Isn't cursing discriminatory in general?

[Black Sheep]

Most curses are in the context of genitalia, intercourse, sexual orientation, sexuality in general, intelligence, etc
So aren't in principle, all of them sexist, chauvinistic and discriminatory?

If i call someone "you pussy!", i pass on the notion that he is as weak, coward, etc as the female genitals => as the female.Sexism.
If i call someone "you retard!", i m being discriminatory of retarded people.
etc
etc

So, historical context aside, if we were just and correct in our fight against all discrimination, we should oppose all curse words.

Where am i wrong in this?

[Sir Comradical]

You have a point. Saying 'you're fucked' has homophobic connotations because the subject of ridicule is treated as a victim of sodomy. So yes, cursing can be discriminatory. Why? Because it's offensive to discriminate and the point of swearing is to be offensive.

[Friedrich]

Pussy -> Pussycat -> Scaredycat? I jest.
To an extent it is discrimination, but also cursing incorporates banter/comedy. This doesn't make it entirely acceptable, but I think it takes the edge off of it enough to not oppose cursing.

[Ocean Seal]

Well there are more than a few cases in which swear words are discriminatory, but then there are also swear words which aren't: fuck isn't discriminatory because its used in about every single context and it doesn't mean anything but sex. Shit means nothing but excrement, and in calling someone a shithead you aren't really saying something which is discriminatory. While dick refers to genitals its not androphobic because it is used in a variety of contexts such that it has no real significance. I don't think that swearing should be used all that often, unless it is being used casually with people you know, or if something happened that would warrant it, or if it is being used against the bourgeoisie or the bourgeois state.

[red cat]

Most curses are in the context of genitalia, intercourse, sexual orientation, sexuality in general, intelligence, etc
So aren't in principle, all of them sexist, chauvinistic and discriminatory?

If i call someone "you pussy!", i pass on the notion that he is as weak, coward, etc as the female genitals => as the female.Sexism.
If i call someone "you retard!", i m being discriminatory of retarded people.
etc
etc

So, historical context aside, if we were just and correct in our fight against all discrimination, we should oppose all curse words.

Where am i wrong in this?

Agreed. In general cursing also lowers the level of discussion, and in many parts of the world, the working class associates the habit of cursing with lumpen elements.

And if one is really feeling like insulting someone here, phrases like "capitalist pig" or "running dog of imperialism" should serve the purpose. :D

[Hoplite]

Insulting someone is usually a reaction of anger, it's generally done without input from the logical centers of the brain. You reach for the closest thing and hurl whatever you think will hurt the most, it isnt a reasoned response. I dont see it as discriminatory, just your lower brain reaching for the low-hanging fruit.

[Princess Luna]

damn
goddamn
shit
ass
asshole
motherfucker
son of a *****
i can't see how any of these could be discriminatory ,except perhaps maybe the last one. however most curses have long lost there original meaning , for example when i call somebody a "bastard" i am not meaning to call him the son of a unmarried woman.

[Rooster]

"I'm fucked. I'm totally shit-faced, really rather rat-arsed", self discrimination! I fail to see how words in general can be the sole reason why there is discrimination. Most of the time when you swear, you don't actually mean the strict dictionary definition of the word. And besides, how can one be an "ugly fucker"? Can an ugly person have lots of sex? Does that still make them universally ugly? You can remove all the discrimination in the world but sometimes an ugly person will still be an ugly person.

[Lobotomy]

damn
goddamn
shit
ass
asshole
motherfucker
son of a *****
i can't see how any of these could be discriminatory ,except perhaps maybe the last one. however most curses have long lost there original meaning , for example when i call somebody a "bastard" i am not meaning to call him the son of a unmarried woman.

Motherfucker doesn't seem discriminatory to you? Really?
I won't pretend like I never say it... I just don't know how someone could claim that it doesn't carry a sexist tone.

[Princess Luna]

Motherfucker doesn't seem discriminatory to you? Really?
I won't pretend like I never say it... I just don't know how someone could claim that it doesn't carry a sexist tone.
its accusing someone of incest by implying they they had sex with their own mother , so i don't see how its sexist.

[Red Commissar]

"Retard(ed)", "gay", "fag", "*****" etc among others, are frequently used by many younger people. When I was in high school it was used a lot, and it took me sometime to work them out of my vocabulary when I became more aware of how bad those sounded, even if I people don't intend to use them in that matter but seemingly as another word for "stupid" or "idiot".

[FreeFocus]

Yeah, a lot of curse words are discriminatory. Aside from ethnic and homophobic slurs, though, when I want to insult someone, I'm going to use things that are as hurtful as possible, since that's the intent (I try my best to refrain from calling a woman a "*****," as "asshole" is more neutral and doesn't have the same oppressive connotations, for example). When we live in a socialist society, we can all circle up, sing songs, and create new words that aren't offensive based on gender and whatever else. Until then, I'm not going to make a big fuss about words for which there are currently no suitable alternatives.

[Political_Chucky]

I personally don't use or like other people using Retard, fag, faggot, whatever it is... and you CAN do your part to stop shit like that. But at the same time, you really don't need to break down curse words and try to find an exact meaning to imply it has discriminatory effects. Its all based on context and I personally think its childish to becoming overbearing on words. Just makes you look like a social idiot and people WILL stop listening to you when you try to perfect vulgar language, which is there for a purpose. To be vulgar.

FUCK............:glare:

[Lobotomy]

its accusing someone of incest by implying they they had sex with their own mother , so i don't see how its sexist.

I feel like if the point of the insult were only about incest, you would hear the "reverse" of the insult as well ("fatherfucker" aimed at females).

I don't mean to be the PC police and analyze a ton of words to determine which are acceptable and which are not. I just think that people should recognize how language can be considered a reflection of cultural values and an influence over the way people think.

[Magón]

I often see "retarded" people as good people, and not actually retarded, since most of them I've met and known, have a good personality of their own, and can do things themselves, without the help of someone else. When I do say, "Oh you're retarded", or something similar with retard in it, I don't imply the person is a "retard" as an insult to "retards", but actually lower than what the public sees as "retarded". I've got a cousin with a "mental deficiency", as the doctors call it, but give him a computer, and he's a fucking computer whiz when it comes to tearing apart it's programming and things like that. So if/when I say retard, I'm not insulting him or anyone like him, I'm just expressing to whoever I'm saying it to, that I see, as the public's definition of "retarded", them being lower than a "retard".

If I said someone was a "pussy", like "retarded", I see them as lower than what that is. With no offense meant towards what others might see as me being offensive to. Same goes for if I say someone's a *****. I'm not meaning it in a sexist way, far from it, I just mean it in a way that's meant to show they're lower than what the public see a "*****" as.

[Political_Chucky]

I often see "retarded" people as good people, and not actually retarded, since most of them I've met and known, have a good personality of their own, and can do things themselves, without the help of someone else. When I do say, "Oh you're retarded", or something similar with retard in it, I don't imply the person is a "retard" as an insult to "retards", but actually lower than what the public sees as "retarded". I've got a cousin with a "mental deficiency", as the doctors call it, but give him a computer, and he's a fucking computer whiz when it comes to tearing apart it's programming and things like that. So if/when I say retard, I'm not insulting him or anyone like him, I'm just expressing to whoever I'm saying it to, that I see, as the public's definition of "retarded", them being lower than a "retard".

If I said someone was a "pussy", like "retarded", I see them as lower than what that is. With no offense meant towards what others might see as me being offensive to. Same goes for if I say someone's a *****. I'm not meaning it in a sexist way, far from it, I just mean it in a way that's meant to show they're lower than what the public see a "*****" as.

I see what your saying, and I can already say a lot of people are going to jump on you for it, but personally(and once again I don't say retarded, faggot, gay in a negative context) I don't get all uptight and offended when people do use it. I'm good friends with people that are gay, and they don't get all offended when someone does use it in a negative context towards something they don't like, because they know 1. its not really affecting them personally 2. its a meaningless cause to try and dictate what words people use 3. The context isn't used negatively towards them. But of course not everyone is going to agree with that, and some people will be offended whether you mean it in a context towards them or not. I personally don't like censorship however and I don't get offended. To each his own in most cases(say what you like, doesn't mean I will like or agree with you), and I don't think I have EVER or ever WILL be offended by what someone might call me. But everyone is different in that sense.

There are words that are used vulgarly however that are socially accepted to be historically discriminatory and society has accepted to refrain from these words. If you do use them, you are either out casted or restricted to certain groups. THAT is the consequences. If you wanna educate people why its wrong, great. But I don't like being dictated to what I should or should not say.

[Magón]

I see what your saying, and I can already say a lot of people are going to jump on you for it, but personally(and once again I don't say retarded, faggot, gay in a negative context) I don't get all uptight and offended when people do use it. I'm good friends with people that are gay, and they don't get all offended when someone does use it in a negative context towards something they don't like, because they know 1. its not really affecting them personally 2. its a meaningless cause to try and dictate what words people use 3. The context isn't used negatively towards them. But of course not everyone is going to agree with that, and some people will be offended whether you mean it in a context towards them or not. I personally don't like censorship however and I don't get offended. To each his own in most cases(say what you like, doesn't mean I will like or agree with you), and I don't think I have EVER or ever WILL be offended by what someone might call me. But everyone is different in that sense.

There are words that are used vulgarly however that are socially accepted to be historically discriminatory and society has accepted to refrain from these words. If you do use them, you are either out casted or restricted to certain groups. THAT is the consequences. If you wanna educate people why its wrong, great. But I don't like being dictated to what I should or should not say.

lol Yeah, I usually do get shit jammed down my throat when I say what I think of words like retard, *****, etc. But like you said, I don't get offended when someone calls me something, that one might find offensive. Like Wet-back, Spick, etc. are words that I find more amusing, rather than offensive to me personally, but can understand if one of my friends was called that, and took offense. I would stand up for him, because I know that to him, Spick or Wet-back are closer to home for him than they are for me, since I neither crossed illegally, etc. which Wet-back and other words used to describe Mexicans, as.

But yeah, it's all in the context in which they're used and who they're used towards. Most of mine are used towards ignorant people anyway, so those I say retard or something like that around, don't take offense because they have the understanding that I see whoever I'm saying it to, as lower than what others might think. (Like I said. :))

[MarxSchmarx]

I think it has more to do with breaking strongly held taboos and engendering a general sense of disgust to which you associate the person. Hence the ubiquity of scatological terms.

But for example in many languages quite a few words associated with religion are considered curse words. I don't think that those are, for the most part, discriminatory, but they violate a taboo by either calling on a sacred being to handle mundane tasks or else wish someone the most unpleasant fate as in "go to hell".

[Manic Impressive]

Language evolves and the meanings of the words change. When I call someone a **** I'm not thinking of female genitalia and the word can be used in a positive way for instance you might call someone a clever **** as a compliment. There are also plenty of other words which are sexist or discriminatory. For instance hysteria and hysterical from the greek hystera which means uterus and that meaning remains today (e.g. hysterectomy). The greeks believed that when a woman was hysterical it was because of her uterus and that it was moving around her body and interfering with her thinking. Surely that's more of a discriminatory word than ****.

[Political_Chucky]

Since I have heard this argument b4 a long long time ago, I'm just waiting for all the feminists to jump on this.:)

[Black Sheep]

Since I have heard this argument b4 a long long time ago, I'm just waiting for all the feminists to jump on this.:)
How is this related specifically to feminism?

[sologdin]

useful here is geoffrey hughes' swearing: a social history of foul language, which tracks the roots of various terms and lays out the unfolding of english cursing historically, as new linguistics are injected into the underlying language stock and as english assumes different geopolitical roles.

the text distinguishes between several types of "swearing":

asseveration - swearing by
invocation - swearing that
imprecation - swearing to (probably whence "cursing" arises)
malediction - swearing at (animate)
ejaculation - swearing at (inanimate)
blasphemy - primarily religious (contra doctrine)
profanity - primarily religious (contra the sacredness of place or time)
obscenity - "in public," i.e., items private meant to remain out of public sight: sex, excreta, &c.

most of it is wrapped up with barbarism, though the memory of the barbarism fades. fr'instance, the notion that something sucks is plainly tied to the homophobic epithet cocksucker, which begins to be recorded in the 1890s. does that mean that the term sucks should be abolished? unlikely in practice, even if true in principle: most folks probably use the term without regard to the historical meaning, and see nothing wrong with indicating that something sucks.

the larger question, i think, is that we can discuss discrimination at several levels. we might make it a very restrictive, limited set of practices that must be abolished: unlawful discrimination in employment practices or public access, say. or it can be broadened out to include any practices that may be considered offensive by someone. no problem either way, although the urgency is certainly removed from the latter usage, and that lack of urgency might cause some, erroneously, to lose sympathy for the cases in the former category if the two categories are commingled by covering them over with the same term--as in fact has happened in the US over the years. we have a semiurgic overload regarding discrimination claims, in part because of expansive readings of the concept.

if one were to go with the broader category, furthermore, does that mean one advocates for rendering such practices unlawful? is there to be a penalty for suggesting that a particular film sucks or that a particular person is a big pussy or that this breakfast tastes like shit? (i'm not sure if a criminal statute on that last is to protect coprophiliacs or what?)

even such seemingly innocuous terms as idiot, moron, imbecile are functionally references to mental disability i.e., you retard!, and i suspect that even an accusation of stupidity carries with it the same "discriminatory" intention. do the mentally disabled deserve the protection of a criminal statute from such terms of abuse as stupid, even when those terms are applied to others who are not mentally disabled? does it matter to the mentally disabled? are they injured further by terms of opprobrium generated by their unfortunate condition?

this is not to suggest that such terms should be used any more than racist terms should be used. however, the left might best lead by example, but be quiet about it otherwise--no need to get in someone's face about choice of rhetoric when there is a live issue on the table otherwise: it is a matter of being goal-oriented, rather than chasing down every rightwing rabbit in the forest.


the advice, then, is to avoid using the terms at issue (even stupid or dumb or whatever--lack of intelligence has a history, and those who lack it are blameless therefor); if we get to the point where we need to start calling people rude names, then we have not owned the particular discursive encounter at issue: a chance to educate has been squandered, or an argument has been lost.

this latter point applies especially to leftists who prefer to denounce each other with sectarian epithets rather than carry out ratonal debate--though i suppose an epithet is better than an icepick in the brainpan.

[Political_Chucky]

How is this related specifically to feminism?

Never said it was.

[Crimson Commissar]

I honestly don't see how this is an issue at all. Oppressed minorities have much more important things to worry about than the fact that a few swear words MAY have originated from discrimination against them.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

we should strive to
Stop trivializing sexual violence.
Stop the resurgence of misogyny.
Stop the dominance of patriarchy.
Stop talking like fourteen-year-olds.
Stop getting our sense of humour from the internet.

[Stand Your Ground]

You have a point. Saying 'you're fucked' has homophobic connotations because the subject of ridicule is treated as a victim of sodomy. So yes, cursing can be discriminatory. Why? Because it's offensive to discriminate and the point of swearing is to be offensive.
I disagree. Getting 'fucked' doesn't necessarily have to mean sodomy.

I don't feel that ALL curse words are bad, like asshole for example, everyone has an asshole, so you can't really say it's discriminatory.

[Ele'ill]

I think this thread reeks of "We don't really have to work that hard, do we? *nervous glances seeking approval*"

[Political_Chucky]

MMMMMMMMMMMMM try again....

I honestly WANT to discuss the context of these words. But I guess no one is up for it...

[Rottenfruit]

Most curses are in the context of genitalia, intercourse, sexual orientation, sexuality in general, intelligence, etc
So aren't in principle, all of them sexist, chauvinistic and discriminatory?

If i call someone "you pussy!", i pass on the notion that he is as weak, coward, etc as the female genitals => as the female.Sexism.
If i call someone "you retard!", i m being discriminatory of retarded people.
etc
etc

So, historical context aside, if we were just and correct in our fight against all discrimination, we should oppose all curse words.

Where am i wrong in this?
Its about context

[Fawkes]

The problem is that there are very few words/phrases, at least in the English language, that carry with them any particularly large amount of venom that aren't rooted in homophobic/sexist/racist/etc. language. The reason for this is obviously because such intense hatred and derision is and has been directed at these groups that these words grow to carry great significance. In most cases, usage of these words serves to further oppress the concerned groups of people, though it does put you in an awkward position because, in all honesty, this language doesn't have enough "neutral" insults to choose from. As far as how to go about addressing this problem, minimize while working towards total eradication of overtly discriminatory insults. Other, less explicit ones such as "idiot", though originating as a term for developmentally disabled people, have, at least I think, been far enough removed from their original connotations that they no longer really constitute a discriminatory word. That is obviously up for contestation though.

Also, insults are not always used to make up for a lack of an argument or a better word to use, they have legitimate usage.

[Boboulas]

When and how did insults become related to the human genatalia? Seems strange.

[Fawkes]

What is unique about a woman that could be used to derisively describe someone possessing stereotypically feminine characteristics?