UK Comrades: Mind the Sexist Terms

[Jimmie Higgins]

No women or class conscious men in the US would want to join a movement that uses female body parts "****s" "Twats" as common pejoratives.

I know that this is a British thing and that these words are more common in and not considered all that offensive in the UK, but in the US, even women who call other women "*****es" consider "****" highly offensive. I really could care less about swearing or what's PC or not, but our movement should not allow our comrades to walk around saying things like "that's gay" or calling people "****s" or "*****es" without challenging it because it alienates people from our politics.

In my circle, there are probably slightly more female comrades than male so it is easy enough to demonstrate in practice that working class movements and revolutionary movements are not just for white middle aged hetero males (for some reason in the US only white men are considered "working class" in pop culture). But I would be weary about telling anyone new to radical politics but had questions about "sexism in the movement" to check out this site if people use language like this.

[Revy]

No women or class conscious men in the US would want to join a movement that uses female body parts "****s" "Twats" as common pejoratives.

I know that this is a British thing and that these words are more common in and not considered all that offensive in the UK, but in the US, even women who call other women "*****es" consider "****" highly offensive. I really could care less about swearing or what's PC or not, but our movement should not allow our comrades to walk around saying things like "that's gay" or calling people "****s" or "*****es" without challenging it because it alienates people from our politics.

In my circle, there are probably slightly more female comrades than male so it is easy enough to demonstrate in practice that working class movements and revolutionary movements are not just for white middle aged hetero males (for some reason in the US only white men are considered "working class" in pop culture). But I would be weary about telling anyone new to radical politics but had questions about "sexism in the movement" to check out this site if people use language like this.

While I'm wary of the calling out of UK comrades, I agree that words like "****" or "*****" shouldn't be used here.

[Jimmie Higgins]

While I'm wary of the calling out of UK comrades, I agree that words like "****" or "*****" shouldn't be used here.I only singled them out because (as I understand it) these terms are not considered as offensive in the UK. I'm not saying that UK comrades are perposfully being sexist, but "****" is particularly offensive to Americans and is considered worse that "*****" as far a sexism goes.

In the US people say "*****" all the time in everyday conversations and you can say it in PG rated movies or on daytime TV so people don't consider it all that offensive, but it is the same thing - it's a sexist term and if used by radicals it is alienating and plays into the stereotype that leftism is for (or dominated by) males and alienates us from newly radicalizing people.


I think that contextually they're often employed in a tongue-in-cheek, teasing manner.

Or at least that's how they're used amongst me & my friends. "You fucking dirty slut!"

Yeah, I definitely don't think that leftists should go around being the word police to random groups of strangers or what people say among friends. I'm not interested in the moral aspects of language - just weather what we say drives people away or creates barriers to winning all workers from all backgrounds to our politics.

[Dr Mindbender]

i think its a cultural thing, i think '****' as a pejoritive is generally more acceptable on this side of the atlantic than it is in the states, and few women here flinch at it being used that way.

[Dr Mindbender]

Yet people flinch (to say the least) at the idea of a society where the economy is controlled by the workers and for their benefit. Yet this is something we nonetheless advocate.

I think its hard for the majority of people to conceptualise that let alone flinch at it. In which case its a lack of misunderstanding, not a case of disgust.

[Revy]

I only singled them out because (as I understand it) these terms are not considered as offensive in the UK. I'm not saying that UK comrades are perposfully being sexist, but "****" is particularly offensive to Americans and is considered worse that "*****" as far a sexism goes.

In the US people say "*****" all the time in everyday conversations and you can say it in PG rated movies or on daytime TV so people don't consider it all that offensive, but it is the same thing - it's a sexist term and if used by radicals it is alienating and plays into the stereotype that leftism is for (or dominated by) males and alienates us from newly radicalizing people.


Oh you've said everything I would have said. I think all that's true.
We could have a discussion about US usage of the word "*****" and it could spark as much debate.

I've told people off here for their stupidity, but I don't think I would ever use a word singling out their gender.

[EqualityandFreedom]

As far as I'm concerned both '****' and '*****' should be considered equally offensive as they both single out women. Clearly the reason why people would consider **** to be more offensive than ***** is because it refer to the female genitals with all the cultural and religious crap about the genitals especially female genitals being 'dirty'.

[Искра]

Its good that in Croatian (and similar languages) we use offensive words which refer to man and women genitals, almost equally.
Swearing is beautiful! SUNCE TI KALAISANO!

Btw. I agree with you, that it's discriminating. But I just don't think that thats huge reason why women are not involved.

[yuon]

I personally think that you are all a bunch of cocks and dicks.

What?


(I.e. what's so special about female body parts being considered offensive? What's the difference? I seriously don't understand why female genitals are considered more offensive than male genitals. It strikes me as perhaps a bit, dare I say, sexist? I remember reading a book a few years ago from a prominent feminist (sorry, can't remember who it was) who argued that it was ridiculous that a word for female genitals ("****") is the most offensive word in English, yet similar slang words for male genitals aren't as offensive. I agree with her.)

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

America is not the rest of the world. The meaning and effect of the word differs between continents (basically sod off).

[9]

Sorry, but this is such liberal shit.

"Nigger" isn't the same as "cracker" because of the whole history and social context behind the words which means that they simply aren't on the same level. Likewise, the term 'dick' or 'cock' has never been used against men for the purpose of denigrating them as men. You cannot say the same for the terms "****" or "*****" which have been and continue to be employed to disparage women for being women. That, and men simply aren't oppressed by sexism on the same level as women. Words don't come falling from the sky or ready-made from an eternal dictionary, but come drenched with the prejudices/attitudes of society.

I hate to agree with what is presumably a banned sockpuppet, but I do think this is the heart of the matter.
I am a woman, and I am not personally offended by the word c*nt in and of itself, but I absolutely understand why others are, and I don't think there is any need to use it on this site.

[Jimmie Higgins]

America is not the rest of the world. The meaning and effect of the word differs between continents (basically sod off).

So you are not an internationalist, comrade? You don't care that radicalizing Americans come to this site and see people calling each other "twats" and "****s" and get the impression that the Revolutionary Left condones sexism?

America is not the rest of the world, no, but THIS WEBSITE IS NOT THE UK!

If you wanna call a cigarette a fag, that's fine because it's totally unconnected to the homophobic slur. But "twat" and "****" mean the same thing in the US and UK and Canada - it just had a different level of acceptance. And again, "*****" is totally ubiquitous in the US, but I don't think any radical should use this term if they are interested in attracting all people to our politics and building a movement that is overtly anti-sexist.

[thejambo1]

why is this on here,good grief can we not talk about something more important than this and yes this website is for all nations not just u.s.a. and u.k. please get over it and move on.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

So you are not an internationalist, comrade? You don't care that radicalizing Americans come to this site and see people calling each other "twats" and "****s" and get the impression that the Revolutionary Left condones sexism?

And dont you think Radicalizing brits would be put off by being told what they can and cannot say even if the word is not offensive.


America is not the rest of the world, no, but THIS WEBSITE IS NOT THE UK!

Agreed although I dont think its beyond peoples capabilties to understand that in some areas of the world certain langauge is aceptable and the international make up of the fourm reflects that.


If you wanna call a cigarette a fag, that's fine because it's totally unconnected to the homophobic slur.

I wasn't asking for permission.


But "twat" and "****" mean the same thing in the US and UK and Canada - it just had a different level of acceptance. And again, "*****" is totally ubiquitous in the US, but I don't think any radical should use this term if they are interested in attracting all people to our politics and building a movement that is overtly anti-sexist.


I dont know what ***** means in the US so I am unable to comment however your being fucking ridiculous.

[9]

And dont you think Radicalizing brits would be put off by being told what they can and cannot say even if the word is not offensive.
Couldn't you make this same argument on behalf of words like "nigger" and "faggot" and "retard" - all of which are discouraged on this site? After all, some working class Americans might not like being told they can't say "nigger", but it is discouraged all the same. As it should be.

[Revy]

this America vs. Britain talk is getting out of hand.
I hope this doesn't lead to a split. RevLeft.co.uk?

[Jimmie Higgins]

And dont you think Radicalizing brits would be put off by being told what they can and cannot say even if the word is not offensive. I know, I know it must be political correctness GONE MAD!

Say whatever the fuck you want with your group of friends and even among other radicals you know - I wanted to bring this up because in the US leftism is often seen as SEXIST - particularly anarchism I might add. This perception in the US drives people who are angry about sexism toward feminist politics which I don't think are effective for combating sexism as our radical working class traditions are.

And no, most americans (in the US anyway) don't know how "****" is used in the UK. I always just attributed this to the US-centric way the schools and media present the rest of the world here. Frankly I'm surpised that you don't know how "*****" is used in the US.

[Jimmie Higgins]

this America vs. Britain talk is getting out of hand.
I hope this doesn't lead to a split. RevLeft.co.uk?Yeah it wasn't my intention - and I didn't expect any contention. I was just hoping for some understanding of how something that's not seen as a big deal in the UK is actually really alienating for people from the US.

I guess solidarity is too much to ask for if it comes at the price of not using one or two slang words.

If I were saying "gypped" all the time and some comrades from Northern Ireland or Italy said: hey, actually that's undermining our efforts to build solidarity in the face of anti-immigrant sentiment", I wouldn't consider it some heavyhanded attack on me or censorship or something. I would simply respond: oh sorry, I didn't realize it was a problem because we don't really have the same issues where I live.

[MilitantAnarchist]

It isnt sexist atall... fuck me, if everyone was like you then you couldnt call a woman a woman you would call them an 'anthropoid who's just as equal and valid if not more so then a man'... You fools, stop being so PC....

Why isnt dick and cock offensive then, that is sexist to men isnt it?


I think when you americans say 'fanny' that is sexist, 'fanny' here means the 'genitals of an anthropoid who's just as equal and valid if not more so then a man' is that better for you?
Just live your life, i dont know of a SINGLE woman who thinks that the word 'twat' or '****' is sexist... they would find them offensive... but not sexist

[Pogue]

blah blah blah, holier than thou lefties trying to put us all to rights, whatever, in my culture males and females use the word **** as an insult, no one cares, stop wallowing in your own insignificance.

[Aeval]

**** isn't even always used as an insult, half the people I know use it to mean 'mate', as it 'alright ya ****!' - depends where you're from right? And the UK, Australia and New Zealand all think it's fine, the US doesn't (dunno about Canada actually...) - I believe that's 3 to 1 :D

I find the word pussy far more offensive - it implies weakness (like when people call a guy a pussy for not being 'manly' enough) **** on the other hand is a pretty strong word, and is also one of the single most aesthetically pleasing words in the english language.

Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xdAX_35u-I :lol:

[9]

Again while having no personal issue with the word "****" in and of itself, there are women here who do. And it will never cease to amaze me that, on a site where women have such tiny numbers, so many of you would continue to express such fierce opposition to the idea of avoiding a single fucking word.
"Freedom of speech!", right? Seriously, go join the Lolbertarians.

[Pogue]

i dont see why we should have to restrict our vocabulary because it offends some people. alot of things offend people, i am offended by alot of what people on here say, but what they say is not against the rules. '****' being sexist and thus offensive is a matter of opinion and theres no reason for me to respect the minority opinion. if the board has a vote and declares its sexist i'll stop using it. that wont happen as most people realise it isnt sexist, nor anymore offensive than any other insulting word.

[JohannGE]

I only singled them out because (as I understand it) these terms are not considered as offensive in the UK.

Just to clarify your understanding there. Such terms are increasing common and acceptable but only among only a certain sub set of the population. I think the vast majority would still be offended by the public use of them.

Personally I am not offended by them but would prefer not to have them in common usage. They are usually employed in an attempt to add a sense of edgy rebelliousness or cool and as such are totally unnecessary.
-

[Aeval]

Because it's massively insulting to have a bunch of predominantly guys saying 'oh no, you can't use this rude word, we have ladies here and it might upset their delicate sensibilities!'. It's got nothing to do with freedom of speech, it's treating a word relating to female genitalia as some how inherently worse than any relating to male genitalia. It's bullshit, **** is just a word, it has lots of meanings, if someone uses the word **** in a way that is disrespectful to women then by all means kick off about it, but then I'd expect people to be doing so because they were being disrespectful, not just because they were using a word which some people bizarrely have a massive issue with.

[bricolage]

'****' being sexist and thus offensive is a matter of opinion and theres no reason for me to respect the minority opinion.

Anyone think 60 odd years ago you'd have got someone saying this; "Nigger being racist and thus offensive is a matter of opinion and theres no reason for me to respect the minority opinion."

The point being we respect the minority opinion because it is minorities who are discriminated against and if it was up the majority to determine what is discriminatory/offensive and what is not there would be nothing to stop all discrimination being legitimised. Whilst I personally don't think saying **** is necessarily sexist in itself and I don't buy into the idea that words have concrete, unbendable, meanings, if someone (someone in a subservient position in society) is offended by it it's not up to me to tell them to get over it, at the very least it's just a bit of common decency to not say it because of that.

[Pogue]

Anyone think 60 odd years ago you'd have got someone saying this; "Nigger being racist and thus offensive is a matter of opinion and theres no reason for me to respect the minority opinion."

The point being we respect the minority opinion because it is minorities who are discriminated against and if it was up the majority to determine what is discriminatory/offensive and what is not there would be nothing to stop all discrimination being legitimised. Whilst I personally don't think saying **** is necessarily sexist in itself and I don't buy into the idea that words have concrete, unbendable, meanings, if someone (someone in a subservient position in society) is offended by it it's not up to me to tell them to get over it, at the very least it's just a bit of common decency to not say it because of that.

Rubbish comparison as nigger was racist, it was always used racislt,y it only was used against black people, etc, **** has none of these associations, either wya, I am not going to be bullied into restricting my vocabulary because someone people here are too childish to handle the sight of the word ****.

[bricolage]

Rubbish comparison as nigger was racist, it was always used racislt,y it only was used against black people, etc, **** has none of these associations, either wya, I am not going to be bullied into restricting my vocabulary because someone people here are too childish to handle the sight of the word ****.

Take your point about nigger but still it's that you said you didn't see why you should respect the opinion when you can go back not too many years and seeing nigger as offensive was the minority opinion in itself.

It don't think it's about being childish, just that some people, who themselves are victims of sexism, do see **** as sexist and thus offensive. As I said I'm not asking for the word to be banned or anything just that's it's just courteous to not use it when in the company (be it real life or electronically) or people who are offended by it. It just reeks of a self centred "me me me" attitude refusing to acknowledge this.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

I think that while the left being male-dominated is a problem, it's also a problem that we're seen as being a strange, inward-looking clique of self-righteous whingers out of touch with mainstream working-class culture and obsessed with changing our own lifestyles so we don't have to feel guilty about anything, at the expense of actually communicating with people outside our own tiny circles. I think that, at least in the UK, imposing arbitrary restrictions on words like **** adds to the second problem far more than it helps solve the first one (in fact, it may even make solving the problem of male dominance further, in that it gives a "quick fix" that creates the impression we're doing something, while not actually doing anything to tackle patriarchal structures within the movement).

I'm also kind of amused by the fact that, unless I've missed someone, no woman as yet has said they're bothered by the word ****, we've just had Apikoros saying that she thinks some woman somewhere probably is. Again, unless I'm wrong, Gravedigger's heroic stand on behalf of the poor oppressed female comrades who can't possibly speak for themselves seems to have been thanked by...five men and no-one else (although I am just assuming about E&F and KH).

[bricolage]

Yes I do agree with that and as I said I wasn't saying we should ban words that people term as sexist, I use them myself. I was just trying to point out that if you are with someone who does find **** or twat offensive and you refuse to do anything but keep using it that's not you being in touch with working class culture that's just you being an arrogant **** (see what I did there :D).

[9]

I'm also kind of amused by the fact that, unless I've missed someone, no woman as yet has said they're bothered by the word ****, we've just had Apikoros saying that she thinks some woman somewhere probably is.

No, that's not what I said at all. I said I have heard from women here who are offended by the word and believe it shouldn't be tolerated on this forum. But thank you for misrepresenting what I said.

And really, I don't think avoiding the word "****" on an internet forum is going to put you out of touch with the working class.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Couldn't you make this same argument on behalf of words like "nigger" and "faggot" and "retard" - all of which are discouraged on this site? After all, some working class Americans might not like being told they can't say "nigger", but it is discouraged all the same. As it should be.

But those words are always racist always homophobic **** isnt.

[9]

Rubbish comparison as nigger was racist, it was always used racislt,y it only was used against black people, etc, **** has none of these associations, either wya, I am not going to be bullied into restricting my vocabulary because someone people here are too childish to handle the sight of the word ****.

How about the word "fag", if "nigger" doesn't suit the analogy thoroughly enough. "Fag" means a lot of things. Its used in much the same way as "****" (e.g. "quit being a fag!"). Do you find it appropriate to use in that context? And if not, why is it really any different from "****"?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

How about the word "fag", if "nigger" doesn't suit the analogy thoroughly enough. "Fag" means a lot of things. Its used in much the same way as "****" (e.g. "quit being a fag!"). Do you find it appropriate to use in that context? And if not, why is it really any different from "****"?

Because faggot is a fucking homophobic insult , **** isn't in the UK at least quit being a fag tends to apply to someone as an insult when they display what are seen as steryotypical gay characteristics. When you call someone a **** you are not saying "oi your a woman" its an insult along the lines of prick wankers and twazzock.

[9]

When was the last time someone on the site said nigger and didn't put it in the context of "i hate niggers and jews" also faggot tends to be homophobic everywhere. Retard hower I do not find convincing as a insult against people with disabilties but more against someone with low inteligence in general (it means someone with an IQ under 70).

Leftists generally tend not to use the word "nigger" because they acknowledge the potential for it to be offensive. This is a good thing.
However, this can be attributed to the fact that leftists are generally quite conscious of racism and careful not to be insensitive.
Sexism, on the other hand - beyond overt sexism such as economic discrimination - seems to be generally ignored by much of the left, or disregarded as unimportant, irrelevant, or nonexistent altogether.

[MilitantAnarchist]

anyway, what has it got to do with you what i say? it isnt direceted at you?

Although one of those words could be applied to you right now... and that wont be a sexist will it?... go figure

[ZeroNowhere]

And it will never cease to amaze me that, on a site where women have such tiny numbers, so many of you would continue to express such fierce opposition to the idea of avoiding a single fucking word.
To be honest, I would see it as going more along the lines of, "Hey, look at this discussion about why they don't have many women!" "Ew, we're not all a bunch of pussies. Fuck this shit, I'm joining libcom."
Not that I want to ban discussing it, of course.


When was the last time someone on the site said nigger and didn't put it in the context of "i hate niggers and jews" also faggot tends to be homophobic everywhere.I think that was me a while ago: "Engels' view of Tremaux was shit, but not racist. He didn't really give much reason to suppose that he had a racist view of niggers." Though that was a while ago, somebody else could have done it in the meantime.


And really, I don't think avoiding the word "****" on an internet forum is going to put you out of touch with the working class.Oh, so we can use it elsewhere? Well, alright then.


I was just trying to point out that if you are with someone who does find **** or twat offensive and you refuse to do anything but keep using it that's not you being in touch with working class culture that's just you being an arrogant **** (see what I did there :D).Indeed, if you're with somebody who is offended by the word '****', save it for special occasions.
And I don't see anything sexist about that statement.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Leftists generally tend not to use the word "nigger" because they acknowledge the potential for it to be offensive. This is a good thing.
However, this can be attributed to the fact that leftists are generally quite conscious of racism and careful not to be insensitive.

No not really I dont vet my language on revleft if I said nigger in real life chances are I would receive warning points for saying it on here. Its just only used when some twat goes on a racist rant where im from.



Sexism, on the other hand - beyond overt sexism such as economic discrimination - seems to be generally ignored by much of the left, or disregarded as unimportant, irrelevant, or nonexistent altogether.


Dont talk bollocks obviously leftists have a tedancy every now and again to do or say something sexist as well as racist because they come from soctieies in which racism and sexism are culturally ingrained. The fact its ingrained into culture is what needs to be delt with not by vetting words like a trendy lefty tosser.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Sexism, on the other hand - beyond overt sexism such as economic discrimination - seems to be generally ignored by much of the left, or disregarded as unimportant, irrelevant, or nonexistent altogether.
I'd agree with that. But, as I've said, I think focussing on language (and not even necessarily language that's particularly common - searching through my posts, I think the only time I've used the word **** here has been in the context of discussions like this) offers an easy way to create the appearance of doing something, while not actually helping to tackle the larger problem.
Sorry for misrepresenting you, btw. My point remains, tho: no-one in this discussion has said that they have a personal problem with the word. I understand that people find certain situations intimidating, and one thread on revleft is never going to be a representative sample of opinion, but it seems weird to me that no-one in this thread has said they're personally offended by it, all the outrage is on behalf of someone else.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Let's get this straight - this is not about OFFENSIVE TERMS IN A GOD DAMN JESUS FUCKING VACUUM!

This whole thing is about not using words that will be seen by a WHOLE FUCKING SEGMENT OF THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD AS OVERTLY SEXIST! My point in bringing it up was to remind people in the UK, that there are differences, not to attack anyone from there or try and control your language.

This has really soured me on this website and British people in general. I was hoping for some solidarity and understanding of how things might be read from different regions. Oh well fuck you all and may you wallow in your tiny meaningless cliques forever!

This is like debating with the assholes back in high school that drove around in pic-up trucks with huge confederate flags and said: why are you offended, I'm not a racist, so then that flag isn't a racist flag.

[ZeroNowhere]

Let's get this straight - this is not about OFFENSIVE TERMS IN A GOD DAMN JESUS FUCKING VACUUM!Yes, exactly.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

WHOLE FUCKING SEGMENT OF THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD AS OVERTLY SEXIST!


Not by brits though. Its not beyond peoples capablities to understand that funnily enough cultures differ between continents.

[9]

Dont talk bollocks obviously leftists have a tedancy every now and again to do or say something sexist as well as racist because they come from soctieies in which racism and sexism are culturally ingrained. The fact its ingrained into culture is what needs to be delt with not by vetting words like a trendy lefty tosser.

Actually, in my experience, implicit sexism is extremely commonplace on this forum, but if that's bollocks to you, fine.
But a trendy lefty tosser? Yeah, if you read through this thread, you'll see that most people responded with outright hostility to the idea that there might be people here who find the word "****" sexist, or to the idea that, even if there are people here who are offended by it, that anyone should be bothered to reconsider whether or not its worth using. So, no, by the looks of it, the position I'm taking isn't trendy at all. To be honest, I wish I'd have stayed out of this discussion altogether.


I'd agree with that. But, as I've said, I think focussing on language (and not even necessarily language that's particularly common - searching through my posts, I think the only time I've used the word **** here has been in the context of discussions like this) offers an easy way to create the appearance of doing something, while not actually helping to tackle the larger problem.
I don't disagree with this. But I think, at the same time, if comrades here aren't even willing to consider the idea that there may be women who find the word offensive, that gives us a good gauge on how successful we might be at combating the really difficult issues surrounding sexism and the left. As to why the women who are offended by the term haven't come forward and said so in this thread, there are a few possibilities. First, the thread hasn't even been opened for a full day. Second, considering the nature and viciousness of some of the responses to the suggestion, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they read the posts and opted against sharing their opinions and I can't say I'd blame them.



Although one of those words could be applied to you right now... and that wont be a sexist will it?... go figure

If you're calling me a ****, quit beating around the bush and just come right out and say it.

[Aeval]

Second, considering the nature and viciousness of some of the responses to the suggestion, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they read the posts and opted against sharing their opinions and I can't say I'd blame them.


Why? It's not like anyone who disagrees with them is going to hunt them down for saying they don't like people using a naughty word on the internet, is it? I doubt anyone here is such a delicate flower that, despite wanting to overthrow the whole capitalist system, they would shy away from posting anonymously on a message board if they found the word offensive enough to give a shit.

Also, if talking to British lefties about the subject has soured you this much then I really would advise you not to ever visit Britain. I think actually you will find that a lot of the backlash from brits regarding this has to do with the fact that it is upper/middle class people who tend to get their knickers in a twist about this word and try to make out that people who do swear are uncultured and stupid. I'd like to see you explaining to some working class Boltonians, for example, just why they should modify their speech because someone might get offended - I have a feeling they'd call you something much worse than word we're currently discussing. I also kind of figured anyone who is intelligent enough to have found their way to left wing politics would also be intelligent enough to not get irrationally offended by words, you know, to rather look at the context and decide whether the person is actually being offensive rather than just hearing the C-word and mentaling out (incidentally, are we allowed to use the word 'gash' to mean 'crap' or is that inherently sexist too?)

[ls]

i think its a cultural thing, i think '****' as a pejoritive is generally more acceptable on this side of the atlantic than it is in the states, and few women here flinch at it being used that way.

Kinda, the people who do find it sexist, I suppose if they ask not to use it because they personally find offensive, idk, I'm willing to not use it.

I've seen that expressed on here before, so am trying to cut down on my use of it (note: trying).

[9]

Why? It's not like anyone who disagrees with them is going to hunt them down for saying they don't like people using a naughty word on the internet, is it? I doubt anyone here is such a delicate flower that, despite wanting to overthrow the whole capitalist system, they would shy away from posting anonymously on a message board if they found the word offensive enough to give a shit.
It's not a matter of "shying away", its a matter of people who have been here long enough to be familiar with the dynamic on this board and the fact that its often not worth it to express an unpopular opinion if you know the only response is going to be a bunch of aggressive hostile people shouting you down and telling you why your opinion is invalid.


Also, if talking to British lefties about the subject has soured you this much then I really would advise you not to ever visit Britain. I think actually you will find that a lot of the backlash from brits regarding this has to do with the fact that it is upper/middle class people who tend to get their knickers in a twist about this word and try to make out that people who do swear are uncultured and stupid. I'd like to see you explaining to some working class Boltonians, for example, just why they should modify their speech because someone might get offended - I have a feeling they'd call you something much worse than word we're currently discussing. I also kind of figured anyone who is intelligent enough to have found their way to left wing politics would also be intelligent enough to not get irrationally offended by words, you know, to rather look at the context and decide whether the person is actually being offensive rather than just hearing the C-word and mentaling out (incidentally, are we allowed to use the word 'gash' to mean 'crap' or is that inherently sexist too?)Is it possible for you to stop being a snide smartass or is that asking too much?
No one is saying we should all go to work and tell the people we work with that they have to stop saying offensive words, and if you had bothered to actually read the OP, you would be aware of the fact that it is concerning this internet forum.
Though by all means, feel free to tell every black person who finds the word "nigger" offensive that they are unintelligent because they get offended by words.
If anything, it is your position which reflects a privileged upper-middle class mentality - one representative of someone who has been so sheltered from reality that the entire notion of minorities and victims of discrimination taking offense at discriminatory language seems, to you, foreign and laughable.

[Aeval]

Well 'nigger' is not a swear word though, it's a derogatory term used against black people, it has no other possible use, you could not use it against a white person, you could not turn it in to a verb or an adjective, it is and always will be a derogatory term used against black people. **** on the other hand is a swear word, it has a variety of meanings and forms (noun, verb, adjective, intensifier - along with the word 'fuck' it's one of the most flexible english word), not all of which are derogatory towards women, which is why it is the context you need to look at, not just the word. And I know that the OP was referring to this forum, but we have got to accept the fact that people use language differently, if someone uses a word which where you are from is rude or unacceptable or whatever, but you know they come from somewhere where it is fine, and the person is not using it in a sexist or whatever context then why should they have to modify their language? I don't think I've used **** on here before today and it's not a word you see here often, but why get so upset about it when you know it is a cultural thing and that the other person is not using it to be sexist?

Also, I wasn't actually saying that your position was middle class, as clearly where you're from it is not. I was saying that here it is more middle class people who get upset by that word and tell people off for using it, which makes a lot of people use it even more and get a bit on the defensive when people tell them not to - kind of like how I was doing :D

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

[QUOTE=Apikoros;1557008]Actually, in my experience, implicit sexism is extremely commonplace on this forum, but if that's bollocks to you,[QUOTE]

Im rather more concerned about the poster who said women are the milk machines then the brits who use a culturally acceptable word which is not anti woman.

I cant stand the cringe worthy American export leftist nun speak which although may be not completely messed up in america (I wouldnt know) over here its fucking ridiculous.

[Plagueround]

Well 'nigger' is not a swear word though, it's a derogatory term used against black people, it has no other possible use, you could not use it against a white person, you could not turn it in to a verb or an adjective, it is and always will be a derogatory term used against black people.

In the U.S., I've actually seen the word nigger take on a much more casual usage in the past few years. People use it as something very detached from it's original meaning, where even if it retains that meaning because of it's roots, they don't see it that way. Generally speaking, that's why I don't see the difference between these words, because you're still reinforcing the original meaning with casual, detached usage, whether you think you are or not.

[Plagueround]

anyway, what has it got to do with you what i say? it isnt direceted at you?

Although one of those words could be applied to you right now... and that wont be a sexist will it?... go figure

While I'm sure some would protest because you didn't actually say it, I'd say what you're getting at is pretty obvious. I don't know how you could possibly miss how using any of the words being discussed would be sexist if you applied them to a female comrade. Consider this a verbal warning for sexism. Feel free to keep pushing if you would like additional administrative action after that.

[proudcomrade]

Sorry, Brits, but the sun has long since set on your empire. You no longer have the privelege of inflicting the worst elements of your culture on the unwilling Other internationally. When comrades tell you repeatedly that your use of dehumanizing hate speech against women is not tolerable, the appropriate response is to listen, learn, and change the offending behavior.

[scarletghoul]

This is ****ing ridiculous. Honestly, what kind of stupid **** finds these words sexist?
I use it referring to ****s of both genders, and I know people of both genders who use this word regularly. It's just a fuckin word.

To compare it to "nigger" is moronic for 2 primary reasons:
1- "nigger" is generally applied to black people, whereas it's normal to call both males and females ****s.
2- racial words for white people are not used as insults anywhere near as much as the N word, creating a huge imbalance of racial insult. However, words for male genitalia (dick, cock, penis, nob, bell end, scrotumface, etc) are extremely common insults, even more common than words for female genitalia.

Twats.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Not by brits though. Its not beyond peoples capablities to understand that funnily enough cultures differ between continents.

I know it's not considered offensive by some brits - that's my point in bringing it up. By using this term you are helping to promote the stereotype that the left is sexist in the eyes of working class americans who may not have taken a college course on the finer points of lad-culture slang in the UK.

I purposefully made a general thread about this because I didn't want to call out individual comrades here or make it a personal moralizing thing - I wanted to raise a point about how this language is viewed by people in other parts of the world. I'm really surprised people are taking such offense at being asked to mind language that is viewed as sexist by a large number of people coming to international forums like this.


1- "nigger" is generally applied to black people, whereas it's normal to call both males and females ****s.


Not in hip-hop culture, not in Oakland. I hear that word 20 times each time I commute on the BART to or from work and it's applied liberally to to everyone.

I have black comrades who speak with their black and white friends and say things like "Nigga this and nigga that" but apparently unlike many people here from the UK, they have the fucking brains to realize that if they went to Rev-Left, they shouldn't start a thread called: "Obama is one shady nigga" because they know that just because they say it in everyday conversation, it would make Rev-left hard to distinguish from Stormfront to an outside observer who may not know they are black.

I find it disgusting that some people here would on the one hand claim that the word "****" or "twat" doesn't mean much but then belligerently refuse to curb their use of a useless word even though it is connected to sexism for readers from the US or Canada.

I'm not interested in policing language, in private messages (or if any of you come out to California and want to have a drink) you can call me a **** and say twat all you like - just don't come to a rally or picket and say that unless you are not interested in building a bigger left with both working men and women.

Your lack of international solidarity makes me question your seriousness as radicals.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I know it's not considered offensive by some brits - that's my point in bringing it up. By using this term you are helping to promote the stereotype that the left is sexist in the eyes of working class americans who may not have taken a college course on the finer points of lad-culture slang in the UK.


Stop acting as if the word is only used by drunken girl beating lads. Also where the fuck is this steryotype that the left is sexist I am yet to even here of that apart from that rantings of a right wing hack he claims that amongst other things the left is anti male (anti white , anti heterosexual etc) .




I purposefully made a general thread about this because I didn't want to call out individual comrades here or make it a personal moralizing thing - I wanted to raise a point about how this language is viewed by people in other parts of the world. I'm really surprised people are taking such offense at being asked to mind language that is viewed as sexist by a large number of people coming to international forums like this.

Yes but for a large portion its not and its not beyond people to learn that.


Not in hip-hop culture, not in Oakland. I hear that word 20 times each time I commute on the BART to or from work and it's applied liberally to to everyone.




I find it disgusting that some people here would on the one hand claim that the word "****" or "twat" doesn't mean much but then belligerently refuse to curb their use of a useless word even though it is connected to sexism for readers from the US or Canada.

Despite the stereotype, north Americans are not stupid and are capable of learning that the meaning of words differ between continents.



I'm not interested in policing language, in private messages (or if any of you come out to California and want to have a drink) you can call me a **** and say twat all you like - just don't come to a rally or picket and say that unless you are not interested in building a bigger left with both working men and women.

Obviously I dont say **** as frequently when not in Europe mostly because it tends to ignite a conversation abit like this one only in real life which is not something I can usually be bothered wtih).


Your lack of international solidarity makes me question your seriousness as radicals.

Saying **** = hitler

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Sorry, Brits, but the sun has long since set on your empire. You no longer have the privelege of inflicting the worst elements of your culture on the unwilling Other internationally. When comrades tell you repeatedly that your use of dehumanizing hate speech against women is not tolerable, the appropriate response is to listen, learn, and change the offending behavior.

Yes but its not hate speech against women in Britain. Ridiculous.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Saying **** = hitler Ok who's being silly comrade? I have said repeatedly that my problem with people using these terms on this website has nothing to do with morality, people being personally offended by a "swear" or any moralistic bullshit. I started this topic after I read some comrades calling eachother "****" in a debate and I decided that I would not single out individuals for the very reason that I didn't want this to become a personal thing where people would misinterpret my intentions and believe that I was calling them sexist for useing certain words. I don't (well didn't) think anyone on this was being sexist or was a reactionary just because they were using this term, but I am quite shocked that supposed comrades would rather defend their right to use a word or two that is seen as completely related to oppression to workers in a different country.

If an American female comrade was posting here and calling people "*****es" I would make a similar argument about how it alienates us from people who want to fight sexism. In the US most workers are now (or soon will be) female, so organizing the working class and working class solidarity means fighting sexism and not throwing around terms that will make people think that the left is OK with sexism.

Aside from that you didn't even understand my sentence you quoted:

Originally Posted by Gravedigger http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../showthread.php?p=1557405#post1557405)
Your lack of international solidarity makes me question your seriousness as radicals. So if you want to say I'm saying anything is the same as hitler it would go like this:
"Thinking that it is more important to defend a regional slang term than to have solidarity with workers in other countries combating sexist ideas = Hitler"

[Jimmie Higgins]

...ignore manarchism and manarchists.

For a split second I thought "manarchism" was a real political tendency and I almost hit the google with it.

Then I realized: ohhhh, MANarchy.:o

[Devrim]

Yes but its not hate speech against women in Britain. Ridiculous.

Actually, in my experience '****' isn't a word often used to refer to women. It almost always used to refer to men.

Devrim

[Искра]

Is "suck my dick", or "you fucking dickhead", or just "you are a dick" gender offensive, or sexist?

This discussion is pointless. Working class people use this words a lot, but why should this make them sexist? I swear a lot... and I say "****" (off course in my language) a lot of time, frankly does the fact that I say "pička ti materina" (eng. **** of your mother) makes me sexist? I don't think so.

If you wanna have a language without these words, you could have it after the revolution, and I'm telling you you will have one more revolution in which will working class man and women fight together so that they can say "****" to each other...

I find this discussion idiotic because I don't understand why do you think that such thing mater? To who? To some intellectual farts? No, only thing that working class people care about is work place struggle...and when you help some people there they will hug you or shake your hand and say "hell yeah, we kicked those ****S!".

[9]

Is "suck my dick", or "you fucking dickhead", or just "you are a dick" gender offensive, or sexist?

This discussion is pointless. Working class people use this words a lot, but why should this make them sexist? I swear a lot... and I say "****" (off course in my language) a lot of time, frankly does the fact that I say "pička ti materina" (eng. **** of your mother) makes me sexist? I don't think so.

If you wanna have a language without these words, you could have it after the revolution, and I'm telling you you will have one more revolution in which will working class man and women fight together so that they can say "****" to each other...

I find this discussion idiotic because I don't understand why do you think that such thing mater? To who? To some intellectual farts? No, only thing that working class people care about is work place struggle...and when you help some people there they will hug you or shake your hand and say "hell yeah, we kicked those ****S!".

Really, because I'm a full-time worker at a hematology lab, yet I find this discussion important. This is the problem with syndicalism. Much of the working class, in the US anyway, holds extremely reactionary views. I assume you come on here to talk about "anarchism" and left-wing politics, but how enamored with anarchism and left-wing politics are the majority of working people where you live? Probably not much, I suspect. I know in the US, if the revolutionary left really wanted to make some huge short-term gains with much of the working class, leftist organizations would be wise to promote strong border control, anti-immigrant sentiment, anti-abortion sentiment etc. But we don't because our goal is not to cater to the prejudices and chauvinism of much of the working class for the sake of popularity, but rather, to represent the most advanced revolutionary consciousness among the working class and spread these ideas for the sake of building a working class movement with advanced revolutionary consciousness and capabilities. Otherwise, we would all just be a bunch of populists.

EDIT: Also - don't feed the troll (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=26016), comrades.

[9]

words

Forgive me, "don't feed the sockpuppet" didn't quite have the same ring to it.

[Искра]

Really, because I'm a full-time worker at a hematology lab, yet I find this discussion important. This is the problem with syndicalism. Much of the working class, in the US anyway, holds extremely reactionary views. I assume you come on here to talk about "anarchism" and left-wing politics, but how enamored with anarchism and left-wing politics are the majority of working people where you live? Probably not much, I suspect. I know in the US, if the revolutionary left really wanted to make some huge short-term gains with much of the working class, leftist organizations would be wise to promote strong border control, anti-immigrant sentiment, anti-abortion sentiment etc. But we don't because our goal is not to cater to the prejudices and chauvinism of much of the working class for the sake of popularity, but rather, to represent the most advanced revolutionary consciousness among the working class and spread these ideas for the sake of building a working class movement with advanced revolutionary consciousness and capabilities. Otherwise, we would all just be a bunch of populists.

EDIT: Also - don't feed the troll (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=26016), comrades.
I'm not taking about popularism. I'm not like that. To me it's just pointless to talk about using the words such as "****" and "dick" etc. That has nothing to do with anti-immigrant sentiments, anti-abortion sentiments etc. That's not swearing.
But you see I have another problem, and that's problem with today's leftists, or to be precise (since I don't hang out with Bolsheviks) today's "anarchists". According to them, especially if they have something to do with that farce called "anarcha femminism" every using of words such as "****" is sexist, blah blah blah... and oppressive, repressive, and we should "free our minds from such behaviour and then we will have peaceful revolution"... That's shit. That's liberalism.
I know that economical system (capitalism) and State are not only things that we need to change with revolution, but also society and the way that people treat each other.. That's the hardest part, but still you can't make revolution, you can't mobilize people if you start with such nonsenses like this "****" stuff. Yeah, sexism, homophobia, anti-immigrant sentiments, anti-abortion sentiments, religion are all problems, but if you want to mobilize working class you have to be tactical and not to demand that they change right now, but step by step. That's the only way that people can understand something. First why's capitalism bad, what we want etc. then why's State bad, what we want etc. than what's wrong with society etc...

[9]

I'm not taking about popularism. I'm not like that. To me it's just pointless to talk about using the words such as "****" and "dick" etc. That has nothing to do with anti-immigrant sentiments, anti-abortion sentiments etc. That's now swearing.
But you see I have another problem, and that's problem with today's leftists, or to be precise (since I don't hang out with Bolsheviks) today's "anarchists". According to them, especially if they have something to do with that farce called "anarcha femminism" every using of words such as "****" is sexist, blah blah blah... and oppressive, repressive, and we should "free our minds from such behaviour and then we will have peaceful revolution"... That's shit. That's liberalism.
I know that economical system (capitalism) and State are not only things that we need to change with revolution, but also society and the way that people treat each other.. That's the hardest part, but still you can't make revolution, you can't mobilize people if you start with such nonsenses like this "****" stuff. Yeah, sexism, homophobia, anti-immigrant sentiments, anti-abortion sentiments, religion are all problems, but if you want to mobilize working class you have to be tactical and not to demand that they change right now, but step by step. That's the only way that people can understand something. First why's capitalism bad, what we want etc. then why State bad, what we want etc. than what's wrong with society etc...

And if you haven't noticed, neither myself or the thread-started (or anyone else here) has advocated going to work tomorrow and telling your co-workers to watch their language. This discussion is about this internet forum, as I have already said.
Though I would certainly not say anyone is asking the unthinkable by requesting that the word "****" be avoided on a web forum.

[Искра]

And if you haven't noticed, neither myself or the thread-started (or anyone else here) has advocated going to work tomorrow and telling your co-workers to watch their language. This discussion is about this internet forum, as I have already said.
Though I would certainly not say anyone is asking the unthinkable by requesting that the word "****" be avoided on a web forum.
I haven't noticed that anyone else here have that opinion...
Also, I don't find avoiding the word "****" (or something worst ;)) good. People need to let their feelings. Not all people here are Stalin :)

[9]

Not all people here are Stalin :)
Thank you for conceding defeat.

[Искра]

Thank you for conceding defeat.
Did I? And where was the competition?

[9]

Did I?
Yes, resorting to calling me "Stalin" for believing the word "****" shouldn't be used on this internet forum, when I am not a Stalinist by any measure, is an admission of defeat.

And where was the competition?
For people who think sexism is a joke, there can be no "competition" because sexism is a figment of the imagination, and certainly figments of the imagination aren't worthy of their consideration.

[Jimmie Higgins]

If you wanna have a language without these words, you could have it after the revolution, and I'm telling you you will have one more revolution in which will working class man and women fight together so that they can say "****" to each other...
Hey strawman, I don't want a language without these words or a revolution where afterwards someone gets to put limits on what workers say. For the 10,000th time, I brought this discussion up not because of anything about these words in of themselves!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Does use of the word **** go hand in hand with the inability to read or something?

yes I want to have a world without sexism and yes I agree that the only way to have that world is through working class revolution from below... in order for there to be working class revolution from below, then WOMEN MUST BE PART OF THAT REVOLUTION. In order for women to be a major part of the revolution, working class divisions will have to be overcome to a certain extent - so sexism will have to be confronted by our movements. YOU ARE UNDERMINING OUR EFFORTS TO DISPEL THE IDEA IN THE US THAT FEMINISM IS THE ONLY PROPER WAY TO COMBAT SEXISM WHEN YOU USE TERMS CONSIDERED HIGHLY SEXIST BY PEOPLE IN THE US ON AN OPEN AND INTERNATIONAL FORUM!

If you want this site to be welcoming for people from all over the world, then you shouldn't be in public sections of the forum throwing around the word ****. No one is saying that not using offensive sexist terms will erase sexism, but using (what is considered in the US as highly) sexist terms will not attract people who want to fight sexism.


No, only thing that working class people care about is work place struggle...and when you help some people there they will hug you or shake your hand and say "hell yeah, we kicked those ****S!".Wow, that argument's a throwback to economism!

Again, I do not really care what people say among friends or at work or whatever; I was just trying to argue about droping terms on this site so that people from North America do not get the idea that sexism is OK with the left. But let me tell you a story that disproves your point above: I was on a picket line 2 years ago and very cool and militant unionists were there and taunting the scabs. They began calling scabs "faggots" and "pussies" - some of my female and gay comrades called them on it in a friendly but political and non-moralistic way. They argued: hey you need public support to win this strike right, well we are the only people outside the union here supporting you and several people here are either gay or women and we are not going to be able to bring community people out to a picket in San Francisco if you call the scabs "faggots". The captain responded by saying: yeah, you're right, I don't hate gay people and I didn't mean it that way, calling some one a scab is the worst thing you could call them anyway.

If workers only cared about bread and butter issues, we are fucked and there will never be a revolution because the ruling class will just keep us weak and divided along gender, racial, and national lines.

[Искра]

Yes, resorting to calling me "Stalin" for believing the word "****" shouldn't be used on this internet forum, when I am not a Stalinist by any measure, is an admission of defeat.
I haven't call you Stalin.


For people who think sexism is a joke, there can be no "competition" because sexism is a figment of the imagination, and certainly figments of the imagination aren't worthy of their consideration.I don't think that sexism is imagination, that's not true. I see it every day, I just don't think that "language" is the first thing we should change regarding this issue. That's not so important. Social and political equality of both sexes/genders is the first thing.

[Искра]

WOMEN MUST BE PART OF THAT REVOLUTION. In order for women to be a major part of the revolution, working class divisions will have to be overcome to a certain extent - so sexism will have to be confronted by our movements. YOU ARE UNDERMINING OUR EFFORTS TO DISPEL THE IDEA IN THE US THAT FEMINISM IS THE ONLY PROPER WAY TO COMBAT SEXISM WHEN YOU USE TERMS CONSIDERED HIGHLY SEXIST BY PEOPLE IN THE US ON AN OPEN AND INTERNATIONAL FORUM!
I have never ever claimed that women are not part of revolution... women are working class, right? that's I care about... I'm not sexist, I'm against sexism, and I don't judge or treat people on gender/sex basis.
I'm an anarchist, not conservative.


If you want this site to be welcoming for people from all over the world, then you shouldn't be in public sections of the forum throwing around the word ****. No one is saying that not using offensive sexist terms will erase sexism, but using (what is considered in the US as highly) sexist terms will not attract people who want to fight sexism.You can't fight just sexism... also, as British people here claim that part of their "culture". You can't also have forum which bans that.
If you know Croatia or Serbian, and go to any of our left forums you will see words such as "****", "twat", "dick", "fuck" in every post.... yeah, we are savages.


But let me tell you a story that disproves your point above: I was on a picket line 2 years ago and very cool and militant unionists were there and taunting the scabs. They began calling scabs "faggots" and "pussies" - some of my female and gay comrades called them on it in a friendly but political and non-moralistic way. They argued: hey you need public support to win this strike right, well we are the only people outside the union here supporting you and several people here are either gay or women and we are not going to be able to bring community people out to a picket in San Francisco if you call the scabs "faggots". The captain responded by saying: yeah, you're right, I don't hate gay people and I didn't mean it that way, calling some one a scab is the worst thing you could call them anyway I see that as problem. I never claimed that that isn't a problem.

Jurko: To me it's just pointless to talk about using the words such as "****" and "dick" etc. That has nothing to do with anti-immigrant sentiments, anti-abortion sentiments etc. That's not swearing.As, you can see I don't find this kind of statements just swearing. Gay thing is included.


If workers only cared about bread and butter issues, we are fucked and there will never be a revolution because the ruling class will just keep us weak and divided along gender, racial, and national lines.Also, I never calmed that. I just believe that social prejudice (nation, gender, race) are much harder to break then economical and political. So, first we need to brake those easier, because you need to work a lot on social prejudices.

[9]

Also, I never calmed that. I just believe that social prejudice (nation, gender, race) are much harder to break then economical and political. So, first we need to brake those easier, because you need to work a lot on social prejudices.
To me, this sounds like making excuses. Basically saying "we'll deal with sexism after the revolution!"

[Искра]

To me, this sounds like making excuses. Basically saying "we'll deal with sexism after the revolution!"
No, that's no the way I think or act.
But from my experience in approaching my fellow working class, you can't expect that they change form the second you meet them, just because you want. "Stop being that, that and that"... No. That doesn't work that way. You have to go step by step with each individual.
You don't talk to them insistently about sexism because they'll give you this answer: "Women? Who cares about them... I lost my job."
But that doesn't mean that you deal with sexism after the revolution.

[9]

No, that's no the way I think or act.
But from my experience in approaching my fellow working class, you can't expect that they change form the second you meet them, just because you want. "Stop being that, that and that"... No. That doesn't work that way. You have to go step by step with each individual.
You don't talk to them insistently about sexism because they'll give you this answer: "Women? Who cares about them... I lost my job."

Case in point, really.
To what do I attribute your assumption that the "working class" is exclusively or near-exclusively male? The people I work with/around on a regular basis consist of six medical techs, two phlebotomists, one secretary, and four couriers. All six med techs are female. Both phlebotomists are also female. The secretary is a female. And two out of the four couriers are female. (Largely irrelevant, but my supervisor is also a female). So, out of the thirteen people who I work with, eleven of them are women. Adding myself to the equation (I am a medical technician's assistant), we have twelve out of fourteen workers at my lab who are female. If my math serves me, that's roughly 85% women doing the labor at my workplace. Of course, this isn't representative of the entire working class in the US, as women are more prevalent than men in the medical field. But it is, nonetheless, an illustration of why your conception of all workers as men is considerably flawed.
Now, I don't know if things are wildly different in your country, or if - maybe - you yourself are not a worker and are not very in touch with the 21st century sexual makeup of the working class.
But if your political philosophy is centered around catering to the prejudices of white male workers, I fail to see how you qualify as a revolutionary.

[Искра]

Case in point, really.
To what do I attribute your assumption that the "working class" is exclusively or near-exclusively male? The people I work with/around on a regular basis consist of six medical techs, two phlebotomists, one secretary, and four couriers. All six med techs are female. Both phlebotomists are also female. The secretary is a female. And two out of the four couriers are female. (Largely irrelevant, but my supervisor is also a female). So, out of the thirteen people who I work with, eleven of them are women. Adding myself to the equation (I am a medical technician's assistant), we have twelve out of fourteen workers at my lab who are female. If my math serves me, that's roughly 85% women doing the labor at my workplace. Of course, this isn't representative of the entire working class in the US, as women are more prevalent than men in the medical field. But it is, nonetheless, an illustration of why your conception of all workers as men is considerably flawed.
Now, I don't know if things are wildly different in your country, or if - maybe - you yourself are not a worker and are not very in touch with the 21st century sexual makeup of the working class.
But if your political philosophy is centered around catering to the prejudices of white male workers, I fail to see how you qualify as a revolutionary.
Women here would also give me that answer: "Women, who cares about that stupid right and stuff.. where's my job?"
I don't have a conception of working class as "white male workers".

[9]

Women here would also give me that answer: "Women, who cares about that stupid right and stuff.. where's my job?"
I don't have a conception of working class as "white male workers".

Oh, so women there would say, "Women, who cares about us? Where's...some man's job?"

[Искра]

Oh, so women there would say, "Women, who cares about us? Where's...some man's job?"
Nope. "Where's my (her) job."
What are you trying to prove? That I'm sexist? I'm not.

[9]

Nope. "Where's my (her) job."
What are you trying to prove? That I'm sexist? I'm not.
I'm not trying to prove anything at this point. I think you have done a fine job, however, of proving your own prejudices.
And I think maybe you ought to go out and talk to some female workers before you just make a kneejerk assumption about how they would answer your hypothetical question.
But honestly I think we've gotten insanely far away from the topic of the thread, so I'd prefer to just leave it at that.

[Искра]

I'm not trying to prove anything at this point. I think you have done a fine job, however, of proving your own prejudices.
And I think maybe you ought to go out and talk to some female workers before you just make a kneejerk assumption about how they would answer your hypothetical question.
But honestly I think we've gotten insanely far away from the topic of the thread, so I'd prefer to just leave it at that.
Hm, I do not have prejudice about female workers. I worked in the print workshop only with them... I know how do they fell on certain issues because of centuries of patriarchy in Croatia. Also, I'm still in contact with few of them and talking with them they broke their prejudice of women's role in society.
I have never been sexist of any sort, and thing that I find that sexism can be resolved (inside one individual) only after he/she changes his/her mind about capitalism and State. Then comes religion, sexism, homophobia and stuff. If you jump on people and start to demand 100% change from them in one second they'll say fuck off...
That's all I'm saying...

[Luís Henrique]

Why do I feel that objecting to the use of certain words is not actually fighting against prejudice?

Why do I feel that using the word "****" is not exactly taking a stand against North American imperialism?

*********************

Words aren't magical. We won't change the world through changing words. On the other hand, this is a political board. I cannot imagine what political point cannot be made without using the word "****". If you absolutely need to mention the sexual organ, may I suggest "vagina"? If you absolutely need to call someone a slur, what is wrong with any of the following: "imbecile, idiot, arsehole, cretin, jerk, dimwit, goof, tool, bigot", etc? If you think it necessary to address someone else in a mood of "manly comradery", what about "bro, guy, man, fella, chap", etc?

Luís Henrique

[#FF0000]

Is all this trouble really worth it. Really.

If someone is offended by certain language, then don't use it around them. That's just courtesy.

[Module]

No women or class conscious men in the US would want to join a movement that uses female body parts "****s" "Twats" as common pejoratives.

I know that this is a British thing and that these words are more common in and not considered all that offensive in the UK, but in the US, even women who call other women "*****es" consider "****" highly offensive. I really could care less about swearing or what's PC or not, but our movement should not allow our comrades to walk around saying things like "that's gay" or calling people "****s" or "*****es" without challenging it because it alienates people from our politics.

In my circle, there are probably slightly more female comrades than male so it is easy enough to demonstrate in practice that working class movements and revolutionary movements are not just for white middle aged hetero males (for some reason in the US only white men are considered "working class" in pop culture). But I would be weary about telling anyone new to radical politics but had questions about "sexism in the movement" to check out this site if people use language like this.
Uh... that might be the case in the US, but it isn't in Australia - that is, women don't consider **** "highly offensive".
***** is sexist, it refers specifically to women or feminine qualities in a derogatory way. **** isn't sexist.. because it doesn't.
Nobody in Australia associates the word with either men or women or femininity. It's just like calling somebody a 'dick'.
I would go so far as to say that people who don't see the obvious differences between words like '*****' and words like '****' just don't have a fucking clue.
Ugh I am so fucking sick of threads like these. THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED A MILLION TIMES. STOP MAKING THESE TOPICS, PLEASE. This should have been closed as soon as it was created, as far as I'm concerned.
Edit:

By using this term you are helping to promote the stereotype that the left is sexist in the eyes of working class americans who may not have taken a college course on the finer points of lad-culture slang in the UK.See, that stereotype to my knowledge doesn't actually exist in the UK. So, what do you think, maybe that has something to do with the left in America?

[bluevegan]

I'm new to this forum, but I'd like to interject and state that I would never refer to my genetalia as my **** or twat, i think it sounds horrible and probably not a turn on (maybe not to the type of man i'd like to to attract). I don't however, have any problem with someone I dislike a ****. I think its a very effective insult. I think the meaning of such words has shifted in more recent times.

I know some people in the UK find the word **** offensive, but I dont believe its on sexist grounds, they just find it a vey harsh swear word, hence why its used. At the end of the day we have been dictated through the years as to what words are socially acceptable and so i think it's each to their own preference. If a user was to state that they personally find the word **** offensive as THEY thought it was sexist then I would gladly adhere so as not to offend (in this istance) a fellow 'comrade' shall we say.

[Jimmie Higgins]

People keep saying... Duh, **** isn't used as a sexist word in X country, why can;t you see the difference - I do see the difference that was my reason for bringing it up, so that maybe you could moderate the use of one or two words ON THIS SITE that are considered sexist in the US, since people in the US can somehow mange to do a google search and come to this site now and then (and may not have a handbook about the implications of slang in the UK with them that day).


Uh... that might be the case in the US, but it isn't in Australia - that is, women don't consider **** "highly offensive".
Ok kid, I wasn't aware that only British and Australian people are allowed to read posts here.


***** is sexist, it refers specifically to women or feminine qualities in a derogatory way. **** isn't sexist.. because it doesn't.*****in' dude. In the US, people don't call eachother ****s, **** is seen as similar to "nigger" in its severity. Whatever, yes, most Americans, check with an Australian kid on the internet to find out what language is connected to violence against women in the US.


Nobody in Australia associates the word with either men or women or femininity. It's just like calling somebody a 'dick'.
Great, I'll encourage all my comrades to stop using this site now that I know it's only for people from Australia and the UK.


I would go so far as to say that people who don't see the obvious differences between words like '*****' and words like '****' just don't have a fucking clue.Or are from another country where the term is not used like that.


See, that stereotype to my knowledge doesn't actually exist in the UK. So, what do you think, maybe that has something to do with the left in America?I doubt that it dosn't , but is this a perception in the US? FUCKING YES! So, when people on this site - which is read by people from the US too, come on this site and see people saying ****, then they may come away with the impression that the left is sexist or ok with sexism.

[Aeval]

I see what you mean about people from the US coming here, seeing that word, not realising elsewhere it doesn't have the same meaning and then thinking they don't want to join a site full of sexist pricks - but as people from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, + people from other countries who have learn english as a second language and don't feel very attached or offended by the word also will come to this site, and most of them probably won't realise that '****' is considered so extremely sexist in the US, then how are we going to stop them from using it? I mean, apart from just having this whole conversation over and over again whenever it's used (which isn't that often right?) or officially banning it which seems a tad OTC, or writing up somewhere all the different meanings all the different swear words have and asking people not to be insulted, which also seems daft. Seriously, what can you do to stop new people either being offended or using a word which isn't offensive to them but might be to others?

[thejambo1]

why is this still going on?surely time to close it down.

[#FF0000]

I think I'll just say it again.

If someone is offended by certain language, then don't use it around them. That's just courtesy.

This whole thing sort of reminds me of how a guy I knew tried to justify the casual use of racial slurs, based on the justification that it wasn't racist because the particular slur was another term for "an ignorant person".

And for a lot of people in my area, that sort of thing flies. That's because language is subjective, and what is racist or sexist or degrading in any other way may not be degrading at all to another.

The point is, people on this forum see the word in questions as sexist and degrading. It's a waste of time to argue that it is not, because, like I said, language is subjective, and it would be like arguing about whether blue is a nice color or not.

SO just don't use the word out of courtesy. I mean goddamn it's not that big of a deal, really.

[eyedrop]

I don't see why genital-words are used as insults. I prefer to keep positive connotations to my sexual organs.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I see what you mean about people from the US coming here, seeing that word, not realising elsewhere it doesn't have the same meaning and then thinking they don't want to join a site full of sexist pricks - but as people from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, + people from other countries who have learn english as a second language and don't feel very attached or offended by the word also will come to this site, and most of them probably won't realise that '****' is considered so extremely sexist in the US, then how are we going to stop them from using it? I mean, apart from just having this whole conversation over and over again whenever it's used (which isn't that often right?) or officially banning it which seems a tad OTC, or writing up somewhere all the different meanings all the different swear words have and asking people not to be insulted, which also seems daft. Seriously, what can you do to stop new people either being offended or using a word which isn't offensive to them but might be to others?

Thank you for a thoughtful non-straw-man counterpoint. Seriously, it's refreshing.

I don't propose banning people who use this term or anything - I was just hoping to raise this issue to people who didn't know about the sexist connotations of some terms in the US and Canada so that we could kind of just monitor ourselves. If someone new to the site called someone else a "****" members who read this post could remind them that it's a sexist slur to US readers and they should try and avoid it when debating here. It's the same approach I would take if a young US comrade said "Capitalism is gay" or called someone a "*****" in a debate here - they may just not realize that these really common phrases are seen as sexist and homophobic and since we want a movement that includes all workers, we shouldn't say things that might alienate people from our politics.

Essentially arguing that since "****" is accepted by men and women in the UK, it doesn't matter how it is seen by people in other regions means that it is also OK for revleft posters from the US to call people "*****es". I think we can all agree that allowing that would make revleft look like it is not serious about fighting sexism - this is why I also think that comrades should not say "****" while on a website read by scores if not hundreds of people from North America.

[proudcomrade]

The rather verbally abusive neg rep I just received, from a member who shall remain anonymous, was pretty telling. Apparently, I am "a fucking moron" for opposing sexism and cultural chauvinism, and I deserved a personal telling-off just for my eyes only. Who knew how dearly the right to offend and alienate others is cherished in the Commonwealth? :rolleyes:

[Fietsketting]

This has really soured me on this website and British people in general. I was hoping for some solidarity and understanding of how things might be read from different regions. Oh well fuck you all and may you wallow in your tiny meaningless cliques forever

I am rather offended by your use of the word FUCK all the time, I aint getting any and it hurts my feelings.

[9]

Well, Gravedigger... I think you made a noble effort and I commend you for it.
But, as seen in the post above, when revleft is jam-packed with little liberal boys who still depend on mommy and daddy to meet all their needs, its hardly surprising that we can't hold a mature conversation about the need to avoid using offensive discriminatory language on this forum.

[ZeroNowhere]

I'm surprised it took 5 pages for somebody to define the word '****'.

[JohannGE]

Should any consideration be given to the views of non committed visitors to the site?

The use of language that could be seen as offensive by the majority of the population can only be counter productive to any aims of attracting the curious or wavering to our cause. To insist on the freedom to use such language adds nothing but a self indulgant expression of fundamentalist liberalism.

Who realy needs it?
-

[Salabra]

This thread revisits a previous one. If I recall correctly, a member was shouted down because she said that she found the word “****” offensive.

So here we go again.

Let me state at the beginning that I am female (only relevant, IMO, insofar as fellow members have noted that there are too few females on this board). I am also a linguist by interest and profession — I have no wish to claim that my opinion is “infallible” or in any way unchallengeable, merely that the usage of words is a topic of especial concern to me. Remember that language is not always “rational” — the connotations (auxiliary meanings, including the feelings aroused by words) are just as important, if not more so, than the denotation (the dictionary meaning).

The thread reminds me of an argument I often have with men about the use of “he” not only as a masculine pronoun of the third person but also as a gender-neutral pronoun of the third person. I won’t go into specifics, but the upshot is that few men actually see a problem with “he” as gender neutral, and don’t see that we are excluded by it because the pronoun refers primarily to them, allowing them to see themselves as the “default” gender.

Now on to “****” and why it may be regarded as “sexist.”

Firstly, women are involved with their bodies in quite a different way to men. From a purely structural point of view, the male genitalia are an excrescence, tacked on, almost as an afterthought, to an otherwise featureless body; we, on the other hand, are built around our genitalia, which are a far more intimate part of us. This is reinforced by the human upright stance, which hides women’s genitalia from sight.

Unlike men, we can’t wave our genitalia about like a flag (and no, Mr Freud, we don’t want to). Men are encouraged to be inordinately proud of their genitals; women, on the other hand, are supposed to be ashamed of theirs — a formal word for the female genitalia is “pudenda — something to be ashamed of” (Yes, I know that it has also been used for the male genitalia, but proportionately less frequently and usually in the form “MALE pudenda,” implying that “women should be ashamed — oh, and guys might feel ashamed too”). Men spray their bodily fluids about like champagne at the grand final of a tennis match; our bodily fluids are “nasty messes.”

From this comes a whole cascade of misogyny — from “****s smell” (it’s funny that no matter how dirty and scabrous some penises are, they are always “bright spears”) to “I can’t trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die.” Is it any wonder, then, that when people use a word that describes such an intimate part of a woman’s body as an insult, many women get a little upset?

So, how do I feel about the use of the word? Well, it all depends on who’s saying it, the tone in which they’re saying it, when it’s being said — and, of course, what they are referring to. My partner and I often refer to our own and each others’ genitals in private as “****s” — it’s a powerful and erotic word. We might also call each other “****” (or “*****” or “slut”) as a term of affection.

We see this as reclaiming the word, in the same way that “queer” and “nigga” are being reclaimed by the gay community and African-Americans respectively. I would hasten to add that the same limitations on usage apply, i.e., it is permissible, for example, for an African-American to call another African-American a “nigga,” but not for a “white person” to do so.

The reason is simple — in most cases, at least here in Australia, “****,” “*****,” “slut” and “ho/whore” are terms that men use to belittle women, or to establish linguistically what sort of behaviour is approved or not. Women, of course, use them against other women for the same reason. Hence I would not use it to refer to another woman in anger or derision, and if a man (or another woman who was not part of my “circle”), called me or my partner or anybody with whom I was affiliated, a “****,” particularly if their tone was aggressive or abusive, they would be asking for an extremely angry reaction.


In Australia ... women don't consider **** "highly offensive".

***** is sexist, it refers specifically to women or feminine qualities in a derogatory way. **** isn't sexist.. because it doesn't.

Nobody in Australia associates the word with either men or women or femininity. It's just like calling somebody a 'dick'.

Sorry to disagree with a fellow Aussie woman, but in the circles in which I move, this is simply untrue.

And, although once again, my knowledge is limited (i.e., I don’t go to rugby matches, or drink at ‘footy clubs’), I have never heard men call one another “****s.”


I would go so far as to say that people who don't see the obvious differences between words like '*****' and words like '****' just don't have a fucking clue.

Guilty, as charged, Ma’am … do I hand in my red star now or after I’m expelled from the party?

For what it’s worth, seeing that I am both a lesbian and physically impaired, I also react adversely both to “gay” and “lame” as descriptions of “inadequacy” or “wimpishness.”


**** on the other hand … has a variety of meanings and forms (noun, verb, adjective, intensifier

How do you use “****’ as a verb? Would you say “I ****ed him/her” (transitive), or “I ****ed onto the bus” (intransive) on the analogy of “I smacked him/her” or “I jumped onto the bus”?

How do you use it as an adjective? Would you say “She is a **** woman (attributive)” or “She is ****” (predicative) on the analogy of “She is a rich woman” or “She is rich”?

How do you use it as an intensifier? Would you say “I hate this **** weather” on the analogy of “I hate this damned weather”?

[Steve_j]

In regards to the op i dont think **** is a sexist word, yes it can be used with sexist connotations which is an issue but i dont think i have seen that on this board, when it is used here, its use can be interchanged with cock, dick, prick ect so i dont think there is anything to be offended about.


We might also call each other “****” (or “*****” or “slut”) as a term of affection.



And, although once again, my knowledge is limited (i.e., I don’t go to rugby matches, or drink at ‘footy clubs’), I have never heard men call one another “****s.”

Australian men? From my experience, Alot. Growing up it got thrown around between alot men, in both endearing and offensive ways.

[revolt4thewin]

If any one wants to look up any sexist look at typical employment in the U$A.

[yuon]

I'm surprised it took 5 pages for somebody to define the word '****'.
OP:

uses female body parts "****s" "Twats" as common pejoratives.


it [****] refer to the female genitals with all the cultural and religious crap about the genitals especially female genitals being 'dirty'.
Sorry mate, looks like you should have read the first page.


The thread reminds me of an argument I often have with men about the use of “he” not only as a masculine pronoun of the third person but also as a gender-neutral pronoun of the third person. I won’t go into specifics, but the upshot is that few men actually see a problem with “he” as gender neutral, and don’t see that we are excluded by it because the pronoun refers primarily to them, allowing them to see themselves as the “default” gender.
That's fucking stupid. I don't know any man that stupid. I would think about getting violent with anyone that thought that "he" was just fine as the "gender neutral" pronoun (especially considering that there are more females than males in humanity).


From this comes a whole cascade of misogyny — from “****s smell” (it’s funny that no matter how dirty and scabrous some penises are, they are always “bright spears”) to “I can’t trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die.” Is it any wonder, then, that when people use a word that describes such an intimate part of a woman’s body as an insult, many women get a little upset?
I have to say, I've never heard of penises being called "bright spears" before. And, I certainly have heard people say that they smell (and they can, and do...).

Anyway, men don't (at least, not that I've noticed) get upset about their most intimate parts of their body (penis and testicles) being used as insults. Cock, balls, dick, etc. Certainly men get upset if said parts are threatened (or insulted), but not if a generic term is used as an insult (unless the insult is directed at them I guess).


For what it’s worth, seeing that I am both a lesbian and physically impaired, I also react adversely both to “gay” and “lame” as descriptions of “inadequacy” or “wimpishness.”
That's an understandable reaction.



How do you use it as an intensifier? Would you say “I hate this **** weather” on the analogy of “I hate this damned weather”?
You might say, "I hate this ****ting weather".


Anyway Salabra, I didn't want to respond line by line to your post, but rather the general feel of it. Let me ask you a question, if, in a society where there was no sexism (etc.) (say a perfect anarchist society), would you object to terms that referred to genitalia being used as insults?

If the word **** was only ever used as a gender neutral insult (along with the word "cock") would you object to it being used in that manner? (From where I'm sitting, it's never used to insult women exclusively, or even the majority of time.)

One final question, do you, as I do, object to the idea that "****" is considered the "worst" swear word in English?
For examples:
http://www.asa.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/1EAEACA7-8322-4C86-AAC2-4261551F57FE/0/ASA_Delete_Expletives_Dec_2000.pdf (see appendix 2 if you don't want to read the whole thing, it's not a small download, so to just see appendix 2, you could also visit: http://www.badscience.net/2006/03/****-fuck-wanker/ )
See also : http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2007/jul/28/weekend.jonronson/print for an example.

[9]

I'm surprised it took 5 pages for somebody to define the word '****'.

Sorry, what is this in reference to?

[Decommissioner]

Sorry, but this is such liberal shit.


"Nigger" isn't the same as "cracker" because of the whole history and social context behind the words which means that they simply aren't on the same level. Likewise, the term 'dick' or 'cock' has never been used against men for the purpose of denigrating them as men. You cannot say the same for the terms "****" or "*****" which have been and continue to be employed to disparage women for being women. That, and men simply aren't oppressed by sexism on the same level as women. Words don't come falling from the sky or ready-made from an eternal dictionary, but come drenched with the prejudices/attitudes of society.


I hate to agree with what is presumably a banned sockpuppet, but I do think this is the heart of the matter.
I am a woman, and I am not personally offended by the word c*nt in and of itself, but I absolutely understand why others are, and I don't think there is any need to use it on this site.

I think attention needs to be called to this post, for it seems a lot of people who are posing the argument that calling someone a **** is as equally (in)offensive as calling someone a dick have conveniently missed this post. To pose such an argument is to ignore the historical context of the words themselves, and why they are offensive. Arguments such as this are analogous to white people here in the US saying it's unfair that there isn't a white history month, or a White Entertainment Television station. In both instances they are saying the unequal treatment is inherently racist/sexist. In a vaccuum, yes it would be racist to not have a white history month, but in reality black people have been and still are an oppressed minority, so in effect celebrating a white history month would merely equate to celebrating a history of one race's dominance over another. This is the same as saying the words **** and dick hold the same weight, and should be treated equally. To pose such an argument is simply ignoring the historical context of the words.

I personally don't hold the moral high ground on this matter. I am guilty as charged, I sometimes catch myself saying "that's gay" every now and then. Mind you, not in an intentionally malicious way towards gay people, but for the same absent minded and disassociated reasons people in the UK say ****. However, in my personal life I really do try not to say this as it can and does offend some gay people, even when no offense is meant on my behalf (I tend to find the word "bunk" is a good replacement for "gay"..especially considering the word usually applies to how you are using it). I definitely wouldn't say something is "gay" in a derogatory manner on a forum such as this, so I don't see how it is so unbelievable for some leftists to replace the word "****" with a word such as "fuckwad" (if you feel like being obscene) or "idiot" for the sake of common courtesy towards those who aren't familiar with the connotations (or lack thereof) an offensive word has in their country.

[bricolage]

How do you use “****’ as a verb? Would you say “I ****ed him/her” (transitive), or “I ****ed onto the bus” (intransive) on the analogy of “I smacked him/her” or “I jumped onto the bus”?

I've heard people say "I ****ed him" as in I smacked him, although it's probably more a replacement for "I twatted him" which of course has it's own connotations.

My favourite use of the word however was for the hours in the day; "I was working a 14 hour shift, there's only 24 of the ****s in the day" after which there were a number of conversations that went like this; "oi when you getting here?" "half a ****" "safe see you then".

[Patchd]

Yeah, "*****" is certainly a sexist term, but "****s" and "twats", I don't think so. Like "cock", "dickhead", "bellend", "bollocks" etc. I see the use of any genitalia as a derogatory word to be reflective of society's former, or current stance towards sex, genitalia still being seen as taboo in many societies.

[revolt4thewin]

Yeah, "*****" is certainly a sexist term, but "****s" and "twats", I don't think so. Like "cock", "dickhead", "bellend", "bollocks" etc. I see the use of any genitalia as a derogatory word to be reflective of society's former, or current stance towards sex, genitalia still being seen as taboo in many societies.

Good point since every one uses those terms on a daily bases.

[Aeval]

How do you use “****’ as a verb? Would you say “I ****ed him/her” (transitive), or “I ****ed onto the bus” (intransive) on the analogy of “I smacked him/her” or “I jumped onto the bus”?

How do you use it as an adjective? Would you say “She is a **** woman (attributive)” or “She is ****” (predicative) on the analogy of “She is a rich woman” or “She is rich”?

How do you use it as an intensifier? Would you say “I hate this **** weather” on the analogy of “I hate this damned weather”?

Verb: as already said - 'I ****ed him' = 'I twatted (that is, hit) him'

Adjective: a piece of work can be described as '****ish', that is, complicated, and you might equally say 'I've had a **** of a day' (yea, ok it's a noun here, but it's descriptive)
A person can also be described as '****ish' but here it rather means 'selfish'.
The word '****ed' means ridiculously drunk or wasted

Noun (used positively): When used with a positive qualifier (good, funny, clever, etc) it conveys a positive sense of the person referred to.
****ing' is also used like 'bollocking' as in: "Did you see the ****ing he got for saying that?"

Intensifier: '****ing' used exactly like 'fucking', like yuon said.

And someone said earlier about why don't people use the phrase 'suck my ****' - I have actually heard this used, by a woman, to a man who was being a complete idiot and the look on his face was brilliant :D

Anyhoos, you are right, women are do tend to be uncomfortable with their genitalia, which is really awful, which is also why I'm so against holding this word up as worse than a word referring to male genitalia. Yea, ok, I won't called anyone a **** on here, the word isn't that important to me, but in real life I think we all could do with becoming a bit desensitised to it.

[debase89]

i get how the origins might be bad and stuff, but i don't think people really mean it to be a sexist term its just what people say. if someone's trying to be insulting ok

-debase

[Sam_b]

To be quite honest, I've skipped the last two pages of this debate so apologies if most of this has been covered by multiple users.

Most of the members of the CC are aware of my views on this issue, and this thread has polarised this debate in several aspects: in the sense that several 'usual suspects' of such threads have posted about their inherent rights to use c*nt or whatever, and thanked by the other predominantly white young males that also feel the need to use this. If anything I find it baffling that such figures continue to use this language on this forum where they are very well aware of how many of our users feel about them, and seems to be used as 'shock values' or whatever.

We can all make our own hypotheses about this issue, around the questions of 'how many women regularly use disputed sexist language on this forum?' or 'how many women regularly use these words in our communities?' and no doubt we will reach wildly different conclusions. This is to be expected, but by no means does this reflect that one side has certain moral authority on the other. As far as the, frankly hilarious, posts in this thread about "using the word dick is also sexist then" this is crying out of making excuses for covert or overt prejudiced language and that they are uncomfortable about being called up for their supposed bigotry. They also seem to not understand that males are not, nor have they ever, been victims of sexism, are not discriminated in life for being men. Sometimes this fact comes over in how patrionising the language is, asserting to women or other users that it is their absolute right to be able to shock or offend them.

You'll see that i've been guarded in the language above, and for reason. For me I do find the terminology c*nt etc to be ridiculously sexist. I think the fact it is used as a slur is a by-product of the patriarchical system, whether intentionally or not by its user. I subsequently think this word should be banned from the forums as if it was one of the more vile racist slurs that our recent trolls have employed. However, this is only one side of the question.

Before you say it, of course this is not going to stop sexism overnight, on this forum or in other spheres. Absolutely, I am in agreement with you there. Nevertheless as revolutionaries we should be leading by example in the fight for women's liberation: recognising this as a word which has been de-sensitised from its original meaning almost to the point that it is an acceptable slur in society, and we should refrain from using it. Just because workers tend to use it does not mean we should. The point again is to treat this as another area of class struggle: to patiently explain the problems associated with the term and how many find it to be construed. It strikes me that some of c*nts most arduent defenders tend to be young and inexperienced leftists and this is a strong argument for internal comprehensive education and questioning within our own tendencies and movements. Its all well and good to be anti-capitalist but it rings a bit hollow when such words are used and acceptable within the inner circles of struggle and our movement. Being anti-capitalist does not compensate for having an obtuse outlook on other important fights against social discrimination.

Sorry if that hardly makes sense, i've had a stupid amount of seminars and presentations today.

[9]

Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/****)

****

 http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/lunaWAV/C10/C1047600) /kʌnt/ http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) Show Spelled Pronunciation [kuhnt] http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.html) Show IPA –noun Slang: Vulgar.

1. the vulva or vagina.
2. Disparaging and Offensive.
a. a woman.
b. a contemptible person.
3. sexual intercourse with a woman.

**** http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/audio.html/ahd4WAV/C0806200/****) (kŭnt) http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html)
n. Vulgar Slang


The female genital organs.
Sexual intercourse with a woman.


Offensive Used as a disparaging term for a woman.
Used as a disparaging term for a person one dislikes or finds extremely disagreeable.



Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/****)

Main Entry: ****
Pronunciation: \ˈkənt\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ****e; akin to Middle Low German kunte female pudenda
Date: 14th century
1 usually obscene : the female genital organs; also : sexual intercourse with a woman
2 usually disparaging & obscene : woman (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman) 1a


Thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/****)

**** (khttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ubreve.gifnt)n. Vulgar Slang
1. The female genital organs.
2. Sexual intercourse with a woman.
3.
a. Offensive Used as a disparaging term for a woman.
b. Used as a disparaging term for a person one dislikes or finds extremely disagreeable.

----

I've yet to find a dictionary which does not mention the use of the word as a disparaging slang term for a woman. So those of you claiming such connotations don't exist might be wise to inform yourselves, if only on a minimal level.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

have you considered http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/****?view=uk you know a British dictionary which would use the British meanings not the US ones.

[Wanted Man]

Let's get this straight - this is not about OFFENSIVE TERMS IN A GOD DAMN JESUS FUCKING VACUUM!

This whole thing is about not using words that will be seen by a WHOLE FUCKING SEGMENT OF THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD AS OVERTLY SEXIST! My point in bringing it up was to remind people in the UK, that there are differences, not to attack anyone from there or try and control your language.

This has really soured me on this website and British people in general. I was hoping for some solidarity and understanding of how things might be read from different regions. Oh well fuck you all and may you wallow in your tiny meaningless cliques forever!

This is like debating with the assholes back in high school that drove around in pic-up trucks with huge confederate flags and said: why are you offended, I'm not a racist, so then that flag isn't a racist flag.

I'm sure you're not trying to censor or attack anyone, but you did manage to make a bigoted comment about "British people in general", so how can you be taken seriously when it comes to racism, sexism or any other form of discrimination? You wanted to "remind" British members on how other users might feel. Well, clearly, they're not interested in taking your advice.

[yuon]

Just so ya'll know that there are actual feminist women out there who don't have a problem with the word (I guess they have a problem with how it is used sometimes *shrug*). Apparently Inga Muscio and Eve Ensler wish to "reclaim" the word. :)

Anyway, the problem with dictionary definitions, is sometimes they are just wrong. I've never heard or seen the word "****" used to mean "sexual intercourse with a woman". (Oh, and all those dictionaries, check the sources, I'm guessing that at least two are the same dictionary in different places. :confused:)

[9]

Just so ya'll know that there are actual feminist women out there who don't have a problem with the word (I guess they have a problem with how it is used sometimes *shrug*). Apparently Inga Muscio and Eve Ensler wish to "reclaim" the word. :)

Anyway, the problem with dictionary definitions, is sometimes they are just wrong. I've never heard or seen the word "****" used to mean "sexual intercourse with a woman". (Oh, and all those dictionaries, check the sources, I'm guessing that at least two are the same dictionary in different places. :confused:)

I'm all for reclaiming words but there is a huge difference between a discriminatory word being reclaimed by its victims and a word being thrown around by anyone with its typical connotations. I have a black friend named Biola who has chosen to reclaim the word "nigger", and she uses it frequently and generally with positive connotations. But I am not naive enough to think that I, as a white person, can sign on to a web forum and start throwing around the word "nigger" as I please, with the excuse that "I know black people who have reclaimed it".
Being "culturally" Jewish, I frequently refer to my Jewish friends as "kikes" and "hebs", but I don't go on political forums and call people "kikes" and "hebs" because the internet is international and impersonal, where it is almost certain that other people - Jews in particular - will not be aware of my background or my sense of humor, and will be very offended by it.
Basically, "reclaiming words" doesn't fly on an internet forum where no one knows who the people using the words are.

Also, dictionary definitions are repetitive, seriously. Questioning the legitimacy of the definitions because they go against your argument is absurd. Go to the websites, which I took the time to link to, yourself and check it out before you make an unfounded statement implying that I bullshitted my last post.
And I have heard "****" used as a noun for sexual intercourse in the same sense that I have heard "ass" used in that same context ("trying to get some good ass", for example).

Also, going back to this:


Just so ya'll know that there are actual feminist women out there who don't have a problem with the word (I guess they have a problem with how it is used sometimes *shrug*)*Shrug* indeed, you've just shrugged off the entire meaning and purpose of reclaiming words. Really. Black people who reclaim the word "nigger" aren't reclaiming it so some racist white kids in suburbia can have a justification for using the word "nigger". Nor are women who reclaim the word "****" doing so to give a bunch of primarily-male members of an internet forum a justification to continue using the word in typical form.

[Yehuda Stern]

The matter seems very simple to me: there's obviously a fair number of politically conscious women who find the word offensive and who do not wish to tolerate its use by men. That is all that I personally need to decide that I won't use it.

That should be such a basic thing to socialists that I'm honestly shocked at how controversial this subject is. If you were with a group of friends, and one of your friends asked you not to say a certain word because it bugs him, you wouldn't out of consideration for that friend. If you insisted to use that word despite his request, your other friends would understandably call you out on your behavior and would probably ask you to leave if things became unbearable.

So why don't women in general get the same treatment? Because the people who insist on using the c word are males who cannot stand being told to not do something by an oppressed person. "What, should I let a woman tell me not to use a certain word? What gives her the right? I'm the man here, I deserve to do whatever I want with my language, no matter who it offends."

Many people are trying to belittle the issue, but the truth is that the behavior of those who insist on using the c word betrays sexism and the attitude of spoiled, privileged people, completely hostile to the oppressed. Their mere presence in this site shows the degeneracy of the supposedly "revolutionary left."

[BobKKKindle$]

I find that when people insist on using words like "****" just because they and their close friends, or the people in the country they happen to inhabit, don't regard it as an insult with sexist connotations, that smacks of the worst form of liberalism, because those people believe that their right to use a particular word as an insult is more important than the desires of other people to not be subject to what they regard as abusive and prejudiced language. I'm fully aware that there are some women who probably think that it is not sexist but given that all countries are increasingly populated by people drawn from a range of different cultural backgrounds it makes perfect sense to acknowledge that you are likely to come into contact with people who object to the use of the word **** during the course of your daily life because they do find it prejudiced, and so, if you want those people to consider you an ally in the struggle against sexism and all other forms of oppression, or even if you just want to get on well with them on an individual basis, it makes sense not to use that word, and, if you want to insult someone, to find another word instead. To draw a parallel, plenty of people in the UK from the older generation call non-white people "coloureds" without intending to be offensive, simply because "coloured" is an old-fashioned word for a non-white person, that is now regarded as prejudiced. It would be absurd if someone said that it was fine for them to refer to a black guy as "coloured" or a "negro" just because the person using the word and others from the same demographic group do not find it offensive - rather, in that situation, we would all recognize that the speaker should change their language, and be confronted if they persisted in their usage of "coloured". It is, as Yehuda said, as simple as that - to me this is actually something more fundamental than not legitimizing prejudiced language, because I've always believed that a basic part of social interaction is that you should respect the preferences and feelings of others, when you do not incur any serious negative consequences by doing so, simply because that allows everyone to get on better with one another, and avoids unnecessary tension and conflict.


but you did manage to make a bigoted comment about "British people in general",To be honest, I think that Britain is one of the most insensitive and stubborn countries in the world when it comes to oppression and language. You only need to look at the absurd number of newspaper articles that center around the theme of "political correctness gone mad" or "those damn immigrants making us change the way we speak" when someone objects to prejudiced language, somewhere.


America is not the rest of the world. The meaning and effect of the word differs between continents (basically sod off).

How does this differ from my grandfather saying "oh, people of my generation don't find any problem with the word "coon" or "negro" as a reference to black people, or the word "oriental" as a reference to Chinese people, so sod off"? Why is it necessary to adopt this narrow viewpoint that only considers matters from the viewpoint of your immediate cultural context?

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

No women or class conscious men in the US would want to join a movement that uses female body parts "****s" "Twats" as common pejoratives.

No 'movement' does this... I'll agree they're much more common colloquially in the UK than elswhere, but in my first impressions of a political organisation I've never noticed the use of those terms. Saying that people don't join a movement because of this seems to be shifting responsibility somewhat. There are plenty of reasons people aren't attracted to the radical left - For some it might be a factor;I'd let those people speak for themselves, but obviously they're not here because of our sexist language - we have plenty else to be ashamed of.

It's much more of a problem on RevLeft, because of the levels of debate here on the word, as well as the blurring of the informal and political.

But this is beginning to feel like groundhog day...

[Luís Henrique]

I find that when people insist on using words like "****" just because they and their close friends, or the people in the country they happen to inhabit, don't regard it as an insult with sexist connotations, that smacks of the worst form of liberalism, because those people believe that their right to use a particular word as an insult is more important than the desires of other people to not be subject to what they regard as abusive and prejudiced language.

In Portugal, the word "puto" is a slang for "kids". In Brazil, it is the equivalent of "faggot" - if anything, somewhat more offencive, because of the implication of prostitution. Evidently, it is not advisable to Portuguese people to use the word, even in its innocent European meaning, in a forum where there are both Portuguese and Brazilian posters. It doesn't mean, however, that the word is homophobic in itself, and much less in the context of being used by a Portuguese person to describe small boys; and if used inadvertently, it shouldn't be a reason for a flame war between Brasilians and the Portuguese.

I am sure if the Americans here could ask politely that the British and Australians please don't use the word "****" in this forum, because it is offencive for American ears, most if not all Brits and Aussies would try to be nice and avoid offending American sensibilities. On the other hand, demands for a ban of the word, completed with accusations of sexism and threats of restriction or banning, will more than likely cause the opposite reaction - some people may make a point of using it, just to annoy the damn Merkins and their perceived moralism.

Luís Henrique

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

How does this differ from my grandfather saying "oh, people of my generation don't find any problem with the word "coon" or "negro" as a reference to black people, or the word "oriental" as a reference to Chinese people, so sod off"? Why is it necessary to adopt this narrow viewpoint that only considers matters from the viewpoint of your immediate cultural context?

Because your grandad picked up the language in a time when the words negro and coon were common usage when the people they refered to were openly discriminated against (As in no anti discrimination laws more social acceptance of racism etc) as opposed to the word **** in the UK not being related to women as an insult (as in its not meant to femanize whoever is being called a **** nor is it an insult used specifically by women).

[Durruti's Ghost]

I live in the US. Here, "c*nt" is not only a sexist slur, it is the single most offensive sexist slur. I understand that people in the UK may not perceive it this way; however, if it is unacceptable to use the word "b*tch" on this website because the word is considered sexist in the UK, surely it should also be unacceptable to use the word "c*nt". To deny this is to hold a blatant cultural double standard.

[Искра]

This thread should be closed just because it's boring :rolleyes:

[BobKKKindle$]

Because your grandad picked up the language in a time when the words negro and coon were common usage when the people

Right, but the point is that people from that generation don't consider the word negro prejudiced because, as you say, it was commonly used, in the same way that you don't consider the word **** prejudiced because it is commonly used as an insult by you others from your cultural background without being applied solely to women or, in your view, being linked to femininity; however, don't you think that we should consider the preferences and opinions of people from cultural backgrounds other than our own in our language, just as a way of showing respect for others, which means not using the word **** because it is seen as prejudiced by many people?

[Devrim]

I have only used this word once on these boards, and I did it to blatently insult somebody, a male by the way.

I don't think that people should use it as it causes offence to some that in itself should be enough.

However, I think that part of the opposition to not using this word coming from UK based posters is based on a feeling of unease at being told how to speak by middle class intellectuals.

I am not sure how the word is used in the US. In my, addmittedly very brief, visits there over twenty years ago, I heard it used frequently by both men and women, but perhaps that is connected to the social circles I mixed in.

In the UK though I get the impression that the whole thing about 'politically correct' speech was something that was imported from America via accademia. Certainly there is resentment amongst the working class towards the sociological middle class and students. I remember a young SWP student telling a postwoman on our picket lines in the 1988 national strike not to use the word 'love' as a form of address as it was sexist. The postwoman quickly told this young girl where to go.

I feel that people arguing against the use of this word should be aware of this feeling and also that in putting forward this argument they should also be aware that it possibly causes those who use it to use it more often even.

Devrim

[black magick hustla]

i think people are defensive about their usage of "****" because they are being called sexist. which in some contexts is not. ive never used the word a lot and i wont say it because its offensive to some people, but if you start calling people sexists just like that dont expect them to just go on their knees and start listening to you. And no, it is not on equal footing as nigger. That is the most outrageous argument. The context behind "nigger" is to belittle someone based on his race, to dehumanize him. When some working class female uk girl uses it, it has nothing to do with that.

[9]

i think people are defensive about their usage of "****" because they are being called sexist. which in some contexts is not. ive never used the word a lot and i wont say it because its offensive to some people, but if you start calling people sexists just like that dont expect them to just go on their knees and start listening to you.
This is the second time I've heard someone claim that we're calling people sexists in this thread. I haven't seen where this has occurred, and I am inclined - after skimming through the thread - to believe it is actually just a piece of deceitful gossip someone (not you) concocted. However, it is possible that, in scanning the thread, I missed this allegation being thrown around, and I will obviously concede as much if you can show me where in this thread anyone has said "you are a sexist" to anyone else.



And no, it is not on equal footing as nigger. That is the most outrageous argument.Well, I realize the two words aren't identical, but I also believe that many here find the comparison between the two words to be "the most outrageous argument" and "not on equal footing" because, unfortunately, I don't think many here believe that sexism and racism are on equal footing in terms of being concrete problems and forms of oppression. Sexism, frankly, is just not taken very seriously by many on the left, and on this forum in particular.


The context behind "nigger" is to belittle someone based on his race, to dehumanize him. When some working class female uk girl uses it, it has nothing to do with that.
Except, in the US, the context behind "****" is to belittle someone based on her sex, to dehumanize her (e.g. reduce her to mere genitalia). And when a black person in the US uses the word "nigger", it also has nothing to do with that. I have no problem at all with an oppressed population reclaiming the slurs traditionally used to victimize them. But let's don't continue blurring the line between this particular internet forum and real life. As I have repeated ad nauseum throughout this thread, no one is telling comrades in the UK to stop using the word "****" in their day-to-day lives, or even on the internet in general. The request was really very small and modest - that comrades avoid using the word on this website. Why there is so much angry resistance to such a minimal request as a matter of courtesy is genuinely completely beyond me.

[Yehuda Stern]

However, I think that part of the opposition to not using this word coming from UK based posters is based on a feeling of unease at being told how to speak by middle class intellectuals.

Well, we hardly know the social class from which other board members come. Personally I think the assumption that all UK members using the c word are proletarian is ludicrous - to me, their attitude smacks of middle class conceit. I think what you wrote just shows once again the for most the left, workers are basically uneducated, prejudiced people to whom we must accommodate in our language (and, implicitly, our politics).


I remember a young SWP student telling a postwoman on our picket lines in the 1988 national strike not to use the word 'love' as a form of address as it was sexist. The postwoman quickly told this young girl where to go.

Well, I would probably phrase it differently so it would not seem like I'm commanding the postwoman to do something. But I would certainly bring it up. (I don't know that the SWPer is right in this particular case, by the way).

[ls]

Well, we hardly know the social class from which other board members come.

Sorry but perhaps you don't, others however definitely do.


Personally I think the assumption that all UK members using the c word are proletarian is ludicrous - to me, their attitude smacks of middle class conceit.

You can be sure that most of them are, trust me.


I think what you wrote just shows once again the for most the left, workers are basically uneducated, prejudiced people to whom we must accommodate in our language (and, implicitly, our politics).


you should think like I do

look like I do

then you'd get all the chicks

because I'm Yehuda

Yehuda Stern

feel the burn


Well, I would probably phrase it differently so it would not seem like I'm commanding the postwoman to do something. But I would certainly bring it up. (I don't know that the SWPer is right in this particular case, by the way).

It's not used as a sexist word at all, or only as much as men using the word "woman" in an aggressive and calling tone could be.

[Wanted Man]

To be honest, I think that Britain is one of the most insensitive and stubborn countries in the world when it comes to oppression and language. You only need to look at the absurd number of newspaper articles that center around the theme of "political correctness gone mad" or "those damn immigrants making us change the way we speak" when someone objects to prejudiced language, somewhere.

Maybe Gravedigger should have said that, then. Maybe he should have said: "I'm disappointed that you defend your use of that word, revolutionaries should not join the Tory rags in complaining about "PC"". But he didn't, he said: "This has really soured me on this website and British people in general".

I don't think that's cool, and it is an openly discriminatory comment, belittling someone because of the nation that they happened to be born in. It's unfair, because there are several British people on here who agree with Gravedigger's view. Gravedigger has a problem with the use of the word "****", but he has already done something worse in this thread.

Gravedigger said that he doesn't want to "attack anyone", but of course he already did that anyway ("fuck you all" - who, all British people?). He said that he doesn't want to "control language", but that he was simply giving some sound advice to "UK Comrades". A few of them kindly refused to take his advice, which is perfectly acceptable (after all, he doesn't want to attack anyone or control anyone's language...). This small fact has caused him so much distress that he resents an entire nation for it.

So who is the one with poor judgment here? Looks like Gravedigger to me.

[Devrim]

I think what you wrote just shows once again the for most the left, workers are basically uneducated, prejudiced people to whom we must accommodate in our language (and, implicitly, our politics).

No, I don't think so. Personally I don't think it is a prejudiced word and it is one that I often use when speaking English with friends. I don't think that it is apppropriate in political discourse, but then I don't think that the word 'fuck' is either. Maybe that is because I am old fashioned or at least old. I don't think it is in any way compromising our politics or 'accomadating' people.



Well, we hardly know the social class from which other board members come. Personally I think the assumption that all UK members using the c word are proletarian is ludicrous - to me, their attitude smacks of middle class conceit

I don't claim to know the social class of every poster. I merely commented on my impressions.

Devrim

[Yehuda Stern]

Quote:
you should think like I do

look like I do

then you'd get all the chicks

because I'm Yehuda

Yehuda Stern

feel the burn

I think that this idiotic post by ls merely shows that at the basis of the arguments of those who refuse to stop using the c word is thinly veiled sexism. The above quote is a prime example of this, as well as other endearing qualities.


Personally I don't think it is a prejudiced word and it is one that I often use when speaking English with friends.

And is it not enough to you that there are many politically conscious women that find this word very offensive?


I don't think that it is apppropriate in political discourse, but then I don't think that the word 'fuck' is either.Sadly we don't have the privilege of not having our political discourse identified with our personality. If I use oppressive language in my personal life, people rightfully associate it with my organization and it discredits it as well as myself.

[Plagueround]

The implication that people holding a particular view is a sign that they're "middle class" and should be slandered for that is beginning to bother me quite a bit, and I regret having done so in the past. At the core of this type of thinking is either rampant anti-intellectualism, or an inability to think of the working class as anything but a bunch of reactionary dumb cavemen unable to think for themselves.

[Yehuda Stern]

At the core of this type of thinking is either rampant anti-intellectualism, or an inability to think of the working class as anything but a bunch of reactionary dumb cavemen unable to think for themselves.

This is something I've noted quite a few times in this forum and elsewhere. I've written about this in George Orwell thread:


Such a macho attitude is common among centrists, because they are usually very middle class, and since they seem to sense that their attitude towards the workers is condescending, they feel the need to posture as being ultra-proletarian. Since centrists habitually associate the workers with backwards prejudice and lack of education, they try to emulate this supposed prejudice. I still remember how Alan Woods commended the Pakistani IMT section for fighting for "women's rights in Pakistan, where it matters, not like whiny feminists [in Britain]." Ex-members of other groups can probably give similar examples.

[JohannGE]

I am sure if the Americans here could ask politely that the British and Australians please don't use the word "****" in this forum, because it is offencive for American ears, most if not all Brits and Aussies would try to be nice and avoid offending American sensibilities. On the other hand, demands for a ban of the word, completed with accusations of sexism and threats of restriction or banning, will more than likely cause the opposite reaction - some people may make a point of using it, just to annoy the damn Merkins and their perceived moralism.

Luís Henrique

:thumbup1:

Tolerance and self restraint... two essencial components of liberty.

[Devrim]

And is it not enough to you that there are many politically conscious women that find this word very offensive?

I don't think that I know anybody personally who finds it offensive, male or female. Most people I know use it.


The implication that people holding a particular view is a sign that they're "middle class" and should be slandered for that is beginning to bother me quite a bit, and I regret having done so in the past.

I don't think I slandered anyone at all. I just suggested where I thought a part of the objection was coming from.


At the core of this type of thinking is either rampant anti-intellectualism, or an inability to think of the working class as anything but a bunch of reactionary dumb cavemen unable to think for themselves.

personally I don't think that people who use the word '****' are 'reactionary dumb cavemen unable to think for themselves'. It seems a very strange point of view to me.

Devrim

[Steve_j]

The matter seems very simple to me: there's obviously a fair number of politically conscious women who find the word offensive and who do not wish to tolerate its use by men. That is all that I personally need to decide that I won't use it.

Why just men? And why can women use it but men cant?


the people who insist on using the c word are males who cannot stand being told to not do something by an oppressed person.

I dont know how you came to that conclusion, in the UK, Australia and NZ (and im sure other countries) it is used quite frequently by women, who im sure will throw a variety of four letter words at any man who tells them not to.


"What, should I let a woman tell me not to use a certain word? What gives her the right? I'm the man here, I deserve to do whatever I want with my language, no matter who it offends."

Now your just being a dick, or is that sexist too?


Many people are trying to belittle the issue, but the truth is that the behavior of those who insist on using the c word betrays sexism and the attitude of spoiled, privileged people, completely hostile to the oppressed. Their mere presence in this site shows the degeneracy of the supposedly "revolutionary left."

No one is trying to belittle the issue, there simply isnt one. In some cultures some things are aceptable where in others they are not.

Simple, some people will get offended because of their cultural circles.

If people get offended thats their problem. Maybe they should try and better understand its usage in the Uk and other places as opposed to pissing and moaning.

At the end of the day, in my cirles the word **** is not used in a sexist way, and i will not use it in a sexist way so why whould i stop using it. Its a lovely word, that is also used as a term of endearment.

Yes it can be used in sexist ways, no one is denying that, but so too can the word "woman". Should i get offended every time someone uses the word woman? Even in a non sexist way.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Right, but the point is that people from that generation don't consider the word negro prejudiced because, as you say, it was commonly used, in the same way that you don't consider the word **** prejudiced because it is commonly used as an insult by you others from your cultural background without being applied solely to women or, in your view, being linked to femininity; however, don't you think that we should consider the preferences and opinions of people from cultural backgrounds other than our own in our language, just as a way of showing respect for others, which means not using the word **** because it is seen as prejudiced by many people?

Its hardly above the intelligence of the members of this bored to understand the effect culture has on the meaning behind words. I am not particularly bothered about offending people who wish to remain ignorant out of choice.

I dont really like your patronizing tone on this.

[Luís Henrique]

If I use oppressive language in my personal life, people rightfully associate it with my organization and it discredits it as well as myself.
The problem is that you are identifying as "oppressive language" something that is not perceived as oppressive by those speaking or hearing it.

I mean, would you object if I called my hypothetical girlfriend "nega", even though she wouldn't, nor would anyone else?

I don't like the word "****", I don't use it, in fact I dislike the use of sex-related words as slurs and swears because I actually think sex is a good and pleasurable thing. This includes that favourite word "fuck". But really your insensitivity towards cultural context is starting to annoy me.

I mean, who in their minds would object to a working class woman addressing people as "love"?

Luís Henrique

[proudcomrade]

Between this and the mouth-breathing specimens defending rape on the R. Polanski thread, this site is getting to remind me of Stormfront, only for sexists. Congratulations, fools.

[Misanthrope]

This is the last thing we need to worry about. Working class people don't need you telling them what words they can and cannot use.

[Jimmie Higgins]

This is the last thing we need to worry about. Working class people don't need you telling them what words they can and cannot use.For the 10,000th time, no one is suggesting going around policing random worker's language at the bus stop or pub. This debate is - or was intended to be - about how we present ourselves on this international website.

Why are those "Pakis" so upset as us? Why won't they join our movement?:rolleyes:

See the problem? Would it be the last thing to worry about if your comrade said things like the above on a website or at a protest? Would it be PC run amok to suggest that a comrade don't use a term that serves the ruling class divides in the working class.

Saying "Paki" or "Nigger" or not doesn't do much to get rid of racism in capitalism... but it does a hell of a lot in regard to building a working class movement that takes opression seriously and attracts all members of the working class.

If Americans on this website were writing things like "Glenn Beck is so gay" don't you think that would make it hard for people wanting to fight for LGBT liberation to take our commitment to gay liberation seriously?

In the US "****" is like "nigger" so don't use it on international left websites unless you want Americans to think that the left condones sexism.


Edit: oh shit, you're from the US and you're defending the casual use of "****" on this website?! You seriously think it's possible to fight for women's liberation and build a movement while saying things like "****"?

[Revy]

I think it's not just use of the word "****" (although I think that is something that should not be tolerated), personally it's not something I have seen a lot here, maybe your experiences are different. I think among some here, there is a hostility toward feminism. Check out this thread. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-feminist-movement-t112968/index.html?t=112968) I think that may shed light into why some women may avoid this site.

[9]

Check out this thread. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-feminist-movement-t112968/index.html?t=112968) I think that may shed light into why some women may avoid this site.

Better yet, check out the women's struggles forum.

[black magick hustla]

actually, i heard gossip of people calling other people using **** sexist. so yeah i am probably mistaken apikoros, i am sorry!

i do find it mind boggling that people go crazy about a simple request for an internet forum. why do folks care about dropping **** in an internet forum if it pisses off so many people?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

For the 10,000th time, no one is suggesting going around policing random worker's language at the bus stop or pub. This debate is - or was intended to be - about how we present ourselves on this international website.

Why are those "Pakis" so upset as us? Why won't they join our movement?:rolleyes:

See the problem? Would it be the last thing to worry about if your comrade said things like the above on a website or at a protest? Would it be PC run amok to suggest that a comrade don't use a term that serves the ruling class divides in the working class.

Saying "Paki" or "Nigger" or not doesn't do much to get rid of racism in capitalism... but it does a hell of a lot in regard to building a working class movement that takes opression seriously and attracts all members of the working class.

If Americans on this website were writing things like "Glenn Beck is so gay" don't you think that would make it hard for people wanting to fight for LGBT liberation to take our commitment to gay liberation seriously?

In the US "****" is like "nigger" so don't use it on international left websites unless you want Americans to think that the left condones sexism.


Edit: oh shit, you're from the US and you're defending the casual use of "****" on this website?! You seriously think it's possible to fight for women's liberation and build a movement while saying things like "****"?

Stab. yourself . in . the. face . now.

Nigger = racist

Paki = racist (although sometimes picked up by peoople who dont have racist intent and see it as the asain version of saying brit)

Slut = sexist

**** = not sexist in UK

Yanks = not stupid and certainly not stupid enough to be unable to believe that America is the rest of the world

[9]

Kinda, the people who do find it sexist, I suppose if they ask not to use it because they personally find offensive, idk, I'm willing to not use it.

I've seen that expressed on here before, so am trying to cut down on my use of it (note: trying).


It's not used as a sexist word at all, or only as much as men using the word "woman" in an aggressive and calling tone could be.
Its not quite a 180°, but your opinion seems to have changed on this matter rather quickly.

[black magick hustla]

it didnt change at all. his opinion, like mine, is that **** in some contexts is not sexist at all, but that if folks here dont want to hear it, it is desirable to not type it.

[Yehuda Stern]

But really your insensitivity towards cultural context is starting to annoy me.

I really don't care what's starting to annoy you or not. You know what, it's possible that the c word really is not a sexist word at all in Britain. I doubt it - but I'll give people here the benefit of the doubt. Still, insisting on using it on a forum where clearly there is a significant amount of people who do consider it sexist says something about those people. It means that their 'right' to say whatever they want is more important to them than to not offend other people. And that has been annoying me for a while now.

You should understand that I have no special relation to that word; I'm Israeli, my mother tongue is Hebrew. As such there is no "cultural context" for me. All I know is that most revolutionaries I've met from English speaking countries have objected to that use of the word, and therefore, I don't use it. That should really be enough for any socialist.


I mean, who in their minds would object to a working class woman addressing people as "love"?

Well, I never said it; that was Devrim's story. I don't rule out that the SWPer was right, I just don't know because again, I don't live in Britain.


Working class people don't need you telling them what words they can and cannot use.

This straw man is really just another instance of this:


The implication that people holding a particular view is a sign that they're "middle class" and should be slandered for that is beginning to bother me quite a bit, and I regret having done so in the past. At the core of this type of thinking is either rampant anti-intellectualism, or an inability to think of the working class as anything but a bunch of reactionary dumb cavemen unable to think for themselves.

[Devrim]

I think among some here, there is a hostility toward feminism. Check out this thread. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-feminist-movement-t112968/index.html?t=112968) I think that may shed light into why some women may avoid this site.

Yes, I think that communists are opposed to feminism. It is a bourgoies ideology. If that makes some women avoid this site so be it. Should we stop being opposed to nationalism because it might make some patriots avoid this site?

Devrim

[Revy]

Yes, I think that communists are opposed to feminism. It is a bourgoies ideology. If that makes some women avoid this site so be it. Should we stop being opposed to nationalism because it might make some patriots avoid this site?

Devrim

Hmm! this is what I'm talking about. The same denouncement of feminism as a bourgeois ideology. You are basically saying the struggle of women is somehow bourgeois.

How is feminism comparable to nationalism? Maybe you should elaborate more on all this. Or someone else who believes the same thing.

There is bourgeois feminism and there is socialist feminism. That should come as no surrprise since there are women of every class and political ideology. A generalization of all feminism as "bourgeois" is just absurd.

If feminism is the idea that women should be equal to men, why does this ruffle so many feathers? Oh because so many feel the need to portray it in abstract terms to which they can bash it....

[Devrim]

How is feminism comparable to nationalism? Maybe you should elaborate more on all this. Or someone else who believes the same thing.

The equivalence that I drew here was one about whether we should hide our ideas because it may 'put people off'. Of course communist ideas put some people off. I don't think that that means we should conceal what we think. I think the comparisson is valid in this way.


There is bourgeois feminism and there is socialist feminism. That should come as no surrprise since there are women of every class and political ideology. A generalization of all feminism as "bourgeois" is just absurd.

Absurd in your opinion. We believe that all feminism is bourgeois in it's basic assumptions.


If feminism is the idea that women should be equal to men, why does this ruffle so many feathers?

I don't think that is what feminism is though.

Devrim

[9]

The equivalence that I drew here was one about whether we should hide our ideas because it may 'put people off'. Of course communist ideas put some people off. I don't think that that means we should conceal what we think. I think the comparisson is valid in this way.



Absurd in your opinion. We believe that all feminism is bourgeois in it's basic assumptions.

What are the basic assumptions of feminism?

[Devrim]

What are the basic assumptions of feminism?

If you want to discuss the class nature of feminism why not go to the thread where it was being discussed, which is linked to above. My point here simply that there are plenty of people who post on here who think that feminism is a bourgois ideology. I don't think that that is something that puts women off posting on this site. It doesn't put them off joining our organisation either.

Devrim

[Sasha]

this is all complete bollox, dont be an dick you bunch of ****s, this is seriously getting on my tits...

[bcbm]

this is all complete bollox, dont be an dick you bunch of ****s, this is seriously getting on my tits...
youre so edgy

[ls]

Its not quite a 180°, but your opinion seems to have changed on this matter rather quickly.

'love' is in no way a sexist word, that is the word I was referring to in the part of my post you quoted.

Most people I've known throughout my life have used it completely casually (maybe the occasional more middle-classish type as well, but still usually more towards being working-class) and I point blank refuse to acknowledge it as a sexist word. Sorry but the only people who would even remotely find this word sexist, would be people out of touch with the wider working-class public in the UK, as it just isn't used as a sexist word.

[Luís Henrique]

youre so edgy

And helpful, you forgot to mention "helpful".

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

I really don't care what's starting to annoy you or not.

I had already noticed. It is part of the problem here, isn't it? That some people don't care if others are bothered by the use of certain words, isn'y it?


And that has been annoying me for a while now.

So, if you don't care about what annoys others, why would others care about what annoys you?


You should understand that I have no special relation to that word; I'm Israeli, my mother tongue is Hebrew. As such there is no "cultural context" for me. All I know is that most revolutionaries I've met from English speaking countries have objected to that use of the word, and therefore, I don't use it. That should really be enough for any socialist.

That's surely enough for me.

If it is enough for you, why are you constantly trying to bring up pseudo-political and pseudo-sociological reasons, that many here find insulting and patronising, to avoid the word?


Well, I never said it; that was Devrim's story. I don't rule out that the SWPer was right, I just don't know because again, I don't live in Britain.


The simple fact that you would consider the idea that addressing someone as "love" (nay, more, that you would consider the idea that a working class woman addressing someone like that) could be sexist, is totally revolting.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Better yet, check out the women's struggles forum.
Can you expand on that?

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

I don't rule out that the SWPer was right, I just don't know because again, I don't live in Britain.

A member of an organisation that supports Hamas and Hizballah telling a working class woman that the word "love" is sexist?

What next, not wearing a hijab is sexist? Probably because it demeans and commodifies women?

Luís Henrique

[Louise Michel]

This seems to be a terminally recurring discussion here usually carried out by ignorant, opinionated, foul-mouthed male brats who have more testoterone than brain cells. Grow up or get out and leave those of us who want to build an alliance between working men and women (who for some bizarre reason don't like being called '****s') to get on with it. Imbeciles!!!!

[9]

Can you expand on that?

Luís Henrique

Certainly.
I was referring to the sexist nature of many of the comments in the threads in that forum. A few more-implicitly sexist comments (not by you) in your own thread there on the wage gap; to give an example:


Originally Posted by PossiblyLeft http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1558027#post1558027)
I don't really think that this is sexism more that women tend to care less about becoming rich.
Originally Posted by PossiblyLeft http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1558195#post1558195)
Aggresive pursuit of increase in corporate status? I think it's nearly only men that are "work-o-holics".In addition, there is the thread by this schmuck:



Originally Posted by JJM 777 http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1554385#post1554385)
This sub-forum is labelled as "All issues regarding sexism and the fight against it". This sounds like a presumption that all sexism should be "fought against". Sounds like a good (or very bad) place to explain my theory about legal age limits, and age differences in the schooling system.

Women typically prefer dating with men who are slightly (but not very much) older than themselves. Maybe this preference begins in teenage, as girls are a year or two ahead of boys in their physical puberty (as average, with great individual variance), and romantically prefer one or two years older boys, who are at the same level of puberty.

This phenomenon is so prevalent that many countries have different age limits for boys and girls to get married. Some countries have 17 years age limit for girls to get married, and 18 for boys. In some countries the difference in age limit is 2 or 3 years.

In most countries the age limit is 18 for both genders, but it is practically not perfectly useful, as a typical young man turns 18 and is able and willing to marry, but his typically 1 or 2 years younger girlfriend, at equal stage of puberty with him, is not legally able to marry yet. So this is the practical reason why many countries have set a lower age limit for girls to marry.

This is "sexism", and in my opinion it is very useful. I like this arrangement. My vote is that the legal age limit for women to get married should be one year lower than the age limit for men....in which we also have this lovely comment:


Originally Posted by Red Saxon http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1555089#post1555089)
In the perfect communistic society, there would be the community whore....and this particular piece of wisdom, among some other more implicitly sexist comments in the "breastfeeding in public" thread (which I find an interesting thread to be in "women's struggle" to begin with, but that is neither here nor there, really):


But also it sounds a bit strange to use a political or moralistic word like "patriarchy" in this context. Nursing the babies is what female mammals are biologically designed to do, they are the milk machines. The biology of mammals is quite patriarchal. Many women (and apparently all non-human female mammals) have found peace and a purposeful existence in this social hierarchy, the male hunts-gathers food for the female who nurses the babies. In a modern society we have the luxury of choosing also different social roles than the natural setting stemming from mammal biology, but most women are quite happy with life as it naturally is.Clear?

[Luís Henrique]

Clear?
In part, yes. I was aware of the existence of those comments.

What I wonder is what has/has not been done to counter it in those threads.

Luís Henrique

[Aeval]

This seems to be a terminally recurring discussion here usually carried out by ignorant, opinionated, foul-mouthed male brats who have more testoterone than brain cells. Grow up or get out and leave those of us who want to build an alliance between working men and women (who for some bizarre reason don't like being called '****s') to get on with it. Imbeciles!!!!

It's a little unfair, and inaccurate, to disregard the people arguing against not using the word as 'ignorant, opinionated, foul-mouthed male brats who have more testoterone than brain cells'. Firstly, not everyone who doesn't mind, or actively likes using the word is male (I'm not, for example), secondly those people who do happen to be male but still are not against the word are not saying stuff to be 'macho' or whatever. This isn't simply a bunch of insensitive males using a sexist word against women, all of whom are terribly insulted; this is a cultural thing. People tend not to like being told something in their culture is sexist when to them and everyone they know it's not, so no wonder people got uptight about it, but that doesn't make them ignorant (or male), it's not ignorant male machos vs. everyone who's not a sexist prick.

And of course 'love' isn't sexist, nor is 'duck' or 'hun' or any of those words, they're just regional terms of endearment :blink: that's proper cheeky, no wonder people think students haven't got a clue about anything when you've got idiots like that going round

[synthesis]

That should be such a basic thing to socialists that I'm honestly shocked at how controversial this subject is.

It only seems controversial because this is the Internet and people have too much time on their hands.

I don't think this is a political issue at all. Insensitivity stems from a lack of respect, which must be earned.

[Sasha]

youre so edgy

yeah i know, but you get my point though...

it DOES get on my tits (and yes i dont have any) that US'rs try to inflict their hyper-politicly correct hysteria on the english language and culture (and for the record its called english for an reason, remind yourself from time to time that YOU speak the dialect).

i mean, lets turn this around for a bit and lets rewrite the OP:


No women or class conscious men in the UK or europe would want to join a movement that refers to short people as verticaly challenged.

I know that this is a US thing and that these words are more common in and not considered all that arogant upperclass "liberal" in the US, but in the UK... etc etc

sommetimes you just have to call things what they are and sommetimes an person is just an ****.

next people are going to tell me and my felow dutchies that we cant swear with deadly diseases anymore
seriously, if you are offended by common enlish you should learn dutch; (slang words for) genitailia, diseases like cancer, tyfoid, tubercolosis. plague and a whole range of STD's and blaspehmy are trown here around like there is no tomorow

dus godverdomme krijg de tering tyfus pest pokke kanker maar, ik blijf lekker kut zeggen als iets kut is.

(translation typical dutch sentence; so godammit, get the typhoi, plague, poxs cancer, i will say that something is "****" when its "****")

[Steve_j]

Grow up or get out and leave those of us who want to build an alliance between working men and women (who for some bizarre reason don't like being called '****s') to get on with it. Imbeciles!!!!

Read the thread next time, its about using the word, not calling women "****s"

[Aeval]

(and for the record its called english for an reason, remind yourself from time to time that YOU speak the dialect).

Ugh, not helpful. Lots of british people speak dialects of english too, I'm guessing you wouldn't have said that to someone from scotland or yorkshire or something? Dialects are not inherently less worthy than the 'proper' language (and what is this by the way? RP?)

[Revy]

Psycho,
We "US'rs" (I prefer Usonian :D) speak "the dialect"? Would you say that only French from France, or Spanish from Spain, Portuguese from Portugal, are somehow the genuine, legitimate form of their languages...seems quite chauvinist. Sounds like you just have your own hegemonic view of how we should treat others on this forum, in whatever language.

Stop ranting about political correctness like a buffoon.


sommetimes you just have to call things what they are and sommetimes an person is just an ****.

What makes someone a **** - explain, define in its entirety, and then explain how **** is a special word that cannot be substituted with any other one. Go!:thumbup1:

[Plagueround]

it DOES get on my tits (and yes i dont have any) that US'rs try to inflict their hyper-politicly correct hysteria on the english language and culture (and for the record its called english for an reason, remind yourself from time to time that YOU speak the dialect).


My ancestors on both sides "adopted" your culture at the threat of a gun. Remind yourself that the next time you make such stupid comments.

Still love you though mang.

[Invader Zim]

Why must women be protected from the horror of a person on the internet using the slang term for their sexual organs, while men are deemed not to require a similar degree of protection? Do women have some kind of biological suseptability to naughty words?


My ancestors on both sides "adopted" your culture at the threat of a gun. Remind yourself that the next time you make such stupid comments.


Ah so what happened to your ancestors, before anyone on this board was even thought of, gives you the right to inject irrelevent drivel into any conversation regarding the English language at will? In see.

[ZeroNowhere]

explain how **** is a special word that cannot be substituted with any other one.It sounds distinct from its synonyms. 'Threnody' could be substituted with 'dirge', 'requiem', and so on without changing in meaning, but sometimes it just sounds better. In this case, there's also that it may be found offensive, in which case if you make sure not to use it excessively, you will eventually have a statement in which it fits perfectly.

[9]

Why must women be protected from the horror of a person on the internet using the slang term for their sexual organs, while men are deemed not to require a similar degree of protection? Do women have some kind of biological suseptability to naughty words?


Yes, just like blacks have a biological susceptibility to the word "nigger", and gay men have a biological susceptibility to the word "fag", and the mentally disabled have a biological susceptibility to the word "retard", and Mexicans have a biological susceptibility to the word "spic", and Jews have a biological susceptibility to the word "lampshade", and Arabs have a biological susceptibility to the word "towelhead". No one knows why. White males, on the other hand, do not have this biological susceptibility, and scientific studies have shown that this is because White males are stronger and better than everyone else, and not at all related to levels of oppression and/or discrimination, which is frankly quite puzzling. :rolleyes:

[blake 3:17]

One of the demands put upon those of who are looking for socialist transformation is to live up to doing better -- especially in terms of breaking with sexism, racism and other forms of oppression. Bourgeois politics demands its actors to obey all sorts of hierarchies and "playing nice" while ripping off the rest of the world.

The politics of the oppressed and the exploited need to be grounded in respect for the oppressed and exploited. We're trained from an early age to accept and believe in racism and sexism and inequality. When we get called on it we need to rethink our behaviours and not rush to defend them. Socialists and anarchists have higher moral standards than reactionaries, liberals, and social democrats do. They accept the rules of injustice. We don't.

That doesn't even mean that we have to change our behaviour or agree with our critics. When I'm feeling uncomfortable or uneasy about an issue or how I speak about it, I ask myself what are the consequences of continuing the behaviour, stopping it, or changing it? If they point in a way to the world I want to live in then I get on it.

[Plagueround]

Ah so what happened to your ancestors, before anyone on this board was even thought of, gives you the right to inject irrelevent drivel into any conversation regarding the English language at will? In see.

Only when it's someone reminding us that "for the record its called english for an reason, remind yourself from time to time that YOU speak the dialect". Why you would find that irrelevant and not condemn it for the ridiculously chauvinistic comment it was is beyond me.

[Outinleftfield]

At the same time political correctness alienates people who might have been interested who have become accustomed to using those words.

Instead of ending the use of these words let's expand them to include men. When you hear someone use words like "*****", "****", or "whore" to refer to a female slide in an insult of that word for a male (maybe some famous capitalist or Republican who just did something terrible). Over time these words won't be gender specific and will just refer to bad people in general. I've already heard "*****" used against men.

There are always two ways to equality, you can take from the one that has or give to the one without. This is an example of where equality can be most easily achieved by giving.

[Salabra]

Anyway Salabra, I didn't want to respond line by line to your post but rather the general feel of it.

Let me ask you a question, if, in a society where there was no sexism (etc.) (say a perfect anarchist society), would you object to terms that referred to genitalia being used as insults?

Let me afford you the same consideration, and jump right into your question.

Unfortunately, you’re barking up the wrong tree, IMO. In a perfect non-sexist society (may we agree on the minimum definition of such as a society in which one’s bodily configuration — and, I would add, one’s sexuality — is not the only factor that determines the way in which others relate to one?), it would be almost literally unthinkable to use words referring to gender-specific bodily parts as insults — because they are no longer an overriding concern in the way that the speech community as a whole defines the world.

I will support this argument with a brief, and very simplistic, excursus on the social history of the English language. In the European Middle Ages, a defining dimension of social life, integral to stabilizing the feudal social structure, was religion. The profanities common at the time were thus religiously-themed — the most famous in English being “bloody” from “By our lady (Mary, mother of Jesus)” or alternatively “By (god’s) blood,” or, to give a slightly outdated Australian example, “strewth” from “god’s truth.” Such swearing was once so heinous that the words were altered and the altered forms now seem merely “quaint” (“darn” for “damn,” “heck” for “hell” or “gadzooks” for “god’s hooks — the nails with which Jesus was affixed to the cross”). In the “christian world” this swearing is profanity (lack of respect for religion), rather than blasphemy (vilifying religion).

Probably the commonest insults in this period would also have been religious — “devil,” “demon,” “heretic,” “witch,” “wizard,” “sorcerer,” “paynim (pagan)” “sarasyn (muslim),” or even “christ-killer”— or related to social class —“churl (Old English “ceorl = farmer”)”, “wretch (OE “wrecca = criminal”),” “villain (servant on a country estate)”. Sexual insults there were, but they focused on behaviour that was indicted by religion, not on bodily parts. Men could be called “sodomite/catamite” but this was a risky accusation since homosexuality was an ecclesiastical crime for which the accused could be executed. Women, of course, bore the brunt of such insults — “Jezebel”, “wench,” “whore,” “slut” “coney (rabbit),” “mare (!)” or (since women are automatically demonic in christianity, and “need to be controlled” in all abrahamic religions) simply “woman,” macho patriarchy reinforced by religion.

As the feudal system crumbled and the church lost much of its influence (here I am speaking generally), religiously-based swearing also became less “powerful” and other words had to be found. The rising bourgeoisie first asserted itself against, then differentiated itself from, and finally usurped the place of (in the UK by assimilation as much as destruction) the old feudal aristocracy, and one of the weapons of this process was ideological, a more puritanical code of morality, focusing on the ideal of “stainlessness” (physical and moral). While behaviour was still criticized, words for acts, body parts and the products of excretion were now also interdicted — thus, “****,” which Chaucer could use freely in the form “queynte,” became taboo (it is interesting that the phrase “dirty word” only appears first in 1800), and finally, in the Victorian period “the most obscene word in English.”

With the long slow death of Victorianism, “dirty words” too are losing their force in much of the English-speaking world. Nowadays, the worst insults are racial and ethnic slurs, sexist name-calling (and “****” still qualifies!) and mockery based on physical characteristics (disability, height, weight etc) — a result of increasing global mobility, but also of the need for neo-liberal capitalism to appear to be inclusive (The primacy of anti-discrimination performs the economic function of making markets more efficient.).

[Please note that the above paragraphs focus on English — to analyse, for example, Spanish swearing, would require a separate essay (though I will note that religiously-themed swearing seems to have been rare in the USSR).]

My point is that what a society defines as “swearing” is determined by what it regards as important — in your ideal anarchist society the ultimate insult would perhaps be “hierarch,” while in my ideal communist society, it would be, not “counter-revolutionary,” but simply “selfish” (Yeah, I’m a bloody Pollyanna!).


One final question, do you, as I do, object to the idea that "****" is considered the "worst" swear word in English?
For examples:
http://www.asa.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/1EAEACA7-8322-4C86-AAC2-4261551F57FE/0/ASA_Delete_Expletives_Dec_2000.pdf (see appendix 2 if you don't want to read the whole thing, it's not a small download, so to just see appendix 2, you could also visit:
http://www.badscience.net/2006/03/****-fuck-wanker/ ) See also : http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2007/jul/28/weekend.jonronson/print for an example.

Sadly I couldn’t download your first reference.

I agree in the sense that I do not see a single “worst” swear word in English. I do not agree insofar as I think that any word which demeans a person for something which is beyond their control (their gender, sexuality, ethnicity or physical attributes) is a “worst” swear word.

Theoretically, this means that I would regard “prick” is as objectionable as “****” —if the ground were level. However, given the extra cultural baggage that women have been carrying for several thousand years, I would see “****” as more objectionable. A man can be a “prick” but he can also “have balls” — what quid-pro-quo does a woman get for being a “****”? Especially when the implication of the male phrases is that courage is the preserve of testicle bearers.


I've heard people say "I ****ed him" as in I smacked him, although it's probably more a replacement for "I twatted him" which of course has it's own connotations.

Ah, the glories of the UK regional dialects! I was puzzled by this too, until I learned that, while in most UK dialects “twat” is used as a synonym for “****,” the dialect of Cumbria (NW England) uses it to mean “to hit” also.

If anyone can come up with a reason for this shift of meaning — apart from the obvious wordplay of “twat” < “swat” — I’d appreciate the chance to consider it.

[FWIW, both “twat” and the place-name “Twatt” — which occurs both in Shetland and in Orkney — come from Old Norse “thveit = a place ‘cut off’ from surrounding land.” While one can easily trace a development in meaning from this sense to “vagina,” it is harder to see how it comes to mean “hit.”]


My favourite use of the word however was for the hours in the day; "I was working a 14 hour shift, there's only 24 of the ****s in the day" after which there were a number of conversations that went like this; "oi when you getting here?" "half a ****" "safe see you then".

Not only is this offensive, it’s also gibberish!

But the dialectal differences in English can create traps even for native speakers. The archetypal example I like to quote is the term “fanny,” which in the “British commonwealth” is a synonym for “****.” To quote the Urban Dictionary, “This is another word which could leave you abroad and in dire straits. In the US, your fanny is your posterior and a ‘fanny pack’ is what Brits [and Australians] decided to call a ‘bum bag’ instead [in Australia, “fanny pack” would be a good slang term for a tampon — particularly in the presence of US acquaintances!]. There’s a neoprene belt sold in the US that is designed to stop snow from entering your ski jacket during a fall. It is marketed under the name “Fanny Flaps.” It is not for sale in the UK.”

Mind you, while I have been insulted with both “****” and “twat,” I can’t see anyone slandering me as a “fanny” in the near future!


Hmm! this is what I'm talking about. The same denouncement of feminism as a bourgeois ideology … There is bourgeois feminism and there is socialist feminism.

No, what he is saying is that an abstract “feminism” that attempts to unite the cleaner at my school and Hilary Clinton in the same movement is bourgeois ideology.

You are correct in implying that it is possible to split “feminists” along class lines.

[9]

No, what he is saying is that an abstract “feminism” that attempts to unite the cleaner at my school and Hilary Clinton in the same movement is bourgeois ideology.

Interesting post, khaver, but I'm a bit confused regarding this last point^
I was under the impression that left communists consider any and all feminism (be it some revolutionary stream of feminism centered around working class women and men which seeks to challenge patriarchy in various forms, raise consciousness of revolutionary ideas, and empower women to be more assertive etc. or the obviously bourgeois pseudo-feminism utilized by the capitalist class to provide incentive or justification for invading a region or discriminating against a 'foreign' people or to promote general cultural imperialism based on fighting burqas or female circumcision or what have you, which has as its goals "moar female CEOs" etc.) - that basically left-communists consider all feminism, no matter the class makeup of its proponents and its goals, to be reactionary and bourgeois in nature, period. From what I (think I) understand, left-communists take the position that "real" communism inherently rejects sexism or something like that, so there is no need for "feminism". And, of course, that looks wonderful on paper.

[yuon]

Thanks Salabra for that! I would then suggest that by your logic, in a "perfect anarchist society", the insults might tend towards (for example) "capitalist". ;)

Oh, and side note, apparently the name Fanny (used to be quite popular if my Edid Blyton are any indication) comes from "Frances". Who knew? Know, of course, in the USA it means bum, and in other English speaking places it means ****. :):blink:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

My ancestors on both sides "adopted" your culture at the threat of a gun.


Yeah thats our fault. What twats we are.

[mel]

Yeah thats our fault. What twats we are.

Plageround's response was a direct reaction to


it DOES get on my tits (and yes i dont have any) that US'rs try to inflict their hyper-politicly correct hysteria on the english language and culture (and for the record its called english for an reason, remind yourself from time to time that YOU speak the dialect).

Which seems to imply that since Plagueround has adopted english language and culture, that he needs to abide by it...hence pointing out that the only reason he's adopted such a culture is because his ancestors were forced to adopt it under threat of violence.

Your taking his comment out of that immediate context, namely a response to psycho's blatantly chauvinistic post, is dishonest if it was intentional and inattentive if it wasn't.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Psycho was pointing out how outright fucking ridiculous demanding English comrades change the English language is and although I dont agree that americains should have to give a shit about where the languge came from. However Psycho is airing a view which in the real world does tend to come up often weather its right or not when linguistical nationalists lecture the rest of how vile there barbaric languages are in comparison to the Superior americain lingo. (Similar stuff happens with lingistical classists such as the person in devrim's story). So I hardly see how telling Psycho his family are genocidal bastards is needed.

[MilitantAnarchist]

As i said before, i was watching an american program the other day on tv, and this guy shouted to his daughter 'get your fanny out of bed'...
I found that offensive and border line incestuous... you see fanny here means twat, or ****, or whatever you wanna call it... so when you look at it... it is you who is in the wrong... you should be ashamed :laugh:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I will admit I spent far much longer then I should have in America laughing at the names of various products, my favorites were rimming salt and fanny packs.

[MilitantAnarchist]

I will admit I spent far much longer then I should have in America laughing at the names of various products, my favorites were rimming salt and fanny packs.

Same here man, i couldnt beleive it....... though they did get alot of funny looks when i kept asking people for a fag.... homophobes!
and i heard someone use nappy as a complement... for some reason i still dont get the term to use that in... but yea, lets not even go there

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I found it quite pleasant really. It would have been a bit boring if I wondered into one of those ultra big supermarkets they have to be greeted with "oi bruv nang trainers ya got there".

[MilitantAnarchist]

I loved it, i spent 3months there, i'm writing a book about it now... Crazy times...

I loved the looks i got, sometimes you cant help slipping into home mode and i asked if they had any 'cobs' in a bar... I had to break it down and all i could think to explain it as was by saying 'like little loaves of bread with stuff in it'...shoulda just said a bun.... mind you, you even get that down south here... cant beat local slang :lol:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Thats true I often cant understand people from the neighboring towns.

[Sasha]

Which seems to imply that since Plagueround has adopted english language and culture, that he needs to abide by it....

dont put up strawmans
i never said that US americans should abide to english language and culture.
i try'd to express (a bit provocative) that trying to impose specific cultural language "dogma's" (they shalt not say thay word ****) on an difrent culture that happens to speak an related laguage is a. reversed cultural imperialism and b. just wrong.

like i siad before, no one would try to ban the dutchies from using words als "kut" (****) on the dutch section and neither would anyone complain about the word **** on an exclusive "british" english language froum, its just because "US" english and "british" english clash here that people kick up an fuss.

[Devrim]

I will admit I spent far much longer then I should have in America laughing at the names of various products, my favorites were rimming salt and fanny packs.

Is 'rimming salt' for people who don't thing that it tastes salty enough by itself?

Devrim

[9]

Is 'rimming salt' for people who don't thing that it tastes salty enough by itself?

Oy.



i try'd to express (a bit provocative) that trying to impose specific cultural language "dogma's" (they shalt not say thay word ****) on an difrent culture that happens to speak an related laguage is a. reversed cultural imperialism and b. just wrong.

If this were regarding "real life", you would be right. The thing is, this is an internet forum for political discussion, not "real life". The US military isn't entering Britain with tanks and a loud speaker proclaiming "thou shalt not say the word ****".



like i siad before, no one would try to ban the dutchies from using words als "kut" (****) on the dutch section and neither would anyone complain about the word **** on an exclusive "british" english language froum, its just because "US" english and "british" english clash here that people kick up an fuss.
Exactly. It is an international forum. Therefore, if a Brit is sincerely offended by my using a common acceptable US profanity that, in Britain, has sexist or racist connotations, I would be more than willing to stop using the word on this forum. I wouldn't respond with "nuh-uh!! that's not sexxist hear, u e-imperializt!!!1 my culture!!11 my cultureee!!!!!!11112"

[bcbm]

Psycho was pointing out how outright fucking ridiculous demanding English comrades change the English language is and although I dont agree that americains should have to give a shit about where the languge came from. However Psycho is airing a view which in the real world does tend to come up often weather its right or not when linguistical nationalists lecture the rest of how vile there barbaric languages are in comparison to the Superior americain lingo. (Similar stuff happens with lingistical classists such as the person in devrim's story). So I hardly see how telling Psycho his family are genocidal bastards is needed.

i don't think there is too much that is so ridiculous in asking that people not use words that other comrades find offensive? forgive me for being a bigot in considering that to discuss leftist politics we don't need to call each other ****s or twats or *****es or whatever?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I just don't think its beyond US users to understand that words have differnt meanings in differnt cultures. Admitly I would cut down on the use of the word if it was'nt for the fact some of the earlier posts seem to present all english people are pure evil.

[Jazzratt]

I just don't think its beyond US users to understand that words have differnt meanings in differnt cultures. Admitly I would cut down on the use of the word if it was'nt for the fact some of the earlier posts seem to present all english people are pure evil.

When a group is travelling a fair distance they always have to go at the speed of the slowest person/vehicle, similarly if we are going to have an international forum we should modify our language for the sake of the most easily offended culture.

While it does feel a lot like this:

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/9632/worde.png

I don't think it's too much to live with to call someone a fuckwit, dickhead or even twat (for some reason no one has ever boithered me about using that word, maybe u is a more sexist vowel than a or something) rather than a **** when you use revleft. If someone tells you not to use the word in the wider world though I think you're well within your rights to tell them to fuck off.

[9]

When a group is travelling a fair distance they always have to go at the speed of the slowest person/vehicle, similarly if we are going to have an international forum we should modify our language for the sake of the most easily offended culture.

I don't think it's too much to live with to call someone a fuckwit, dickhead or even twat (for some reason no one has ever boithered me about using that word, maybe u is a more sexist vowel than a or something) rather than a **** when you use revleft.

I think what many people who aren't from the US are not understanding is that the objection to the word has nothing to do with American culture being "easily offended" and it has nothing to do with people being bothered by profanity. It has to do with the social context in which the word "****" is generally used in America, which is as a sexist slur. I've never been called a "twat" in a sexist manner (or at all, for that matter). I've been called a "****" several times, and every time it has been in an unambiguously sexist context.



If someone tells you not to use the word in the wider world though I think you're well within your rights to tell them to fuck off.Obviously this comes down to personal choice. But I know, on a personal level, if someone from a traditionally oppressed segment of society tells me not to use a particular word because it is derogatory toward them, I would quit using the word. I would absolutely never be so self-interested as to simply dismiss what they've said and tell them to fuck off.

[Invader Zim]

Yes, just like blacks have a biological susceptibility to the word "nigger", and gay men have a biological susceptibility to the word "fag", and the mentally disabled have a biological susceptibility to the word "retard", and Mexicans have a biological susceptibility to the word "spic", and Jews have a biological susceptibility to the word "lampshade", and Arabs have a biological susceptibility to the word "towelhead". No one knows why. White males, on the other hand, do not have this biological susceptibility, and scientific studies have shown that this is because White males are stronger and better than everyone else, and not at all related to levels of oppression and/or discrimination, which is frankly quite puzzling. :rolleyes:


Apples and oranges. Racist terms, which are perjorative for a specific group of people are, by definition, not the same as a slang term to describe a sexual organ. You ignored that salient fact, and instead employed a tedious strawman. You also ignored my question. To paraphrase it, why do you believe women need protecting from slang terms labeling their anatomy and men do not?

So why don't you sit down, re-read what I actually wrote, drop your 'holier-than-thou' bullshit attitude and employ some intelligence, assuming that you have actually been gifted with any, and address the point? But this time with at least a modicum of honesty and integrity (again assuming you possess any).

[Jazzratt]

I think what many people who aren't from the US are not understanding is that the objection to the word has nothing to do with American culture being "easily offended" and it has nothing to do with people being bothered by profanity. It has to do with the social context in which the word "****" is generally used in America, which is as a sexist slur. I've never been called a "twat" in a sexist manner (or at all, for that matter). I've been called a "****" several times, and every time it has been in an unambiguously sexist context.

I wasn't using "easily offended" to dimiss americans as somehow less robust and more bothered by things. Different words carry different connotations everywhere (and, apparently, denotations looking at the Merriam-Webster* compared to the Oxford English definitions) and if in one place the word can be construed more easily as a slur then it easier to offend someone from that country; it's not a flaw in the character of that country or any other stupid shit like that it is, as you're saying, simply a function of the social context.


Obviously this comes down to personal choice. But I know, on a personal level, if someone from a traditionally oppressed segment of society tells me not to use a particular word because it is derogatory toward them, I would quit using the word. I would absolutely never be so self-interested as to simply dismiss what they've said and tell them to fuck off.I do not take the words of a few individuals to represent the attitudes of an entire segment. If I did my opinion on the word **** would vacillate wildly depending on whether I last talked to a woman online that I don't know from Eve or one of my friends. Certainly if I am in a space where a large number of people do not want me using the word I'll not use it.

*Incidentally that definition included "sexual intercourse with a woman" do people actually say "I had **** last night?" because that sounds absolutely bizarre to me

[9]

Apples and oranges. Racist terms, which are perjorative for a specific group of people are, by definition, not the same as a slang term to describe a sexual organ. You ignored that salient fact, and instead employed a tedious strawman. You also ignored my question. To paraphrase it, why do you believe women need protecting from slang terms labeling their anatomy and men do not?

So why don't you sit down, re-read what I actually wrote, drop your 'holier-than-thou' bullshit attitude and employ some intelligence, assuming that you have actually been gifted with any, and address the point? But this time with at least a modicum of honesty and integrity (again assuming you possess any).

And maybe if you'd had the common sense to go back and read the actual responses to the thread, you'd see that your question has been asked, answered, asked, answered, asked, and then answered again countless times.
"Racist terms are, by definition, not the same as a slang term to describe a sexual organ". What the fuck does any of this mean? Are you really that daft? What a term "describes" doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether its racist or sexist. Although in this particular case there is a correlation, and I find it interesting and quite telling that you seem to be unable to get through your narrow head how calling a woman a ****, which is to reduce her to mere genitalia, might be offensive. And of course, I know you're all geared up at your keyboard there, ready to make your obnoxiously liberal relativist point about "why isn't it sexist to call a man a dick, then??11" because you clearly don't understand anything about privilege and oppression. So I'll give you an example to illustrate it. Take the word "*****", which means literally "female dog". The term for a male dog is simply "dog". Hopefully you are not so dense that you fail to understand why it would be far worse to call a woman a "*****" then to call a man a "dog". Women as a group are the victims of sexism whereas males, generally, are the beneficiaries. This has been the case for thousands of years. Women are discriminated against for being women, men are not discriminated against for being men. This is the same dynamic that makes it acceptable to refer to a white person as a "cracker" and unacceptable to refer to a black person as a "nigger". If you don't get this by now, you're a fucking idiot.

[9]

There is also this (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=****) very interesting multiple page entry on the word on Urban Dictionary. Its no scientific reference, but it does give a bit of perspective on the regional implications of the word. It makes many references to the varying connotations between America and the UK/Australia, but to give some examples from the entry of how it is used in the US:


a derogatory term used for a female when they act really stupid and annoying, and need to be put in their place.
1. A slang word for vagina.

2. An arrogant, rude or conceited woman.

3. A woman whose only useful body part is her vagina.

Women who are offended by the word "****" even when it isn't directed at them are the same women who fit the third definition.
A woman with the ethics of a man.
A term for the female genitals, and a highly insulting term (if you're American; many people in Britain and Austrailia actually use it among frends as a term of endearment).
stupid/contemptible person of either gender
Only in America is this considered a specifically misogynistic insult. In Britain it is most likely to be heard amongst men quarelling.
Offensive term for the female genitalia. Also used to describe a *****-like woman.
A noun which is a composite of the worst traits of a woman. Some times applies to men who act as a woman in this regards, usually a bastard or mother-spoiled male. Contains the components of: *****iness, immorality, narcissism, moodiness, unaccountable, selfishness, vanity, arrogance.

Character traits are expressed as follows:

- Flips out of no apparent reason, burning everyone in site.
- Seeks power and control over people close to her at ANY cost.
- Abuses people closest to her because she can get away with it.
- Lacks repentance completely.
- Verbally and emotionally assaults people, especially men.
- Loves to be the victim.
- Mouths off to such an extent that others contemplate physical abuse - which in turn feeds victim status giving her the greatest gift she could have.
- No morals what so ever.
- Preys on weaker/nice people.
- Gets knocked up by weaker male in order to have controlling role in relationship.
I think that is a pretty good illustration of the way the word is used, and the kind of assholes that use it, in America in case anyone had any doubts.

[Invader Zim]

What the fuck does any of this mean?

I can only write posts, I can't go back and correct the years of obvious neglect by your teachers and address their failure to impart to you the skill of comprehension.


Although in this particular case there is a correlation, and I find it interesting and quite telling that you seem to be unable to get through your narrow head how calling a woman a ****, which is to reduce her to mere genitalia, might be offensive.

No, there isn't any correlation at all. Perjorative employed to describe and stereotype a group of people based on their ethnic origion has fuck all to do with slang that describes a sexual organ. Nothing. Got that? Similarly the word '*****' also has fuck all to do with this.

And no calling a person a '****' in no way reduces women to 'mere' genitalia. And if we deconstruct your idiotic comment then presumably it is, in your mind, perfectly fine to call a man a '****' implying that there is nothing inherently sexist with the word in itself, but in the choice of who it is directed at. Of course if the target of an insult is what defines whether the insult is sexist then presumably any words, casting a woman in a negative light, through the medium of comparison, must be sexist. For example "Although in this particular case there is a correlation, and I find it interesting and quite telling that you seem to be unable to get through your narrow head how calling a woman a 'clown', which is to reduce her to mere 'circus entertainment', might be offensive."

Your 10th grade logic cuts no ice with me.


And of course, I know you're all geared up at your keyboard there, ready to make your obnoxiously liberal relativist point about "why isn't it sexist to call a man a dick, then??11" because you clearly don't understand anything about privilege and oppression.

Ah yes, because to disagree with your sophomoric views on language is of course the hallmark of "obnoxiously liberal relativism" and a clear indicator of ignorance of the notions of "privilege and oppression". :lol:

Though I gotta say, I find it bemusing that I am being described as the reletivist, when it is you who is playing loose and fast with language.


PS. I note you still haven't addressed either of my questions.

[un_person]

All comrades mind those sexist and homophobic terms.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

All comrades mind those sexist and homophobic terms.

For fucks sake.

[9]

I can only write posts, I can't go back and correct the years of obvious neglect by your teachers and address their failure to impart to you the skill of comprehension.

Ooh, dig!


No, there isn't any correlation at all. Perjorative employed to describe and stereotype a group of people based on their ethnic origion has fuck all to do with slang that describes a sexual organ. Nothing. Got that? Similarly the word '*****' also has fuck all to do with this. So what is your argument, then? That words can be inherently racist but not sexist?



And no calling a person a '****' in no way reduces women to 'mere' genitalia. And if we deconstruct your idiotic comment then presumably it is, in your mind, perfectly fine to call a man a '****' implying that there is nothing inherently sexist with the word in itself, but in the choice of who it is directed at.Generally, in the US, if a man is called a "****" it is to imply weakness by associating him with femininity. Much the way it works when a man is called a "pussy" or a "*****". So, while it might not be considered a sexist slur per se when used against a man, the misogynistic tone is still absolutely palpable.

Of course if the target of an insult is what defines whether the insult is sexist then presumably any words, casting a woman in a negative light, through the medium of comparison, must be sexist. For example "Although in this particular case there is a correlation, and I find it interesting and quite telling that you seem to be unable to get through your narrow head how calling a woman a 'clown', which is to reduce her to mere 'circus entertainment', might be offensive."

Your 10th grade logic cuts no ice with me. Your daycare comprehension skills might be the problem. Degrading a woman by implying that the only purpose she fulfills is to provide sex - that she is merely genitalia, with no person attached is quite different from the average woman's connection to circus equipment. But the meaning of the word "****" is not the central part of what makes it sexist. You could take almost any word - make up a word even - and if it were used toward women in the same social context under the same conditions as it is and has been in American culture, the effect will be the same. I understand the word "****" has different connotations (or so I've been told) in the UK, but you have to understand that it is one of the (if not the) most explicitly sexist slurs in America. "Nigger" is not offensive to black people because of the structure of the word, or its etymological origin, or it's literal meaning. Rather, it is offensive because of the traditional context in which it has been used and because of the traditional sentiment that accompanies its use. Over time, these things (traditional context and sentiment) have become inextricably linked to the word itself. The same applies to the word "****" in America. I am an American. I am a woman. I have been called a **** on multiple occasions; it is crystal clear when you are on the receiving end of it that it is explicitly sexist, and that it is employed precisely because it is explicitly sexist, which makes it far more cutting than any other insult could be.



Ah yes, because to disagree with your sophomoric views on language is of course the hallmark of "obnoxiously liberal relativism" and a clear indicator of ignorance of the notions of "privilege and oppression". :lol:No, but for you as a male in the UK to assert that you know better than I, a woman in America, what is or isn't misogynistic language in America is really quite a spectacle for its demonstration of sheer pompous ignorance.


PS. I note you still haven't addressed either of my questions.They have been addressed innumerable times in this thread already. In case you don't know how to use an internet forum, what you do is scroll up to the top of the thread, find the little page numbers in the right-hand corner of the screen, click on the number "1" (which, incidentally, will take you to the OP and the first page of responses) and start reading.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Apples and oranges. Racist terms, which are perjorative for a specific group of people are, by definition, not the same as a slang term to describe a sexual organ.But in the US, "****" is not primarily used as a slang term for genitals. Additionally, "pussy" is used for genitals, but is also used as a homophobic or sexist slur depending on the context.


You ignored that salient fact, and instead employed a tedious strawman. You also ignored my question. To paraphrase it, why do you believe women need protecting from slang terms labeling their anatomy and men do not? I think women should and do demand that people not use sexist language. Men do not care about "dick" and "cock" because MEN ARE NOT SUBJECTED TO SYSTEMIC ANTI-MALE SEXISM in the way that women are confronted with anti-women sexism.

Your argument about men not being offended by "cock" so women shouldn't be offended by "****" is essentially the same argument made by US racists when they say, "hey, I call my white friends and myself redneck, so I can call blacks niggers".

[synthesis]

Same here man, i couldnt beleive it....... though they did get alot of funny looks when i kept asking people for a fag.... homophobes!

That always trips me out. I feel like most British people have learned not to use that around Americans, but when I'm in a group of drunk Brits, I'm laughing to myself almost constantly.


Is 'rimming salt' for people who don't thing that it tastes salty enough by itself?

Margaritas or assholes?

[MilitantAnarchist]

MEN ARE NOT SUBJECTED TO SYSTEMIC ANTI-MALE SEXISM in the way that women are confronted with anti-women sexism.


So your saying that male sexism NEVER happens... if it only happens once its bad... From what i've read here, your a bunch of patronising fuckwits... I guess your offended pretty easily... but when it comes to words like **** and twat, i dont understand that... but you know what they say, if the shoe fits....

ALSO, that word was probably rarely used, obviously because it is SO offensive only us darn brits use it... but its been said more times in this thread then it ever has been... and youve highlighted it as an issue, so everyone is gonna use it more now, and you cant stop it, because it is only a word, and we arent being sexist... and if we are gonna get offended about every little thing that someone might say that you COULD perceive as being sexist or any kind of 'slight' discrimination, we're gonna end up *****ing about things that dont fucking matter and its gonna be no fun for anyone... Just please, stop being so pedantic, and well, twats....



That always trips me out. I feel like most British people have learned not to use that around Americans, but when I'm in a group of drunk Brits, I'm laughing to myself almost constantly.


I could get pissy about you stereo typing... and see, we are always 'constantly' having to learn around you... maybe you should actualy try and learn around us...

[yuon]

So your saying that male sexism NEVER happens... if it only happens once its bad...
Just so you know, in this case "systemic", happening generally. No one, but an idiot, which I'm sure that Gravedigger isn't, would say that sexism directed towards males never happens. It is a fact though, that sexism against women is ingrained in most societies around world.

Now, whether or not "****" contributes to that sexism is what this thread is discussing. Personally, I've said my piece. I don't think that the word ****, when used as a general insult, without reference specifically to women, is not equivalent to words such as "cock" and "dick". (Obviously, it can, and is, used differently, to specifically target women, or to attribute "womanly characteristics" (such as how the word "pussy" is generally used), and I would suggest that it shouldn't be used in that manner. Duh.)

I also accept that other point of view, that "****" is offensive, no matter how it is used. I think this opinion is a bit strange, but hey, that's probably 'cause of my background.

Anyway, it doesn't hurt me not to use the word as an insult on this forum. I don't think I ever have. It also doesn't hurt anyone else not to use offensive words on this forum. Which, I think, has been said more than enough times that only slightly thick people haven't taken it on board yet.

:cool::rolleyes::);):ohmy::drool::tt1:

[proudcomrade]

Waterboard the British.

[mel]

Waterboard the British.


This was unnecessary and unhelpful.

[Luís Henrique]

Character traits are expressed as follows:

- Flips out of no apparent reason, burning everyone in site.
- Seeks power and control over people close to her at ANY cost.
- Abuses people closest to her because she can get away with it.
- Lacks repentance completely.
- Verbally and emotionally assaults people, especially men.
- Loves to be the victim.
- Mouths off to such an extent that others contemplate physical abuse - which in turn feeds victim status giving her the greatest gift she could have.
- No morals what so ever.
- Preys on weaker/nice people.
- Gets knocked up by weaker male in order to have controlling role in relationship.

This reminds me of somebody... who could it be?

Oh yes. That person.

Luís Henrique

[TC]

So your saying that male sexism NEVER happens... if it only happens once its bad... From what i've read here, your a bunch of patronising fuckwits... I guess your offended pretty easily... but when it comes to words like **** and twat, i dont understand that... but you know what they say, if the shoe fits....

ALSO, that word was probably rarely used, obviously because it is SO offensive only us darn brits use it... but its been said more times in this thread then it ever has been... and youve highlighted it as an issue, so everyone is gonna use it more now, and you cant stop it, because it is only a word, and we arent being sexist... and if we are gonna get offended about every little thing that someone might say that you COULD perceive as being sexist or any kind of 'slight' discrimination, we're gonna end up *****ing about things that dont fucking matter and its gonna be no fun for anyone... Just please, stop being so pedantic, and well, twats....



I could get pissy about you stereo typing... and see, we are always 'constantly' having to learn around you... maybe you should actualy try and learn around us...

Consider this a warning for abusing other forum members.

[TC]

Waterboard the British.

Consider this a warning for off topic and abusive spam.

[TC]

I've lived in both America and England and while the terms may be more highly offensive and politically charged in America, the reality is that women virtually never use these terms in either country, for the same reason women virtually never tell rape jokes, because these types of comments are sexually demeaning and socially harmful.

[ellipsis]

I am not getting involved in the spirited debate/flame war but I will just say that I don't think the any racist/sexist/discriminatory terms should be used by comrade on this site. cultural significance aside, these terms associate negativity with a specific gender/race/nationality etc.
Comrades must not allow capitalist heteronormative ideas colonize your thoughts and words.

[MilitantAnarchist]

I've lived in both America and England and while the terms may be more highly offensive and politically charged in America, the reality is that women virtually never use these terms in either country, for the same reason women virtually never tell rape jokes, because these types of comments are sexually demeaning and socially harmful.

I dont know where you lived in England, but most of the women i know use at least one of these terms... also i dont think i've ever heard anyone tell a rape joke... i see the point your getting at, but the arguement as i see it, is some people are saying that those words are sexist, but the people from the UK are saying they arent sexist... offensive yes, but not sexist. I would say the word '*****' is more sexist because it refers to a female dog, not a part of the anatomy... and more often then not '*****' is used as in insult to women alone, the other words are unisex.. if that is the right word to describe them as :rolleyes:
So if we should 'ban' a word for being discriminative, it probibly should be *****...

[bcbm]

or we could just not use offensive words in general, because we're here to discuss politics and not to call each other slurs?

[ls]

I've lived in both America and England and while the terms may be more highly offensive and politically charged in America, the reality is that women virtually never use these terms in either country

Seems factually inaccurate to me I'm afraid, most women do not seem to 'virtually never use' terms like '****', '*****', 'twat' and so on in the UK.

[proudcomrade]

Consider this a warning for off topic and abusive spam.


Oh, for goodness' sake, relax- it was meant as a smartassed wisecrack to break up the seriousness of a fight-thread that is rapidly getting uglier and less productive with each page. If laughing at ourselves a little bit is against the rules, then, by all means, give me some more demerits; guess I deserve them. :rolleyes:

[Devrim]

Margaritas or assholes?

Sperm, 'rimming' is the oral retrival of seminal fluid from the anal cavity, but jokes sort of lose it when they have to be explained.

Devrim

[Devrim]

I've lived in both America and England and while the terms may be more highly offensive and politically charged in America, the reality is that women virtually never use these terms in either country, for the same reason women virtually never tell rape jokes, because these types of comments are sexually demeaning and socially harmful.

I think it says a lot about the social groups that you mixed in in England. I lived in England too, for a total of seven years, and heard it used by women often. I also heard it used by women often in America, but realise that that may have been due to the short time I was there, total 12 days, and the restricted groups I mixed in while there, first and second generation Irish immigrants.

Also as I said before, I don't think I have ever heard it used to refer to a woman, one wolud call a woman a '*****', whereas one would call a man a '****' or a 'bastard'. None of them refers to any sexual slur in my opinion, but is a general coment on the unpleasantness of somebody's charecter, having nothing to do with female dogs, sexual organs or illegitamte children.

Devrim

[Plagueround]

This reminds me of somebody... who could it be?

Oh yes. That person.

Luís Henrique

Not very subtle at all. Did you actually read all of that and then make a thinly veiled reference that it fits a member of our forum? As you said yourself, "Insinuation that has the same consequences as actual accusation is no different from accusation." With this in mind, you've received a warning point for this comment.

[Luís Henrique]

Not very subtle at all. Did you actually read all of that and then make a thinly veiled reference that it fits a member of our forum? As you said yourself, "Insinuation that has the same consequences as actual accusation is no different from accusation." With this in mind, you've received a warning point for this comment.

Do you think that it fits a member of our forum?

If so, might I say, the problem is in your interpretation, not in my post.

And you are a gross hypocrite, since when it was the case of an actual "insinuation that has the same consequences as actual accusation is no different from accusation", you voted "do nothing".

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

or we could just not use offensive words in general, because we're here to discuss politics and not to call each other slurs?
The problem is, we are so imbibed with the idea that politeness is a bourgeois and reactionary thing that we probably cannot fathom this. So, when we are offended, we need to make a contorted argument that the offending word is not merely offencive, but in some way "reactionary" or "discriminatory".

See the shit poor old Trotsky got for suggesting otherwise:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/trotsky-wants-you-t116508/index.html?t=116508&highlight=Trotsky

Luís Henrique

[ZeroNowhere]

or we could just not use offensive words in general, because we're here to discuss politics and not to call each other slurs?We're here to discuss politics, not to discuss whether or not we should use the word '****'. That by itself wouldn't work as an argument against this thread, so I don't see why it would as one against 'offensive words'.

[bcbm]

We're here to discuss politics, not to discuss whether or not we should use the word '****'. That by itself wouldn't work as an argument against this thread, so I don't see why it would as one against 'offensive words'.

as i said elsewhere...

let me be honest for a second here. i use "****" and all kinds of other nasty, offensive words in real life. i use them with people i know and they get that they're not being used in an offensive way. but this is a message board with people from all over the world who come from different contexts and don't know me, so i don't use those words, or make questionable jokes and comments because i'm here to talk about politics and there's no good reason to. for that matter, i try to remain cordial with most members here, even if i find them to be horrendous idiots. so i really don't understand why everyone gets so riled up when its suggested we don't use a word that is more trouble than its worth.

[Sasha]

doesn't anyone think that its mostly the culture of either completly denying the exsistence or using pseudo-latin or "cute" words for genitalia that causus an unhealthy mental atitute towards those body parts.
at least to my experience workingclass people (and espacely women) who regularly hapen to use words like **** and dick etc got an way more healthy look on their own body's and sex than midle and upperclass people who beat around the bush (pun intended)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I've lived in both America and England and while the terms may be more highly offensive and politically charged in America, the reality is that women virtually never use these terms in either country, for the same reason women virtually never tell rape jokes, because these types of comments are sexually demeaning and socially harmful.

Men rarely tell rape jokes either; that doesn't discredit the fact rape jokes can indeed be funny, just as racial jokes can elicit a laugh without requiring the audience to feel remorseful. What ultimately matters is the intent behind each joke. Please provide evidence that supports your assertion that rape jokes are "socially harmful." If you must insist this is an issue that should be defined between "right" and "wrong," I want to see how it's destructive (to use George Carlin's own humor) to make a joke about Elmer Fudd raping Porky the Pig. Rape is not an issue exclusively for women (nor are homosexual men the only culprits of rape against heterosexual men), but even if it were, that doesn't mean one cannot tell a joke about penises, "****s," menopause, or anything else that is gender-specific. White comedians should be able to tell jokes about black people - if they aren't actually promoting racism. Black comedians should be able to tell jokes about white people - if they aren't actually promoting racism. Now substitute the color oriented nouns with "men" and "women" and "racism" for sexism.

The inherit problem I see is that some users think that if one person for a historically oppressed "minority" group is offended, then something is wrong. I just see people who are too easily offended. Intent matters, not whether or not someone somewhere might be offended. I'm part Native American, but I don't get peeved when I hear of an athletics organization calling itself the "redskins." So what?

We can't obliterate etymologically "unfavorable" words. The case of "women" versus "womyn," for example. Stupidest shit ever. One has to just step back and ask: so what?

[9]

doesn't anyone think that its mostly the culture of either completly denying the exsistence or using pseudo-latin or "cute" words for genitalia that causus an unhealthy mental atitute towards those body parts.
at least to my experience workingclass people (and espacely women) who regularly hapen to use words like **** and dick etc got an way more healthy look on their own body's and sex than midle and upperclass people who beat around the bush (pun intended)

To be honest, I'm tired of participating in this discussion. But I want to make this clarification, because there still seems to be confusion about it. The problem is not people referring to the female genitalia as a "****"; I almost never hear/see the word used in that context, and I certainly don't give a shit when it is. The problem is the use of the word "****" as a disparaging term for assertive women - this is the way it is generally used in the US, and this is at the heart of the objection to it. That is all.

[mel]

To be honest, I'm tired of participating in this discussion. But I want to make this clarification, because there still seems to be confusion about it. The problem is not people referring to the female genitalia as a "****"; I almost never hear/see the word used in that context, and I certainly don't give a shit when it is. The problem is the use of the word "****" as a disparaging term for assertive women - this is the way it is generally used in the US, and this is at the heart of the objection to it. That is all.

This is what I've been trying to get across to people. Very well said. However, I'd argue that it's not just used against "assertive" women, but it retains a similar connotation in every context it's used to disparage: regardless of who it is disparaging.

[9]

This is what I've been trying to get across to people. Very well said. However, I'd argue that it's not just used against "assertive" women, but it retains a similar connotation in every context it's used to disparage: regardless of who it is disparaging.

Yes, that is a good point, and very true.

[Sasha]

To be honest, I'm tired of participating in this discussion. But I want to make this clarification, because there still seems to be confusion about it. The problem is not people referring to the female genitalia as a "****"; I almost never hear/see the word used in that context, and I certainly don't give a shit when it is. The problem is the use of the word "****" as a disparaging term for assertive women - this is the way it is generally used in the US, and this is at the heart of the objection to it. That is all.


but on this site i have seen it used exclusively for (fascist, cop or politician) males...

[mel]

but on this site i have seen it used exclusively for (fascist, cop or politician) males...

and it retains the connotations which are derived from its use against women.

[pastradamus]

Women are not made of porcelain and most of the women I know on this site are strong-minded enough to overlook something as trivial as the C word. I dont like using the C word myself, but I dont feel that this place is going to get any better by black-listing a word.

[mel]

Women are not made of porcelain and most of the women I know on this site are strong-minded enough to overlook something as trivial as the C word. I dont like using the C word myself, but I dont feel that this place is going to get any better by black-listing a word.

Pastradamus:
It isn't just using the word [****] in the abstract [**** **** **** ****] that's the problem. Nobody cares if the word is used in a non-disparaging manner. However, many women and men have been highly offended when being called "useless ****s", because of the deeply sexist connotation that the word carries with it.

The Thread in General:
The fact of the matter is that it's simply common fucking courtesy to not call people something that a large number of other people deem sexist even if you don't think it is. There's no good reason to use "****" over asshole, jerk or any other word if you really insist on being a jerk to other people.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

However, many women and men have been highly offended when being called "useless ****s", because of the deeply sexist connotation that the word carries with it.Connotation is individualistic. What may be deeply sexist for one person is harmless for another. Who is right? The person who is offended by default?

Profanities where the intent is not sexist/racist/homosexist should never be forced upon anyone. A lot of the English language derives from patriarchal ideas, so going about policing an ever evolving medium of communication does nothing but procreate an image of oppressed groups being too weak (it has been brought up before but the fact "dick" is being ignored has everything to do with the perception of women as fragile dolls).

Sometimes it requires from people to just not get offended over stupid shit. If I tick off an asexual by calling him/her a fucker, tough luck. Same for a homosexual man who can't stand "faggot" being a substitute for smoke, or a white man not being able to handle "white in the face." This sort of reminds me of the discussion that took place a few months ago denouncing Romance languages because of genderization rules.

Thus far not a single person has come out in support of RevLefters using "****" as an assault on one's sex, so I think the whole point is moot.

[mel]

Thus far not a single person has come out in support of RevLefters using "****" as an assault on one's sex, so I think the whole point is moot.


Yet it's used that way on here with enough frequency for it to have become a problem. At the end of the day, a ton of people come out here in support of their "right" to call somebody else a ****.

I'm probably done with this discussion though, I'm getting tired of repeating myself.

[Jazzratt]

and it retains the connotations which are derived from its use against women.

So why doesn't "twat"? It means exactly the same thing (from the oxford english dictionary:
twat

/twat, twot/
• noun vulgar slang 1 a woman’s genitals. 2 a stupid or obnoxious person.


****


• noun vulgar slang 1 a woman’s genitals. 2 an unpleasant or stupid person.


Althought to be fair twat is also used as a verb meaning to hit or punch.) why does it not carry the same connotations? I don't mean this as an attack but I am genuinely curious as to why the two words are treated so incredibl differently. Do americans just not use the word twat?

[Yehuda Stern]

So why doesn't "twat"?

To be honest, I find that word to be even more offensive if anything.

[Jazzratt]

You are the first person to express that opinion, but if that's the case I guess the question isn't really directed at you. In honesty, though, if the most uptight groups of people aren't offended by that word you should perhaps reconsider your views :lol:

[Yehuda Stern]

To be honest, given the patriarchal, chauvinist societies we all live in, and the fact that in most of them women are taught to be ashamed of their sexuality and bodies, I find all words that are used to refer to the female anatomy in a demeaning way to be disgusting and impressible for use in any revolutionary organization. But then, maybe I'm just "uptight" about oppression and such things.

[Invader Zim]

Consider this a warning for abusing other forum members.

Several people in this thread have 'abused' other forum members, what about them? If you're going to moderate this forum you should at least pretend to employ some objectivity.

[Revy]

Sexist terms like "****", "twat" and "pussy" are not only offensive they are uncreative. You have to make it elaborate, and reference something that isn't related to genitals.

It's like the word "retard". Couldn't you just yell something like "shit-for-brains". since you know, the only thing that's being insulted by the term is the person you're talking to...and feces.

[Invader Zim]

Ooh, dig!

So what is your argument, then? That words can be inherently racist but not sexist?

Generally, in the US, if a man is called a "****" it is to imply weakness by associating him with femininity. Much the way it works when a man is called a "pussy" or a "*****". So, while it might not be considered a sexist slur per se when used against a man, the misogynistic tone is still absolutely palpable.
Your daycare comprehension skills might be the problem. Degrading a woman by implying that the only purpose she fulfills is to provide sex - that she is merely genitalia, with no person attached is quite different from the average woman's connection to circus equipment. But the meaning of the word "****" is not the central part of what makes it sexist. You could take almost any word - make up a word even - and if it were used toward women in the same social context under the same conditions as it is and has been in American culture, the effect will be the same. I understand the word "****" has different connotations (or so I've been told) in the UK, but you have to understand that it is one of the (if not the) most explicitly sexist slurs in America. "Nigger" is not offensive to black people because of the structure of the word, or its etymological origin, or it's literal meaning. Rather, it is offensive because of the traditional context in which it has been used and because of the traditional sentiment that accompanies its use. Over time, these things (traditional context and sentiment) have become inextricably linked to the word itself. The same applies to the word "****" in America. I am an American. I am a woman. I have been called a **** on multiple occasions; it is crystal clear when you are on the receiving end of it that it is explicitly sexist, and that it is employed precisely because it is explicitly sexist, which makes it far more cutting than any other insult could be.

No, but for you as a male in the UK to assert that you know better than I, a woman in America, what is or isn't misogynistic language in America is really quite a spectacle for its demonstration of sheer pompous ignorance.

They have been addressed innumerable times in this thread already. In case you don't know how to use an internet forum, what you do is scroll up to the top of the thread, find the little page numbers in the right-hand corner of the screen, click on the number "1" (which, incidentally, will take you to the OP and the first page of responses) and start reading.


That words can be inherently racist but not sexist?

No word can be inherently reactionary, as ever context is all that matters. Though that said, words such as 'nigger' have a tendency to be used specifically as perjorative for an ethnic group, a result of history and the terms etymology. The word **** on the other hand doesn't have that same, or even similar, history and etymology.


Generally, in the US, if a man is called a "****" it is to imply weakness by associating him with femininity. Much the way it works when a man is called a "pussy" or a "*****". So, while it might not be considered a sexist slur per se when used against a man, the misogynistic tone is still absolutely palpable.

Thus the way the word is used, typically in the US, is what matters? So the problem is context after all, and not the word it self. I see.


Your daycare comprehension skills might be the problem.

On the contrary, the problem here is your sophomoric gender politics, and your various conflicting views that don't stand upto analysis.


Degrading a woman by implying that the only purpose she fulfills is to provide sex

The assumption being that, that is the meaning attatched to the word. An assumption that simply isn't supported by reality. But also I note that again you fall into the trap of ignoring the same argument that could be applied to slang defnining male genitalia. Why is it wrong to employ words, that in your mind, imply that a person's only role is to gratify the opposite sex and not the other way round? Is it because you think women are in some way 'weaker' than men? Again your argument draws upon outdated gender constructs. You need to get that shit out of your system.

There isn't really a lot more to say to you, other than to note your patronising xenophobia.

[Invader Zim]

But in the US, "****" is not primarily used as a slang term for genitals. Additionally, "pussy" is used for genitals, but is also used as a homophobic or sexist slur depending on the context.

I think women should and do demand that people not use sexist language. Men do not care about "dick" and "cock" because MEN ARE NOT SUBJECTED TO SYSTEMIC ANTI-MALE SEXISM in the way that women are confronted with anti-women sexism.

Your argument about men not being offended by "cock" so women shouldn't be offended by "****" is essentially the same argument made by US racists when they say, "hey, I call my white friends and myself redneck, so I can call blacks niggers".


But in the US, "****" is not primarily used as a slang term for genitals. Additionally, "pussy" is used for genitals, but is also used as a homophobic or sexist slur depending on the context.

So context is what makes a word sexist, as opposed to the word itself? In that case what are you trying to achieve here?


I think women should and do demand that people not use sexist language.

But as neither you, nor anybody else, has been able to back up the assertion that the word '****' is inherently sexist; your statement is reduced to nothing but empty rhetoric. All you have achieved is to show that in some contexts the word can be sexist. Something I doubt anyone disagrees with.


Your argument about men not being offended by "cock" so women shouldn't be offended by "****" is essentially the same argument made by US racists when they say, "hey, I call my white friends and myself redneck, so I can call blacks niggers"

You have failed to grasp my argument. My argument is that there is an inherent chauvanism in trying to defend women from the word '****' while not applying the same standard to words such as 'dick'. It implicity implies that women, unlike men, cannot hack these types of slur and places female anatomy on a ludicrous pedastle. I think that the attitude you hold is a lot more problematic and betrays wider problematic social trends that need to be addressed. For a start why do you, a leftist, buy into these outdated gender constructs?

[Jimmie Higgins]

But as neither you, nor anybody else, has been able to back up the assertion that the word '****' is inherently sexist;No group of letters in inherently anything, in the US "****" is not used like people say "Shit" or "Fuck" or even "*****". In the US frat boys and other morons like to say "What's up *****es" to their friends - many women call eachother *****es in the same way that people in the UK call their friends "****s" or get in an argument and say, "stupid ****". In the US, **** is not used like this, if you called another male a "****" they would be confused unless you were in a heated argument. If you called a female friend a "****" she would probably not take it as a joke.

If you think I'm somehow a prude or making this up, go friend some random american on facebook and ask them which word is more sexist: "*****" or "****" or "twat". "*****" probably won't be the one they pick.


your statement is reduced to nothing but empty rhetoric. All you have achieved is to show that in some contexts the word can be sexist. Something I doubt anyone disagrees with.Yes so let me break it down real simple-like

1) in the US it is only used as a sexist slur with the same impact as words like "faggot" or "nigger".

2) People from the US use and read this website and most would not know that "****" is used more regularly in the UK. Some are new to the left and want to know more about it so they come here.

3) Communication on this website is through text.

4) Accents aren't reflected through text.

Add these up and I think any radical with a brain in their head would come to the conclusion that it's best to refrain from some words that are seen by other readers as explicitly sexist.


You have failed to grasp my argument. My argument is that there is an inherent chauvanism in trying to defend women from the word '****' while not applying the same standard to words such as 'dick'. It's not chauvanism, it's solidarity just like when middle school kids say "that's so gay". I don't pick fights when I overhear strangers saying these things, but if someone says it to me or says "George Bush is Gay" at an anti-war rally I challenge them on it. If someone I was debating here said that I would also challenge them on it because I think that using language seen as racist sexist or homophobic hurts our ability to build solidarity and a left that fully reflects all oppressed people and the full range of the working class.


It implicity implies that women, unlike men, cannot hack these types of slur and places female anatomy on a ludicrous pedastle. I think that the attitude you hold is a lot more problematic and betrays wider problematic social trends that need to be addressed. For a start why do you, a leftist, buy into these outdated gender constructs?No, I EXPLICITLY STATED that "dick" is not sexist because there is NO SUCH THING as systematic anti-male sexism in our society. Fuck protecting anyone else from being offended - I'M OFFENDED by this sexist term and I am really amazed that people here are pushing so hard to defend its use. If French comrades here told me that in France, that the word "Dude" was used to slur immigrants in France and they wanted me to stop using that term, I would have no hesitation.

Outdated gender constructs - what do you mean? Ha, I have a "Post-racial America" bridge to sell you too.

[proudcomrade]

Be careful not to assume that those of us from the US "don't know" or "don't understand" the "cultural difference", either. Some of us are well aware of the usage of the word in Britain and the Commonwealth, and yet still hate the word due to principle and/or personal experience, both among the women slurred with it over here, and the men who love and care about them. Just because we disagree with you, does not mean that we fail to understand you. Talk about patronizing...

[Salabra]

Interesting post, khaver,…

Did you know that some linguists have tried to derive the somewhat outdated Australian term ‘cobber’ (a largely male word for ‘male friend’) from ‘khaver.’ However, it is more likely derived from the Yorkshire term ‘cob = to take a liking to.’


…but I'm a bit confused regarding this last point^

I was under the impression that left communists consider any and all feminism (be it some revolutionary stream of feminism centered around working class women and men which seeks to challenge patriarchy in various forms, raise consciousness of revolutionary ideas, and empower women to be more assertive etc. *or* the obviously bourgeois pseudo-feminism utilized by the capitalist class to provide incentive or justification for invading a region or discriminating against a 'foreign' people or to promote general cultural imperialism based on fighting burqas or female circumcision or what have you, which has as its goals "moar female CEOs" etc.) - that basically left-communists consider all feminism, no matter the class makeup of its proponents and its goals, to be reactionary and bourgeois in nature, period. From what I (think I) understand, left-communists take the position that "real" communism inherently rejects sexism or something like that, so there is no need for "feminism". And, of course, that looks wonderful on paper.

Me, a ‘Left Communist’? I think you’ll owe my fellow Aussie Niccolò Rossi a new computer for that — he’ll have laughed so hard that he’ll have sprayed his evening coffee all over his keyboard! I actually have no factional affiliation — I read my Marxist texts with unclouded eyes and try to make my judgements in the same fashion. I am as happy to give credit to an anarchist if she says something I find valuable as I am to a Leninist, a Maoist, a feminist — or even a despised Trot! Yeah, yeah, I know the rewards of non-alignment — when it comes time to storm the Winter Palace, Private Salabra will find herself promoted to Leftenant(sic)-General and ordered to lead the human wave against the machine-guns at the top of the Grand Staircase (“She died a hero, Comrade Commander.” “Hmm, did she now? *sighs* I suppose it’s just as well — her ‘factional affiliation’ was somewhat dubious!”).

Seriously, though, your summation actually raises a few questions about Separate Organization (of women, gays etc). While I agree that the liberation of humanity depends on the overthrow of capitalism, I don’t expect sexism to evaporate as soon as Lenin arrives at the Finland Station to proclaim the Revolution. And Marxism, born and growing in a sexist society, has the potential to be very sexist, both in philosophy and programme (in the definition of ‘work’ and the relation of procreation to this definition, in the nature and role of ‘leadership,’ ‘democratic centralism’ and the ‘vanguard party,’ and the relation of ‘women’s issues,’ including domestic violence and intra-relationship sexism to the overall programme of the party — to name but a few) .

While I applaud the tremendous steps in consciousness that Lenin and the Bolsheviks achieved and the herculean efforts of the Revolution/Civil War period, later currents of Marxism have not been so benign in relation to women — we’ve had everything from “women as secretaries and bedmates to the (male) leaders of the ‘vanguard’” through “the family as a fighting unit for socialism” to the nonsense question “What is wrong with a burqa exactly?,” all of which are usually ‘justified’ by some reading of the works of Marx/Engels/Lenin/Stalin/Mao or Pol Pot!

And let us not forget that, for all his sterling analysis of the family, Engels was, if not an out-and-out homophobe, at least firm in his commitment to heteronormative coupling.

Some leftist currents actively address these questions, but some less willing to do so. So, no, I’d rather not “wait until we’ve destroyed the capitalist state” to even start thinking about having full social, economic and political equality and I am no more inclined to take orders from male comrades just because they’re male than I am to take orders from bourgeois men just because they’re men (or, for that matter, from bearded fanatics in turbans, mitres or dog collars just because their invisible friend tells them that they have a “right” and a “duty” to control me).

I would be happy to see separate women’s organizations linked to the ‘vanguard party,’ whose brief would be not only to address issues of specific concern to women and to educate and propagandize but to monitor the Party’s commitment to these issues.


Thanks Salabra for that! I would then suggest that by your logic, in a "perfect anarchist society", the insults might tend towards (for example) "capitalist". ;)

Why? All the apologists for capitalism I know are convinced that their socio-economic system is totally anarchistic, and that people all act out of enlightened self-interest for the mutual benefit of every member of society with no external control except for a mystical entity with an Invisible Hand! :rolleyes:


Oh, and side note, apparently the name Fanny (used to be quite popular if my Enid Blyton are any indication) comes from "Frances". Who knew?
I did! :tongue_smilie:

[Salabra]

. Do americans just not use the word twat?

Very few actually know the word.

Those who do, in my experience, see it exactly as they do "****."

[Niccolò Rossi]

Me, a ‘Left Communist’? I think you’ll owe my fellow Aussie Niccolò Rossi a new computer for that — he’ll have laughed so hard that he’ll have sprayed his evening coffee all over his keyboard!

Luckily I'm not drinking coffee at the keyboard, so Apikoros is off on this one. ;)

Seriously, I didn't (and still don't) know much about your politics before now. Apparently you are some sort of 'Marxist-Leninist'? I actually had a suspicion you might have been a Spartacist sympathiser. Don't know why, the posting style and what you've had to say, I guess (I'm not trying to be offensive here, don't take it the wrong way ;)).

As much as I would like to reply to the meat of your post, I'm not sure this thread is the best place, I think alot of what you raise is deserving of a discussion of its own. Unfortunately even if it were, I'm affraid I can't give a proper reply at the moment due to being pre-occupied with exams. For the next few weeks people will probably notice my posts will be reduced to much shorter and lighter matters.

[Salabra]

As Nic has implied, most of my post is irrelevant — my flight on feminism was inspired by Stancel’s comment on feminism and then by Apikororos’ question.


Luckily I’m not drinking coffee at the keyboard, so Apikoros is off on this one. ;)

Seriously, I didn’t (and still don’t) know much about your politics before now. Apparently you are some sort of ‘Marxist-Leninist’? I actually had a suspicion you might have been a Spartacist sympathiser. Don’t know why, the posting style and what you’ve had to say, I guess (I’m not trying to be offensive here, don’t take it the wrong way ;)).

‘Left-communist,’ ‘…some sort of Marxist-Leninist,’ ‘Spartacist sympathizer’? Labels — Bah, humbug!

I suppose the attempt to play Pin the Label on the Salabra warrants a reply — but this thread is not the place, so you may expect a submission to my RevLeft blog whenever I get off my lazy arse to do one.

But, to return to the topic, whatever factional point-of-view I seem to be espousing on any question, you can be sure that it will be one that upholds the rights of us ****-endowed people.


As much as I would like to reply to the meat of your post, I’m not sure this thread is the best place, I think alot of what you raise is deserving of a discussion of its own.

No, it isn’t ... but thank you, I’ll look forward to your comments.


Unfortunately even if it were, I’m afraid I can’t give a proper reply at the moment due to being pre-occupied with exams. For the next few weeks people will probably notice my posts will be reduced to much shorter and lighter matters.

Sincere good wishes to you, Nic, and to all others who are doing exams at the present time!

Now, if you really want to debate cultural imperialism vis-a-vis English dialectal variation, you could try explaining to me why (a) it takes me at least six separate operations to change Microsoft’s spellcheckers etc away from US English, (b) why I have to use Microsoft’s UK Dictionary, because its Australian Dictionary is virtually identical to its US one, and (c) why web pages also invariably use US spelling and stylistic conventions. :D :lol: :laugh:

[TC]

Several people in this thread have 'abused' other forum members, what about them? If you're going to moderate this forum you should at least pretend to employ some objectivity.

I am a global moderator not the moderator of this forum, I'll issue warnings when I see/read something that warrants it, but I wont see or read everything, so plenty will get past me. You can PM me if something deserves a warning since in all probability (since I don't read most things here) I just haven't read it.

[Louise Michel]

This stuff about the UK is a lie. It's just that there are some disgusting sexist brats here from the UK. I have friends from the UK and the picture I get is that the UK is a really sexually repressed culture and the abusive use of the word '****' is a reflection of that.

The truth is that the brats who want to call us ****s enjoy doing it. They get their rocks off doing it. All this 'it's different in the UK' stuff is complete bullshit. It's different because you mix with sexually repressed retards just like yourselves and you think it's normal to abuse women.

I don't know what these imbeciles are doing in a revolutionary forum. Why are they tolerated particularly given the letter of the law position on abortion. It makes no sense.

[Devrim]

This stuff about the UK is a lie. It's just that there are some disgusting sexist brats here from the UK. I have friends from the UK and the picture I get is that the UK is a really sexually repressed culture and the abusive use of the word '****' is a reflection of that.

The truth is that the brats who want to call us ****s enjoy doing it. They get their rocks off doing it. All this 'it's different in the UK' stuff is complete bullshit. It's different because you mix with sexually repressed retards just like yourselves and you think it's normal to abuse women.

As I mentioned before on this thread, I lived in the UK for years, and I don't think I have ever heard it used to describe a woman. It is almost invariably a word used to describe men.

Devrim

[Louise Michel]

As I mentioned before on this thread, I lived in the UK for years, and I don't think I have ever heard it used to describe a woman. It is almost invariably a word used to describe men.

Right, so women's oppression doesn't exist? Take a female body part and use it as a form of abuse and you call yourself a revolutionary. Do you have a brain or has it been surgically removed?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

This stuff about the UK is a lie. It's just that there are some disgusting sexist brats here from the UK. I have friends from the UK and the picture I get is that the UK is a really sexually repressed culture and the abusive use of the word '****' is a reflection of that.

The truth is that the brats who want to call us ****s enjoy doing it. They get their rocks off doing it. All this 'it's different in the UK' stuff is complete bullshit. It's different because you mix with sexually repressed retards just like yourselves and you think it's normal to abuse women.

I don't know what these imbeciles are doing in a revolutionary forum. Why are they tolerated particularly given the letter of the law position on abortion. It makes no sense.


This is ridiculous , essex is not Kabul.