| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 10/06/2006 : 12:41:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Incidentally, I come from a very short generation for whom the term "lady" is an unacceptable term. For most people older or younger its perfectly OK, but for my generation it was classist and condescending.
Same for me - I was brought up not to use it. Some of my colleagues find the use of "woman" derisive, but I stick with it. |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 13:22:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
True, but if anyone who's about to say/write anything looks at possible 'offensive nuances' in their chosen words/phrases, then they'd end up saying nothing. You can say virtually anything in an offensive way using any choice of words.
The first of these statements just isn't true - the vast majority of terms have no offensive connotations. The second is true, but so is the reverese - one can say virtually anything in an inoffensive way.
quote:
An example:- I was driving through a town in Kenya that I lived in once, there were a few hundred people visible, and I had an Afrikaner sitting next to me who I had just picked up from the airport, and he said "They breed like flies, don't they?" He didn't need to say "The kaffirs" in place of "They" which is what he meant (Afrikaners use the word 'kaffir' in place of 'nigger'). So in this instance the word "they" became patently offensive. E.g., I'll put this Afrikaner back in Kenya and make up some offensive sentences for him:-
"Are there many of them there?"
"They are waiting near the gate."
etc. Anyone want to ban the words "them" or "they"? I can still hear him saying those words, and coming out of his mouth the words are filled with hate, he really means "fucking nigger/kaffir black bastards".
No, I don't really agree. In your first example, it is the rest of the sentence where the primary offensiveness is located. "They" is only offensive insofar as he was referring to a sense of otherness and generalising. Yes, this is bound up with his racism, but there were also real cultural differences. For example, if one man says to another, in a context where there are lots of women, "They...", this is not necessarily sexist. (Just to be clear, I am not pretending that the Afrikaaner was not being racist.) The second two examples are different as "they" are somewhere other than here, and so who is referenced is not clear from the physical context. It is only clear from the context of the speaker's attitudes, and thus the otherness issue is more clearly extreme here. It is not a case of banning "they" altogether - it is just that it is offensive in certain uses. The same goes for "coloured/junior/senior". A word having offensive connotations in some contexts doesn't mean it does everywhere. Of course, I realise that you know this. But conversely, that does not mean that an offensive word can be used inoffensively just because that is what the speaker wants.
quote:
There is no logical end to this irrational process.
Well, there is. Terms which are coined by the group themselves (or used by them when other terms are used by others) are very likely to remain fine. This is why terms for mental disability have shifted so much, because in general that is a group less likely to define itself.
quote:
And if I intend to communicate a thought to ten other people and one of them takes offense because the words I chose to use are not the same words that they would themselves have chosen, then that's unfortunate but I don't lose any sleep over it and won't change anything. If however eight of them had taken offense (causing the message to have not been received) then obviously it's in my interest to re-phrase the statement. So in my view intent is everything.
Since it is perfectly easy to talk to ten people without offending any of them, offending one of them would be your fault. This would especially be the case if you offended that person because of their being in a group that none of the others were. Also, your choice of words is part of your intent anyway. If you want to use words regardless of their inherent meaning being offensive, then part of your intent is to be offensive.
quote:
Also, given that 'normal' words like "them" can quickly become offensive (because it's the speaker's position that's offensive), then so-called offensive words can quickly become non-offensive if used in a non-offensive manner. So, who's offended by this sentence:- "I like niggers, gooks, faggots and subnormal retards." 
I've already said this really, but words which are coined in an offensive context are completely different to normal words being used in an offensive way. And to answer your question literally, other than in an ironic context (which is dodgy ground anyway) those words in any statement would be offensive.
quote:
If everone on the planet decided to use the word "cunt" 200 times per day, by the end of the week it would be one of the most boring words in the English language.
This is also different. Apart from the fact that "cunt" and "fuck" were normal words which became offensive as the subject matter became taboo in society, they do not refer to types of people. This is a very significant difference. There are issues over "cunt" being more offensive than "cock" because of sexism, so for that reason it would be a good idea to use it more. Of this category of word, the only one that I think is intrinsically bad is "motherfucker", and I wouldn't use it. |
|
|
|
Catuli 
"Loves Film and Fun"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 16:13:25
|
When I voiced my concerns over controversial langauge, I wasn't even thinking about words like "cunt", "cock" or "fuck", which are commonly uttered by someone with a sexual insecurity. In contrast ethnic and sexual orientation slurs usually broadcast genuine hate. Anyway, I'll be cryptic in alluding to the review I contemplated entering. However, with this august group. being cryptic isn't much more than being transparent. My review involved wordplay of a Herman Wouk novel in regard to a Spielberg movie beginning with the letter "A". Let's see who can figure it out.
|
|
|
|
lemmycaution 
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 16:30:52
|
The "N" word aside, I believe that the "C" word (in the racial, not sexual, context--it has not been used in this thread unless I missed it) is way offside. I believe you were thinking of using The CaineC**n Mutiny for Amistad. |
Edited by - lemmycaution on 10/06/2006 16:31:43 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 17:34:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
When I voiced my concerns over controversial langauge, I wasn't even thinking about words like "cunt", "cock" or "fuck", which are commonly uttered by someone with a sexual insecurity.
Fanny you should say that...
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 18:55:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
There are issues over "cunt" being more offensive than "cock" because of sexism, so for that reason it would be a good idea to use it more.
I have been thinking about this and now am not so sure. I still feel that there is some truth in it, but I would say that "twat" is a less strong term than "cock" (or at most about the same). It's even a sufficiently everyday term that I did not know what it literally meant till I was about fifteen - I can remember the occasion when I realised it. |
|
|
|
Catuli
"Loves Film and Fun"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 18:59:27
|
When you say "way offside" does that mean abhorrent? I never stumbled across that idiom before.
|
|
|
|
lemmycaution
"Long mired in film"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 19:21:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
When you say "way offside" does that mean abhorrent? I never stumbled across that idiom before.
In hockey, when a play is offside the whistle is blown and the play is called back. |
|
|
|
Catuli
"Loves Film and Fun"
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 19:28:43
|
I know who Andy Bathgate, Tim Horton, Dave Keon, and Terry Sawchuk are, but I never thought to factor in that hockey analogy....I guess I was out in left field
|
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 20:27:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
When I voiced my concerns over controversial langauge, I wasn't even thinking about words like "cunt", "cock" or "fuck", which are commonly uttered by someone with a sexual insecurity.
Fanny you should say that...
Yes, I learned that in the original British version of THE OFFICE, when the ingenue was planning on moving to America and the fat bloke advised her what a "fanny pack" was. "Cunt" is used far more frequently in Britain; over here it's considered one of the vilest words you can utter. [Watch Al Pacino explode at Kevin Spacey near the climax of GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS; in the tirade in which he uses that word, Ricky Roma is searching for the most despicable, humiliating verbal blunt instruments he can possibly hurl against the Spacey character, a world away from Monty Python's cheerful "you silly bunt."]
Is the word "fanny" considered the reverse over there? Here, it's only mildly naughty; your mum might use it. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 20:59:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
When I voiced my concerns over controversial langauge, I wasn't even thinking about words like "cunt", "cock" or "fuck", which are commonly uttered by someone with a sexual insecurity.
Fanny you should say that...
Yes, I learned that in the original British version of THE OFFICE, when the ingenue was planning on moving to America and the fat bloke advised her what a "fanny pack" was. "Cunt" is used far more frequently in Britain; over here it's considered one of the vilest words you can utter. [Watch Al Pacino explode at Kevin Spacey near the climax of GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS; in the tirade in which he uses that word, Ricky Roma is searching for the most despicable, humiliating verbal blunt instruments he can possibly hurl against the Spacey character, a world away from Monty Python's cheerful "you silly bunt."]
Is the word "fanny" considered the reverse over there? Here, it's only mildly naughty; your mum might use it.
The C word is considered very bad here too. I wouldn't say fanny is mild enough for a mother to use - depending on the mother! - but its certainly milder.
Some feminists will use the c word on the basis that its being hypocritically repressed in a male dominated word. I assume that's the same on your side of the pond?
|
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 23:30:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
True, but if anyone who's about to say/write anything looks at possible 'offensive nuances' in their chosen words/phrases, then they'd end up saying nothing. You can say virtually anything in an offensive way using any choice of words.
The first of these statements just isn't true - the vast majority of terms have no offensive connotations.
Correct, unless the user wants the term to be offensive.quote:
The second is true, but so is the reverse - one can say virtually anything in an inoffensive way.
Exactly.quote:
quote:
And if I intend to communicate a thought to ten other people and one of them takes offense because the words I chose to use are not the same words that they would themselves have chosen, then that's unfortunate but I don't lose any sleep over it and won't change anything. If however eight of them had taken offense (causing the message to have not been received) then obviously it's in my interest to re-phrase the statement. So in my view intent is everything.
Since it is perfectly easy to talk to ten people without offending any of them, offending one of them would be your fault.
I disagree. I have no control over how people are going to react to things I say, unless I know them particularly well. There are plenty of people who 'take offense' as a means of exhibiting control over others. I.e., they take offense when it suits them to appear to have been offended. Sometimes this is done to avoid the issue being discussed (e.g. politicians do it a lot, i.e, complain of a 'personal attack' when they don't want to debate the issue raised). Some will also 'take offense' as a result of insecurity, i.e, they feel more secure when they perceive themselves to be a victim of persecution, while also hoping that others also perceive them to be a victim and will henceforth 'side with them'. Some will also take offense with no ulterior motive, i.e., they are genuinely offended, but also have a habit of being offended on a regular basis. I don't perceive this as my fault at all, but it does cause me to feel a bit sorry for them.
I can't help paranoid reactions in people either, i.e, if someone perceives I'm attacking them when I'm not (this happened to a lifelong friend by the way, there was very little I could actually say to him in the end without it appearing that I was attacking him, same for most others who spoke to him). Likewise, I can't help offending people if they have a habit of being offended at every opportunity. For example, if I was to use the word "nigger" in a joking way in the presence of my brother-in-law (who is black as the ace of spades) and he laughed at it, but his black friend became offended, then I'd see that as not my fault at all, as he took offense where there was clearly none.quote:
quote:
So, who's offended by this sentence:- "I like niggers, gooks, faggots and subnormal retards."
And to answer your question literally, other than in an ironic context (which is dodgy ground anyway) those words in any statement would be offensive.
Yep, if someone chooses to be offended by them then they will be. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/06/2006 : 23:38:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
If everone on the planet decided to use the word "cunt" 200 times per day, by the end of the week it would be one of the most boring words in the English language.
This is also different. Apart from the fact that "cunt" and "fuck" were normal words which became offensive as the subject matter became taboo in society, they do not refer to types of people. This is a very significant difference. There are issues over "cunt" being more offensive than "cock" because of sexism, so for that reason it would be a good idea to use it more. Of this category of word, the only one that I think is intrinsically bad is "motherfucker", and I wouldn't use it.
This is also subjective. For you "motherfucker" is a more offensive word than "cunt", but I think it's the other way around for most. E.g., when a Samuel Jackson character uses "motherfucker" he often doesn't mean anything more than "dude". And as was pointed out above in Glengarry Glen Ross (which had about as much swearing as any movie) the word "cunt" was used near the end as simply the most abusive word that anyone could think of.
So offense is in the eye of the beholder.
...trying to work out which is more offensive, "cunty motherfucker" or "motherfuckin' cunt"...  |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Language Restriction
