[4398] in Depressing_Thoughts
Re: badwords
cfields@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (cfields@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Tue Mar 8 02:14:10 1994
> - but because you state your opinions in such a rude and offensive manner
>
> Language prudery.
Cool. I like that phrase. But so what? There's something that bothers
everyone. If not in language, then elsewhere. Is it rational that it
should bother them? Usually not. Do you have no hangups yourself? Is
there nothing that irrationally bothers you?
> What is rude or offensive about the word "fuck", in and of itself?
In and of itself, nothing, of course. Offensive is relative to
society. So it is with fuck. If you're enough a part of the relevant
society, fuck is offensive to you.
> Why is something rendered "rude" if a certain noun is preceded by a
> "fucking"?
Same deal.
> What rational argument can you offer me, to convince me that "fucking
> thing" is the epitome of rudity
Pretty easy if you've got the correct definition of rude. But as far
as I can tell, you don't think the word "rude" should exist at all, at
least with respect to language. But it does...
> Never occurred to you to question why certain words are "bad", eh?
Do you really not understand why words are considered bad by some
people? Do you expect everyone to be rational in all respects? Are
you?
> Taboo. And you've bought into it, sold out unto it, and swallowed it
> whole, with nary a smathering of indigestion.
Is nothing taboo to you? Are you sure? You can't really know, given
you've swallowed it whole, that it's irrational.
It seems like you're criticising a social convention that is only
problematic in that everyone doesn't share it, potentially hindering
communication in one direction. I don't think it's that big of a deal.
It's not that hard to avoid the profanity that offends, at least in
writing, is it? You seem to have done pretty well at it here. On the
other hand, if you're offended by something, it's pretty difficult to
get over - even assuming you believe you should.
> "Wade"? The only reason it takes any effort for you to read through
> and past such words, is that you have a hang-up over 'em.
I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but I find the superfluous use
of adjectives, whatever adjectives they may be, to be very distracting
and definitely difficult to wade through. Occasional emphasis isn't a
problem, but as it becomes less occasional it becomes more of a problem.
> If you are offering insights on rationality, well then I'm afraid I'm gonna
> have to pass on them, thanks-a-bunch.
I think I'd agree that there's not a rational reason for superfluous
adjectives. My definition is that they are not needed to make a point
- take them out, and no information, save possibly the attitude of the
writer, is lost. They're just noise. Why would you rationally want to
introduce noise?
> Your position then, is that "fucking school" is ir-rational, whereas
> "school", surprisingly enough, is rational.
School. Information. Fucking school. Same information. Fucking adds
nothing but emphasis. At least, in an interpretation with no context.
One assumes you're not referring to a school where one is taught to
fuck. Well, I assume that anyway.
