuckerMotherfuckerCocksucker . It's like an assault, on you. So I can dig that.

And we mentioned shit earlier, of course. Two of the other 4-letter Anglo-Saxon words are Piss and Cunt, which go together of course. But forget about that. A little accidental humor there. Piss and Cunt. The reason Piss and Cunt are on the list is that a long time ago certain ladies said 'Those are the two I am not going to say. I don't mind Fuck and Shit, but P and C are out. P and C are out.' Which led to such stupid sentences as 'OK, you fuckers, I am going to tinkle now.'

And of course the word Fuck. The word Fuck, I don't really...well, this is some more accidental humor, but I don't really want to get into that now. Because I think it takes too long. But I do mean that. I mean, I think the word fuck is an important word. It's the beginning of life, and, yet it's a word we use to hurt one other, quite often. And uh, people much wiser than I have said, I'd rather have my son watch a film with two people making love than two people trying to kill one other. And I of course agree. I wish I know who said it first, and I agree with that. But I would like to take it a step further. I would like to substitute the word fuck, for the word kill in all those movie cliches we grew up with. 'Okay Sheriff, we're gonna fuck ya now. But we're gonna fuck ya slow.' So maybe next year I'll have a whole fuckin' rap on that word. I hope so.

Uh, there are two-way words, but those are the seven you can never say on television. Under any circumstances you just can not say them ever, ever ever, not even clinically. You can not weave them in the panel with Doc and Ed and Johnny, I mean it's just impossible, forget those seven, they're out.

But, there are some two-way words. There are double-meaning words. Remember the ones your giggled at in sixth grade? 'And the cock crowed three times.''Hey, the cock the cock crowed three times. It's in the bible.' There are some Two-way words, like it's okay for Kirk Goudy(sp?) to say 'Roberto Clemente has two balls on him.' But he can't say, 'I think he hurt his balls on that play Tony, don't you? He's holding them. He must have hurt them by God.' And the other two-way word that goes with that one is prick. It's okay if it happens to your finger. Yes, you can prick your finger, but don't finger your prick. No, no."

Credit goes to this site for their transcript of his famous speach. That being said, I don't mind a little swearing to accentuate a point, but will simply dismiss out of hand anything that is chock full of swearing.

The moon is covered with the results of astronomical odds.

Dirty Words, Dirty Minds (3.31 / 19) (#11)
by SPrintF on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 06:30:48 PM EST

Most "contributors" to Internet content, to weblogs in particular, are poor writers. Their writing style reflects their casual speaking style, and, in turn, their sloppy thinking style. If they are inarticulate, you can reasonably conclude that they're stupid. If they swear a lot, you can conclude that they have a limited vocabulary, and that they rely heavily on what little they know.

Most people today aren't readers, let alone writers. The decline of language on the Internet is due to the influx of more, and more stupid, people. Intelligent discourse is diluted by trolls and flamers.

-1, pointless article, pointless subject. (1.25 / 12) (#18)
by suick on Mon Dec 24, 2001 at 08:48:31 PM EST

"People like to swear on the internet, they used to not, but now they do! Is this a good thing? Sure it is!"

This has got to be the most inane article written in a while, and should have stayed a comment. Your article states the obvious about a topic which has no real value to discuss.

Ok, so now we now that most of k5 likes to swear. Woohoo. Was this profanity roll-call necessary?

order in to with the will I around my effort sentences an i of more be fuck annoying.
American English sucks (yet again) (4.25 / 12) (#23)
by MicroBerto on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 12:08:39 AM EST

When I was in high school, I was talking to my Russian friend, who exclaimed how much America sucks when it comes to swear words. We basically use the word 'fuck' for everything -- and it's totally overplayed! We are basically a language with TWO swear words - fuck and shit, and shit isn't even bad anymore!

Our country's jargon has evolved into a mess of simplicity and has lost all flavor when it comes to obscenity. Is there anything that can be done about it?

We really need to start borrowing words from Europe. Please send help!

Berto
- GAIM: MicroBerto
Bertoline - My comic strip

Foul language. (3.33 / 15) (#28)
by driftingwalrus on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 08:05:11 AM EST

The english language has over six hundred thousand words. Why is it such a difficult intellectual feat to pick some other ones? The English language can be used as a scalpal, carefully slicing and dissecting one's opponent. Most people however, and I beleive this is a reflection of the decay of education, decide to use it as a club.

Not only does it demonstrate a lack of intellectual capability, it also demonstrates a horrible laziness that has gripped the users of our language. Not only can these people not be bothered to phrase their statements with greater tact and precision, they also will not put the effort into coming up with a suitable retort. As a result of this laziness, any kind of discussion degenerates into the equivalent of two people shouting "Well You're one too!" and "Am not!" back and forth at each other with enough profanity inserted to melt a small housepet. It demonstrates a profound intellectual laziness that is running rampant. Consider stand-up comedy. Before the days of lazy imbeciles like Richard Pryor, one had to be creative to pull it off. You need to have a broad base of knowledge to draw from, and a clever mind to make it work - there are some who are still like that, Robin Williams being one good example - but the VAST majority just get up on stage and club their audience until they laugh. It's just not funny any more. Also worth considering is Monty Python, a group of individuals which are quite people within the hacker culture. Every one of them has doctorate's in medicine and is very highly educated.

By way of conclusion, this issue is not really about people being stupid. It's about people being lazy. A game with no rules is very easy to play. By imposing rules and controls, it requires more work but is also more rewarding. Remember: Checkers is just chess with fewer rules.


"I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
My take on profanity: (3.85 / 7) (#29)
by ersatz on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 08:19:52 AM EST

I swear. A lot, in fact. I swear around my friends, I swear around my parents (quite a bit, actually, they've gotten really cool about it in the last few years, although my dad occasionally complains about "ineffective swearing" :)), and, hell, I even swear around my teachers (but I don't go to any sort of normal High School...) Basically, within the context of my life, profanity isn't really a forbidden, or a discouraged thing. Rather, it's a useful extension to the English language.

Some have commented that profanity is the sign of a poor writer. I find this to be incorrect. Profanity changes the tone of writing, and that can be taken advantage of. The most general use of profanity is it simply and easily makes speech markedly informal. "Aw, fuck", might not be as eloquent as "oh, despair, for the world is cold and cruel", but everyone will be taken down to a lower level of formality, eliminating any distinctions between classes. Fuck is human and base word. I love it.

Others argue that profanity's potential is crippled by its overuse. I generally disagree. Profanity, including it's overuse, is always communicative. "Aw, fuck, I fuckin' hate this shit" is just great to communicate your life situation to a friend in a casual, base way, even though about half of the sentence is profanity. Sure, its entirely possible to overuse profanity in such a maner to make it obvious that one is doing it for it's own sake. But if someone is too stupid to realize they write like a 3rd grader with a potty mouth, then we know all that much more about them, just like any bad writing.

Profanity - Myth or Reality? (3.33 / 3) (#34)
by daveq on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 10:33:51 AM EST

Really folks, can a word be inherintly bad? Can wallpaper be inherintly bad? Words are used to communicate thoughts. Thoughts on the other hand can be inherintly evil/bad. Words are just the medium. While using so-called "bad" words affects how much respect certain types of people give you, they don't do any real harm at all. They're great for communicating with friends -- just keep them out of places where they're distracting or unnecessary (work).

Can't Understand the Fascination (3.37 / 8) (#39)
by boyken on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 12:04:09 PM EST

Really. I have never understood the fascination people have with profanity. Proponents argue that it their "right" to use these words and they can't understand why people get so upset at the overuse of profanity. I would argue that it is you proponents that have the hangup. What is it about these words that so fascinates you that you not only have to pepper your conversations with them, but you feel compelled to defend your "right" to use them?

The point that I find most fascinating is the issue of offensiveness. In times past, a mark of a civilized society was graciousness, consideration for others, and a desire to NOT say or do things that would offend others. I hear people today defending their "right" to be offensive. They say, "It's YOUR problem if you find my speech objectionable." Really? It's funny that this never seems to be a two way street. For example, if my dog were to relieve himself in your front lawn, I'm sure you would have a problem with that, no matter how strenuously I argued that he was simply doing what comes natural for a dog, and that it was his "right" to do so.

Don't miss my point. It's not that using profanity is "right" or "wrong". It's about community and civility. Instead of asserting our "right" to be offensive, why not focus on things that are positive?
...on profanity (3.60 / 5) (#51)
by dave256 on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 07:22:43 PM EST

Profanity is the last resort of inarticulate motherfuckers.
-- /usr/games/fortune

Or, as Mr. Carlin would say:

There are over 60,000 words in the English language. And only seven of them are bad. You 59,993 words, over here. You seven, you're baaad go stand over there.

Profanity really is the last resort of the inarticulate. The net provides plent of opportunity for offering inflection and tone of voice. It's a print medium that happens to also have markups to allow some inflection in the text itself. I try to refrain from using the generally accepted "bad" words in print for the same reason authors in the last several thousand years have -- you really do end up looking a little stupider.
-Dave

Words have meaning. Using them all purpose --- (3.57 / 7) (#53)
by vmarks on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 08:03:36 PM EST

Words have specific meanings. Using them in an all purpose fashion dilutes their meanings and impact.

People generally swear because they are highly frustrated, in pain, angered, or a combination of them all. Swearing is a last resort done the intensity of the moment, and for those with etiquette, apoligized for afterwards.

Shit applies to one thing only, excrement. Using it as an exclamation, and a common one, lessens it's impact and disassociates it from it's true definition.

Fuck, sometimes referred to as a police injunctive for unlawful carnal knowledge (a folk entymology with no supporting evidence,) is pretty specific to describing an act. Using it to describe anything other than that act dilutes the meaning.

The word fucke first appears around 1503, so there's a long history of usage, but it remains unacceptable for use in public. The first use of as an insult (fucker) was in 1893.

Fuck was exclusively a verb in late middle English, and only recently (last century) extended to use as just about every part of speech.

Then came the victorian period, which made the usage of these words pale in public use. Henry James reviled Oscar Wilde for such things.

So. There's a long history of these words. But they ought to be used with measure and care.

If you dilute the meanings of words, you destroy the ability of language to communicate precisely what you mean, and leave it to your audience to infer from context. Fortunately for your audience, if you use these words liberally in your writings, the context is likely simplistic enough that the audience will not mistake your intended message.

(Historical information from the book _Swearing_: A Social History of Foul Language, Oaths and Profanity in English_ by Geoffrey Hughes, Penguin Books, 1998.)

I think we become desensitized to obscene words (3.33 / 3) (#55)
by joegee on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 08:52:39 PM EST

over time. Look at the words that have become acceptable in every day speech. At one time, "butt" was not spoken on American television. As I recall it was first used in an episode of M*A*S*H because Hawkeye's character would not have used the word "bottom." Now it's on Nickelodeon.

I suspect definitions of profanity and obscenity change along with cultures over time. "Butt" is a simple example, there are probably dozens of others. "Ass" has found its way onto television, as has "piss." There was a time when "damn" and "go to hell" would have been deleted by censors. If you watch closely you'll probably notice "shit" working its way into prime time in the next four to ten years.

How does this pertain to the net, and K5? I think in the cultural percolator we call the internet we're just a bit more advanced (or devolved) than general society. Although "fuck" will probably never be a Nickelodeon word, twenty years from now I'd wager it will be all over whatever media are used to distribute future "television" programming.

<sig>I always learn something on K5, sometimes in spite of myself.</sig>
Forget you and the horse you rode in on (3.88 / 9) (#57)
by rde on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 09:08:27 PM EST

My feeling is that fuck is as much a part of the language as any other word, and its omission is as heinous as any other example of Orwellian lexical limitation. However, I also have the feeling that this is over the top, and that I should probably lighten up.
So why do I say fuck? Because, like many others, it's a word to which I've become accustomed. Like everyone else, I encounter words, and I like the sound of them, and they somehow insinuate themselves into my conversation. At the moment, I can't seem to go a day without using the word 'ineluctable'
While I most emphatically don't swear to shock or offend, I do tend to find myself irritated by the sanctimonious motherfuckers who seem inordinately fond of the phrase 'that isn't necessary'. However, when pressed, they can't give me a single adjective that is necessary. This is petty of me, I know, but the alternative is a diatribe for which I'm rarely in the mood.
I do have one observation, though: most of the time (check the posts in this thread) you'll find that the worst spelling and grammar come from people who want to limit our lexicon, and have the temerity to castigate others for 'bad language'.
So, to one and all: you can lecture me on bad language when you learn to use a fucking apostrophe.

Inteligent articulate peole on the net (3.33 / 3) (#59)
by hillct on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 09:59:34 PM EST

Certainly profanity offers exresson of emoton as well as shades of meaning not easily expressd through more socially acceptable language, but more highly educated and articulate people can usually find alternate expression of meaning through more socially acceptable language. The anonymty of the net offers an opportunity for even the mot articulate people to make use of language society wouldn't otherwise expect or allow from them. The bottom line though, is something my grandfather told me once. "Articulate people with decent vocabularies should have no need for profanity in expressing themselves". This is as true online as in the offline world of real social interaction.

--CTH


--Got Lists? | Top 31 Signs Your Spouse Is A Spy
"Pop" Lyrics (4.28 / 7) (#60)
by sgp on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 10:05:18 PM EST

What really gets me, is when popular radio stations play songs which include excessive swearing.

My best examples would be Limp Bizkit (who rock) and Eminem (who's kinda interesting for a while).

I really enjoy listening to an album, even if the profanity involves every other word. I really hate to listen to a track on the radio, though, if they have to remove every other word (by a bleep or by silence). It disrupts the flow of the music.

"We don't, don't give a f**k and we won't, ever give a f**k until you, you give a f**k about me, and my generation. So go ahead and talk s**t. Talk s**t about me...."

Anyway, I think that's how it goes. I don't really notice it on the album. But when the radio station insists on playing this track, most of which they can't broadcast, it really gets on my t*ts. Why bother playing it at all, if you're going to ruin the flow of the track?

Some may argue whether or not it's art. If it's not, don't play it. If it is, don't play with it.

But as far as on-line goes, I think that many of us have learned lessons from google's archiving of old NNTP postings. I've found a few embarrasing posts from myself back in the early 90's (none of which included profanity) - if I swear in 2001 because it saves me a minute's thinking, it could come back to haunt me in 2021.


There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

What do you say when you are really fucked? (4.50 / 6) (#66)
by chinhdo on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 11:23:06 PM EST

I think there are two problems here with the use of foul language in public forums. First is the misuse of language. When you say "fuck" all the time, what do you say when you are really fucked? The second problem is the failure to tailor your language to the audience. Just as you adjust your language when speaking in front of a bunch of kids, or your best buddies, or your grandma, you should use neutral language in public forums where you don't know the exact make-up of the audience.

Flaws in the theory (4.75 / 8) (#67)
by Hobbes2100 on Tue Dec 25, 2001 at 11:36:17 PM EST

Your theory was very interesting, interesting enough to make me really wonder what its merits (and demerits) were.

I pretty quickly came up with what I consider a comparable situation. The authors of novels (and of poetry, short stories, articles; i.e. all strictly written media) have not resorted to the use of the "seven deadly words" (or, if they have, at least to only a minimal extent compared to the 'net). So, I have to say that the hypothesis that the profanity on the 'net is explained by the lack of other means of expression is not correct.

However, I do think that there are certain characteristics of 'net communication. The most significant of these is anonymity. Even individuals who choose to use their real names and provide addresses, phone numbers, and other contact information are not fundamentally connected to those with which they communicate. Perhaps anonymity isn't the best term for this condition, but I'll try to clarify the idea.

If I were to respond to UncleMikey calling him any number of profane slurs, I could do so with no real concern for what he thought about me. I will, most likely, never run into him on the street. Even if we did pass, we wouldn't know that we were the face connected to our avatars (unless we were wearing "Hi, I'm Hobbes2100 from K5" shirts). So, I have zero real threat of any physical retaliation and I have little real threat of any other retaliation from UncleMikey (ok, it could happen, but the point is we don't think about it).

Now, my alter ego, Hobbes2100, could suffer some damage in credibility from using certain language. He could also suffer damage from presenting stupid ideas. But, neither of these (will tend to) reflect upon me, myself, and I. It reminds me of my MUD days. Certain players would have high level, friendly characters but would also run PK (player killer) characters that devastated virtual lives (no, I'm not bitter *smile*).

One other note (sorry if I'm losing coherence), imagine a "small village" situation. You are a farmer and you rely on the local supply store for fertilizer, seed, and other necessities. Now, say you and the proprietor of the supply shop have a bit of a tiff. Since you rely on the store owner and, perhaps, the store owner relies on your food, it is in both of your interests to maintain a cordial tone and manner. I think the 'net is almost a complete opposite of this scenario; we can always find other forums and people to argue with (and we can always login as Hobbes0012).

Another note, it's a heck of a lot easier to drop a couple F-bombs then it is to come up with a truly witty, biting comment ("Your mother was hampster and your father was the mud-slinging son of a architect" ... see, it's not that easy).

Regards,
Mark
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? --Iuvenalis
But who will guard the guardians themselves? -- Juvenal

Well, bloody well bugger it! (2.50 / 2) (#71)
by ragnarok on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 02:06:45 AM EST

If you want a humorous view of the whole fair fucking deal, try "The Great Australian Adjective":

"The sunburnt bloody stockman stood
And in a dismal bloody mood,
Apostrophized his bloody cuddy:
"This bloody moke's no bloody good,
He doesn't earn his bloody food,
Bloody! Bloody! Bloody!

Etc. Just to fill you in, in Australasian English, "bloody" is a swear word. It's the bloody word bloody Australians are bloody-well known for. Abso-bloody-lutely - Bugger it!

And if you can't fill yourselves in on what I am getting at, well you should be.


"And it came to healed until all the gift and pow, I, the Lord, to divide; wherefore behold, all yea, I was left alone....", Joseph Smith's evil twin sister's prophecies

Inverse skimming? (4.33 / 6) (#73)
by periFeral on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 02:40:04 AM EST

Perhaps this is connected to the way that people interact with language on the Web....

I remember reading in a study on Web usability (Web Site Usability: A Designer's Guide) that web page copy was generally more effective — and more completely comprehended — when the average grade level of the language was higher than that of, say, advertising copy. One specific datum was particularly notable. The authors found that the Hewlett-Packard site, when they tested it, was regarded by the test groups as "highly readable," yet it had a Gunning Fog index of 15.3. Normally, text with a Gunning Fog index higher than 12 is regarded as "incomprehensible to most readers."

What the authors proposed was that this was due to a tendency to skim text on the Web rather than read it: the more complex the text (and this is especially the case with the Gunning Fog index, as it measures average syllabic complexity) the more "big words" can be immediately recognized. This would allow a quick apprehension of the content (assuming that the reader was familiar with the words) without a large investment of time.

Flip this to its inverse: would that suggest that there is a tendency to write in a manner that involves a minimal investment of time, relying on profanity to communicate by context? This would reduce the effort required for syntactic construction, especially as it applies to implication and logical structure, replacing it with communicative assumptions based on common use of idiom.

I wonder whether the increasing exposure to broadband media — full DivX flics in hours instead of days — and the easy-use interfaces of AOL and various other GUI applications — formatting without markup, toolbars instead of arcane command-line switches — contribute to expectations of "mediated immediacy" (to borrow terms from Hakim Bey) and its attendant instant apprehension of represented (as opposed to present) sense data. I also wonder how, or if, the ubiquitous use of IM clients and file sharing applications play into this.

Not that I feel that this is in any way connected to a putative "culture of instant gratification." I'm thinking more along the lines of something that James Carse mentioned in Finite and Infinite Games: that machines (and, in this case, information systems) don't extend the capabilities of the users. Rather, he argued that users extend the structure and implementation of their machines.

The point about the declining use of asterisks does present a quandary, though. I suspect that this might be related to the declining percentage of educated users — the Internet no longer being a privileged system, but rather one open to anyone who buys a Gateway or a Dell. There might have been an awareness, at first, that one was posting to a community of peers, and there might have been some hesitation regarding appropriate conduct. The existence of a more diversified user base might have changed that... as it has changed the general character of even specialized lists for the design community [ref: article on A List Apart].

But that's just a guess. I wasn't there in the early days.
Oh my God, you've all missed Uncle Mikey's point! (4.20 / 5) (#75)
by Nf3 on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 03:34:35 AM EST

Rather than propose a position against which you all could rail, he asked a question which some of you, in true k5 manner have answered interestingly, but which most of you have missed entirely.

There is both a cognitave and a generational element at play here, if we want to grab this issue by the gonads.

Cognative: what we say, infuences what we think, which influences what we do. Or: our understanding of things, defined by how we explain / describe them: will dictate our actions.

Generational: That 20 something blonde who knocked on my door in her night gown without undies tonight knew I was an older guy, but she also knew that by my uptodate usage of profanity online and by my awareness of current state reality as contrasted to old fogey, letters behind your name, misunderstanding of how things really are now, head up your ass, adequacy oriented, recta fossal (for those of you who know Latin) ambiguity ridden angst, I was of her type. I was/am real and I was/am alive.

Uncle Mikey has pointed us toward a significant thing. A sea change in our language, led by how we speak online, which may point the way toward an incredibly novel future. In doing so he's done something way cool, imho.


Heh. (3.60 / 5) (#77)
by NovaHeat on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 04:30:26 AM EST

Reading through the comment threads, it really doesn't surprise me that a large number of the threads under a topic about internet swearing degenerate into expletive-filled flamewars such as:

"You, sir, are an illiterate boor!"

"well fuck u up the fuking goatass u cocksucking cuntbag."

"You have only proved my point, sir, that you are, without a shadow of a doubt, an idiot. How, then, does it feel to know that whenever you open your mouth, you are telling everyone you are an idiot, sir?"

"Pfff. Ya whatever u shit-eating cockpope. Maybe u should take ur own FUCKING advice u assliking quearbate"

*sigh* Good times... good times. :)

-----

Rose clouds of flies.

Step by step (4.33 / 6) (#83)
by Happy Monkey on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 10:00:14 AM EST

Overuse of "bad" words is merely a step on the path to having no "bad" words anymore. When overused, they lose their stigma, and therefore they also no longer give the emphasis they used to, and their use will fall back to that of any other words. Ride it out, the concept of "bad" words is too stupid - I'll be glad when it's gone. I hope I live long enough.
___
Length 17, Width 3
Why I say "fuck" and "shit" (4.41 / 17) (#86)
by epepke on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 01:06:01 PM EST

It's political speech. Really.

What are now known as the British Isles once had a fairly decent culture, with the influence of the Celts, the Angles, and the Saxons. Everyone knows who Boadicea was, and not too many other cultures had women as generals. Of course, the Romans were not entirely repulsed, but most of their influence worked out pretty well. Through the end of the first millenium, most rule in Britain was clan-based, making use of councils that were quite democratic for their time. As English began to cohere as a language, words like "fuck" and "shit" were used by everybody, kings and farmers alike.

Then, in 1066, William the Conqueror conquered England and essentially enslaved all the people with a rigid hierarchy that was to grow into the feudal system. One of the public relations efforts was an attempt to make the people living there ashamed of the language they used. Words like "fuck" and "shit" became "vulgar," literally of the people. They were considered low class compared to the "correct" Norman French forms. The enslavement was literal, a feudal system of lords and serfs whereby lords could kill serfs when they liked, got free sex with newlyweds, etc., and it only began to weaken with the Magna Carta in 1215 but did not really extend to the common people until about a century and a half after that. Even then, the rigid class system maintained as tradition until this day. All languages have swear words, but only English has this kind of socially engineered, class-based system of "four-letter" words.

I have been hearing for decades about how teaching American Standard English to African-American children is cultural genocide. I'm skeptical; I think that children can easily learn to become bilingual. In any event, I find it appalling in that context how a genuine and explicit use of language to enforce slavery at the hands of the Normans is so ingrained that people to this day do not even wonder why they consider such words "bad," that a political ploy by some French slaveholders should remain internalized by the ex-slaves almost one-thousand years after the fact. Most of us do not even question our assumptions that these words are somehow inherently bad.

There have been some small rebellions against this. In the late 19th century, to quote Bill Bryson in Made In America, "Angela Heywood launghed a spirited campaign for free love in which she made the universal acceptance of the word fuck a central tenet. Why should she be compelled to use the term 'generative sexual intercourse' in her lectures? she repeatedly asked. 'Three words, 27 letters, to define a given action...commonly spoken in one word of four letters that everybody knows the meaning of.'" In the 20th century, of course, there were J.D. Salinger and Lenny Bruce, but the pendulum always seems to swing back. It is still against FCC rules to use Saxon terms when the corresponding French terms are considered appropriate, the opposite of George Orwell's advice..

I think it's time for the rest of the world to get over their inferiority complex with respect to the French. Jerry Lewis isn't that funny, and neither were La Petomaine, the Treaty of Versailles, the colonization of Vietnam and most of the Middle East, the invasion of the Sinai Peninsula, the capitulation to Germany during World War II, or the opportunistic fence-sitting during the Cold War. Napoleon was a jerk. It's really OK to bathe more than once a week and have bathrooms indoors with doors that close. Australian wines taste better and so do most other cuisines. Shakespeare wrote better plays, and even Hollywood makes better movies, admittedly along with a lot of crap. They did produce Jacques Tati and they do like Philip K. Dick, but that only goes so far. In other words, fuck that shit.


The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.--Terry Pratchett
Writing for effect (4.27 / 11) (#89)
by jolly st nick on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 02:25:48 PM EST

I have no qualm with the "decorum" of "profane" words. Framing the discussion on the appropriateness of "vulgar" language is simply the wrong way (in my opinion) to look at the issue. I am more concerned with the fairness with which a writer treats the reader, and the skill and effort put into the words.

Every writer is a karma whore or troll at heart. By this I mean anyone who (figuratively) picks up a pen is hoping for a response. What distinguishes the troll is a lack of sincerity. To elicit a response with your true opinions requires (a) insight and (b) skill. You earn your response by thinking about a topic and crafting your words carefully. Accomplishing this entails vulnerability and effort, for which you deserve to be rewarded. Trolls essentially freeload on the community's attention span by adopting a position from which it is easy to invoke a response and using fairly rote inflammatory language. Trolling is reprehensible because it is a cheap way to get a response(although in rare instances one does encounter trolls of equisite skill).

Bringing this back to the issue of "bad words", my own take is that they are like exclamation points: best to use them sparingly. Words "Fuck", "Motherfucker", "Cunt", "Asshole" etc are at best crude indicators of emotional attitude. They are seldom used in any literal denotative sense and it is a stretch to call most of their appearances metaphorical. Overly free use of these is not informative or eloquent -- it's just a easy (and thus futile) means of calling attention to oneself.

A good case in point is UncleMikey's example:

The old machine and it's array were a bit fragile, and when they got moved (without rusty knowing about it), they broke.

vs.

The old K5 shit the bed when some jack-off moved it. They didn't even fuckin' tell rusty they were moving it until after it was broken. What assholes.

The latter, however, more completely conveys the exasperation which many of us here felt at the situation. Tone of voice is easier to reader to infer (and easier for the writer to imply).
First of all, you should note that the first (presumably less effective) example gives information that the second lacks -- that the old server was somewhat fragile. This indicates to some people who may not know it that moving machines doesn't automatically result in catastrophic failure. To others that already know that, this indicates that the problem was their not checking with Rusty first rather than, say, handling the server in an unusually rough manner.

Secondly, the "tone" communicated by the "vulgar" version is not particularly informative. The people who share this feeling don't need to be told it, and people who don't share it aren't given any means of grasping it. This kind of language implies a kind of egotistical assumption that your feelings matter, not because they are just or understandable, but simply because you are the person feeling them. It is all well and good for when my wife has this attitude when communicating with me, but remember I don't know you and I have no a prior investment in your feelings. If you are writing for strangers, you have to earn their sympathy and respect.

Skillful writing should either communicate something to you didn't know, or give you new ways of articulating and thinking about things you do know.

I think such words might be used skillfully , but not strung into a profanity laced rant where they tend to create a kind of emotionalistic incoherency. Better to use them, in very rare instances, in places where they would not be expected.

Times for profanity (3.00 / 1) (#95)
by unstable on Wed Dec 26, 2001 at 04:47:33 PM EST

There are times when profanity is the best way to convey the situation (there may be other ways but none so direct and to the point)
Take for instance
You have a server and it hangs and needs to be rebooted
Saying

"The servers down is quite enough"

But say that same server starts smoking and you see a orange flickering comming from in the case.

"The server is probably never going to function again, as it is currently on fire"

is one way of stating the problem, but,

"The server is fucked"

get the point across so much better.
But then again I'm not an english major (in highschool my english marks were abismal [you could say "shitty"]) so my opinion may not weigh much.



Reverend Unstable
all praise the almighty Bob
and be filled with slack
A personal story (4.57 / 7) (#101)
by rusty on Thu Dec 27, 2001 at 12:43:53 AM EST

This has almost nothing to do with the article, as it didn't happen on the net at all. But it does tie in with profanity sometimes being an issue of tone, and sometimes being the only way to say what you have to say.

In high school, two of my friends decided to borrow one of their dad's truck, supposedly to go to the store or something. Of course, what they actually wanted to do was take it out in the sand pit down at the other end of the neighborhood and four-wheel around and act stupid. So they asked him if they could use the truck, and he said "Sure, just don't go down to the sand pit and act stupid." Which they promptly did.

Well, they got about 50 yards into the pit when they got it hopelessly stuck. So they trudged home, and got Dad, and told him the truck was stuck in the pit. He didn't say a word, just looked at them for a moment, then went to the garage, got a shovel, and got in the other car. My friends got in with him, and he headed for the pit.

This may be a good time to mention that the Dad in question looks quite a bit like Clint Eastwood, and in fact is often known as "Clint" amongst us, for looks and general attitude toward life.

Anyway, they arrived at the stuck vehicle. The Dad got out, stared at it for a minute, and said:

"This fucker's fucking fucked."

He dug out the wheels a bit, got in, wrangled the truck out of the dirt, and drove away, leaving my friends to bring back the other car. Those were the only words he ever said about the whole matter. Ever. And to this day, between these friends and I, the phrase is legendary, and contains a pretty deep and subtle and very specific shade of meaning. Like, if you claim that "this fucker's fucking fucked," that means that it has already resisted all normal tactics, and getting it unfucked will require turning to whatever expedient you most wanted to avoid. Basically, that means that "we're gonna have to do this the really hard and unpleasant way."

Well, that's my anecdote. Draw whatever conclusions you want from it. I just think it's a good story. And a frequently useful expression, if your friends are as collectively dumb as me and mine are.

____
Not the real rusty

Use (4.50 / 4) (#105)
by mlong on Thu Dec 27, 2001 at 12:34:09 PM EST

Personally I think the user of profanity shows a lack of respect for others around you, or perhaps a lack of maturity. Using profanity in web discussions is pretty lame and unwarranted. Profanity should be reserved for those situations that need it...like when your china cabinet falls off the wall, or perhaps you accidentially cut off your hand, or you back your car into a tree.

Well, fuck me running (none / 0) (#110)
by wiredog on Thu Dec 27, 2001 at 10:20:58 PM EST

Someone posts an article on my suggestion, and it gets to the front page, while I'm on vacation and not hitting the net. So I don't see it until it's been up a few days and has stories of incredible obviousness above it.

Good article, man. It's generated some interesting commentary.

Peoples Front To Reunite Gondwanaland: "Stop the Laurasian Separatist Movement!"

Ancient egyptian wisdom (3.00 / 2) (#113)
by Echo5ive on Fri Dec 28, 2001 at 01:36:39 PM EST

"Dip not your pencil in the ink to hurt a man. The finger of the writer is like the beak of the ibis bird. Beware that it does not turn against you." (modern translation: "Right back at ya.")

"As you act, you will be acted against."

"A good word is a monument."

"The words of a man is his scale. It is this scale that allows others to see the weight of his words."

"Do not ruin the perfect moment by speaking too fast."

"The human body is larger than the Pharaoh's corn shed. It is filled with different answers; pick the one that is good to say and let the evil one be left behind."

"A man loses nothing by speaking mildly, his speech wins nothing by sounding rude."



--
Frozen Skies: mental masturbation.
because (3.66 / 3) (#121)
by anonymous cowerd on Sat Dec 29, 2001 at 07:46:48 PM EST

"Fuck" and "shit" are proscribed for exactly the same reason marijuana is illegal everywhere in the U.S., even when used as medicine; merely to give the power-mad a pretext by which to abuse their subject fellow-citizens.

Yours WD "fucked" K - WKiernan@concentric.net

A drowning man asks for pears from the willow tree.

What do the 'Cuss Words' mean? (none / 0) (#123)
by The Amazing Idiot on Sun Dec 30, 2001 at 02:14:27 AM EST

I'm just quite curious what the definition of these words are (or where they origionally derive). Well, Carlin (and the FCC) made that clear for us.

Shit - Excrement, Explitavive (similar to che (as in check) in japanese)

Piss - The other excrement word, Also can be used as a feeling (You're Pissin' me off.).

Fuck - Sex, Kill (movie cliche) Wasn't this derived from Rome?

Cunt - Women's vaginal region. I've read that this is Latin word. I cannot remember the root. Of what I do remember, it was thier equilavalent of vagina.

Tits - Women's other "sexual" region, breasts. Guys have 1, women have 2.

Cock (cocksucker) - Guy's penis (hopefully not women's ;-) I've heard that this also derives from latin root.


My main point is that I really don't know what these mean, as there is other, more truer meanings behind these 'today' meanings. Does anybody have insight on this?



Offensive? (3.00 / 1) (#124)
by n0mj121 on Sun Dec 30, 2001 at 06:48:17 AM EST

Let me test something...

Fuck.

Did you feel offended? No? Didn't think so. I will try it again...

Shit

Offended that time?
How can anyone be offended when they see one word? Yes, it can be combined with other words to cause offence, but so can anything. For example:

'Joe wouldn't know how to turn a PC on'

There is no one killer word in this sentence, but if you are Joe you could still be offended.
Also,

'Oh shit, I just dropped my tea'

This has the word'o'death, shit, but is not offensive to anyone, because it is not constructed that way. If it was

'Oh you shit, you made me drop my tea'

then it would be offensive, because the word shit is directed at someone.

It is all in the construction, not in the word. But being a strong exclamation, swearing can swing an insulting/offensive/hurtful statement even further.

Lowest common denominator (none / 0) (#129)
by Ixohoxi on Sun Dec 30, 2001 at 11:05:08 PM EST

I think many people here are missing the mark. My own hypothesis is based upon the principles of conformity and intelligence.

Conformity is really, really strong in the United States these days. Most of America's youth are concerned with being popular. If you aren't popular, you can be at a big disadvantage socially. We humans are very social animals, and just like in the wild, if you are "weaker", you are prey. Those who are prey become the means by which the "predators" achieve social dominance. After all, who usually gets the hot cheerleader types in high school - the popular jock or the reserved scholar?

Being popular is about conforming to social norms. Lately, our society has drifted away from proper speech. For many kids, it's not cool to sound like a "geek". Besides that, many kids don't have a grasp of the English language that enables them to understand proper speech. The result of it all is an overall dumbing-down of speech. If one doesn't have a good grasp of the language, are they ever going to improve after their formal education phase is complete?

As far as intelligence goes, I don't propose that people are less intelligent today compared to decades ago. What I do see however, is a lack of effort on a large scale throughout "pop-culture". Many people want to achieve as much as possible with as little effort as possible. "Get rich quick" schemes are one word away from "get popular quick" schemes. This whole concept of being "cool" has dramatically affected our society, further polarizing people into yet another hierarchy - popular or unpopular.

There are many things that are classifiable as "cool" by pop-culture; slang words, specifically vulgar words, fall into this category. Perhaps this is why for years, much of popular music has been laden with profanity. One need look no further than musicians/groups such as Limp Bizkit or Eminem for examples. Which reminds me of another fad - phonetic misspellings are now cool too. Why be cool when you can be "kewl"? Why be skilled when you can have skillz? Even products we buy in stores use this trick to garner name recognition.

In summary, I think it is simply the dumbing-down of our own society, on many levels, which is contributing to the rise of profanity in common speech. Yes, another large component is that people today care alot less about each other, and thus rarely show respect, tact, or courtesy towards their fellow human beings. We as a society are becoming intellectually lazy, emotionally desensitized, and greedy as hell. These things are caused by the dumbing-down of emotions, which is also rampant today.

being a young, foul-mouthed kinda guy... (4.00 / 1) (#133)
by lnxcwby on Tue Jan 01, 2002 at 04:18:34 PM EST

i agree with mikey, in that when i post somewhere or write an email, or irc'ing, it's basically the keyboard being an extention of my mouth. i don't capitalize words, i use excessive punctuation, lots of ... , etc :-) so when i get excited or agitated, i'll slip a "fuck" or "shit" into the mix. it's the way that i would talk, and i'm a verbal kind of person.

in direct response to mikey's question:

No, this is just a quest for thoughts on why blue langauge should come so easily to our lips -- or fingers, rather -- without any attempt to gloss it over, when even five years ago we would at least have thrown in a few f**king asterisks. :-) I've told you my hypothesis, above. What's yours?

i can't speak for the older people out there, but i'm 23, i dropped out of college, and fuck, i barely graduated high school, but i'm a gigantic fucking geek, and i'm good at my job (ask mikey) and this is the way that i convey my feelings, i've been told several times at the office to "tone it down" and i make a concerted effort, but it's just me, be that good or bad.

maybe i'm just too young, maybe i'm the foul-mouthed voice of a new generation, who the fuck knows... but i read k5 because there isn't that underlying desire of the readers or posters to *** stuff out. it seems honest.

cheers!
.l.

To quote Flanders and Swann... (none / 0) (#134)
by Obvious Pseudonym on Wed Jan 02, 2002 at 03:34:04 AM EST

"If we use those words all the time we'll have nothing left for special occasions..."

Obvious Pseudonym

I am obviously right, and as you disagree with me, then logically you must be wrong.

Profanity as shortcut (4.00 / 1) (#135)
by sera on Wed Jan 02, 2002 at 10:33:42 AM EST

No doubt there are multiple factors to why there's so much swearing online. Let me suggest one that I haven't seen anyone else bring up: Profanity is often a shortcut to effective writing, and people need shortcuts more now that they're writing more.

First, let me say where I stand personally on profanity: I don't think there's really anything wrong with profanity, but there's often a more nuanced way to express the same thing. Yes, sometimes you need to use "fuck" and only "fuck" will do. But more often precision is valuable, and swear words tend to be too loaded to be precise.

Writing is a skill, and most of aren't very good at it. This is more of a question of environment than of innate talent. Anybody can become an expert writer, but like most anything else, it takes a little time and attention. Once upon a time many people learned how to do this, before the invention of telephones and telegraphs, when people had to put their most intimate or important thoughts into letters. But after we became dependent on electronic media to transmit our own thoughts and feelings -- and you could argue that with the advent of one-way media like TV we forgot that our own feelings were even worth the trouble -- writing proficiency started to drop out of the culture.

Enter the internet, which makes the demands of writing at the speed of speech. Not that I don't know the stats exactly, but can you imagine how much more writing an average 16-year-old does today than e would've done 20 years ago? Without email, web discussion boards, instant messenger ... But it's still just text, with all of its limitations and strengths. Most people can't write well-crafted prose into a chat window, so they resort to shortcuts. Emoticons are one, swear words are another.

I've noticed this for a while because I always try to write fairly well-structured, clear prose online. But I know I'm an unusual case. For one thing, I simply love written prose. For another, I write quite a bit -- sometimes even for money -- and I like keeping in practice.

firmament.to: Every text is an index.

I think I might have a handle on this..... (5.00 / 1) (#143)
by porkchop_d_clown on Thu Jan 03, 2002 at 11:06:22 AM EST

So, I think streetlawyer reminded me of something when he called me a cunt.

When he did that, I was momentarily startled, but not really hurt or offended - more amused than anything. And that reminded me of a past episode in my life...

Several years ago I quoted a line from "Blazing Saddles" where the sherriff takes himself hostage and yells "Nobody move or the n***** gets it!" - now, this is a black man in a comedy saying this line, and (at the time) I felt no harm in repeating it. Except that a black man who heard me say it became incredibly upset and there were, as they say, repercussions.

For months I was furious at the man for being so hyper-sensitive. Then I realized that part of the problem was that there was simply no word in the English language that you could use on me that would actually hurt me - for example, 'cunt' was startling but hardly hurtful. Not nearly as bad as if streetlawyer had insulted the quality of my code. This led me to some appreciation of how, just because I have a hide like a rhino doesn't mean everyone else does. (Not to mention a certain pavlovian flinch when it comes to the use of racial slurs. :-P)

What I'm wondering is if this characteristic is common among either geeks or young white american males (and face it, 90% of the geeks are also young white american males).

But in a sense, that just begs the question - instead of wondering why we've become more foul-mouthed on the 'net, we have to wonder why we've become less sensitive in this age of diversity training and affirmative action?

eh. I have to get back to work, so I'm just gonna leave that question as an exercise for the reader.



People who think "clown" is an insult have never met any.
'Foul' Language and the Modern Internet | 150 comments (140 topical, 10 editorial, 1 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!