Bill Baxter wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Nick Sabalausky <[email protected]> wrote:
"Bill Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Unless of course you use those same words to express your dismay at
today's lunch options. Then you've robbed those words of any special
emphasis they might have been able to provide.
Not necessarily. Just like the "normal everyday words that can be used
maliciously", the difference is all in the delivery. I could say "Oh, fuck,
broccoli again" in a way that suggests "I despise you, let's fight!" (loud,
gruff and annunciated with a sneer or a big frown and glaring at the chef or
server), or I could say it in a perfectly benign manner (subdued, prepended
with a chuckle or soft laugh-like snort or a "heh", and glancing over to,
nudging, and smiling at a tired-of-broccoli friend standing nearby). That
latter still leaves plenty of room for "fuck" to be used coarsely, in just
the same way that "Did you see that thing on TV last night?" leaves plenty
of room for "that" to be used coarsely (as in my earlier example of telling
an insecure acne-victim "I'm surprised you're willing to come out looking
like THAT!")
But then the emphasis is not at all coming from the word itself but
the intonation. You have robbed the word of the extra-special power
it had via that societal indoctrination, making it just an ordinary
word. You are right, though, that you may be able to still get your
point across, even without the extra help that the taboo gives.
But this part is really just my argument for why, given the choice
between profanity as the norm and not, why we should choose the
latter. It's certainly a valid proposition for a society to decide
there are no taboo words and play "fuck-a-bye baby" to their children
in the crib, because after all it's just a word. But I'm saying by
doing so you're giving up a capacity for nuance and dynamic range. I
think there's more value in keeping that capacity for dynamic range
open, than there is value in cheapening "shit" to the point where it
is in all ways equivalent to "poo". Now we have two different words
that can communicate two very different levels of intensity. If you
make it all the same then that really just seems like a loss overall
to me.
I understand your point. But it's sort of lost when people can't bring
themselves to utter certain words because they're too profane, so they
say words like "poo" or "screw" instead. We can't still get a nice,
dynamic range. Look at how many different words there are that can be
substituted for "fuck" in different contexts.
That's quite separate from the second argument, which is that given
societal norms as they stand *now* (whatever those norms may be), it
is disrespectful to one's fellow man to unilaterally decide to ignore
the established norms because of an attitude of "if you don't like it
it's *your* problem". Perhaps in your microcosm, you are behaving
well within the norms. I would assume so, or else you are probably a
lonely guy. But when you go out in public, your microcosm rubs elbows
with everyone else's microcosms -- the average norm of your
surroundings changes and I believe one should adapt one's behavior
accordingly. And I think you agree with this to some extent, too, if
only because I don't see you swearing like sailor Dan here on the NG.
In my case, I rarely swear. I let a word out on my blog every now and
then for emphasis. Regardless of what I think, I understand how society
at large views these words. I don't go out of my way to offend people.
It helps that I'm in Korea, where English expletives just don't have the
same weight. But when I'm around other expats, particularly females
(excluding those who get offended when you don't treat them as one of
the guys), I behave just as I was taught. Well, once I get inubriated
all bets are off.
Considering that these days there are so many people offended by so many
different things, I don't agree with the idea that we should always have
to tip-toe on egg shells in order to avoid offending someone. I mean,
directly insulting people is certainly not good practice. And in public,
as silly as I think it is, I try to be careful about what I say (being
in Korea helps, but when I'm around other expats and alcohol...) But I
fully blame the emphasis on political correctness over the past two+
decades for restrictions on freedom of speech. It started out with good
intentions, but it has devolved into absurdity. For a prime example,
just look what's happened with the UN Special Rapporteur on Human
Rights, where it is now considered a human rights violation to defame
religion. That has some ugly side effects [1].
So while I certainly am consciously considerate of others to a large
extent in person, it is something I hope that some day I don't have to
bother with. And I will continue to post content on my blog that I hope
offends certain groups who always offend me by whinging about being
offended :)
[1] http://richarddawkins.net/article,3600,n,n
