the_seeker

Well, it would seem that "obscenity" is classified by whatever culture is dominant during a particular time period. These change, and so does "obscenity." However, I find it absolutely irrational that there be absolute rules and laws over words. As has already been pointed out, the whole point of "offensive language" is that it offends the hearer (or speaker). Granted, a particular culture may find an expression unacceptable, and therefore pass laws against it or simply make it socially unacceptable to utter such words. I believe that that is the case with the remnants of Christian culture that the majority of us live in today.

I don't think obscenity actually has any kind of moral considerations attached to it, except the considerations and sensitivities of the culture in which one lives. For example, in the UK, it is both reprehensible and in vogue to use obscenity in public. I myself shy away from it, simply because I have no use for it, but if one is so concerned about the "right" to swear, one can always form their own religion/nation/whatever and swear away there. It is ridiculous to expect society to allow public decadence simply on the grounds of personal freedoms, but that's just my view.

luvluv

I've thought about this one too, and while I don't believe that there is anything actually sinful or harmful in the use of profanity, I do consider it wrong for a Christian to use such terminology because it is potentially offensive.

I have always thought it curious that regarding or procreative and excreatory functions we have words that are either scientific or vulgar, but nothing merely adequate. Thus, we have to refer to our genetalia either in the most ridiculously medical of terms, or in base, vulgar terms. I think it is a significant but often overlooked psychological phenomenon that we have no way of referring to certain of our more ordinary functions in ways which are neither scientific or vulgar, merely realistic and accepting. I think it has to do with a rejection of our basic humanity. We like to consider ourselves rational beings or pure souls, and the notion of a pure soul taking a squat (excuse the vulgarity) offends the high-minded. The high-minded cannot typically accept any of their naturalistic functions and thus refer to their natural functions, whether sexual or excreatory, in high-brow technical terms which alienate them from their authentic physical humanity.

Conversely, the, shall we say, less high-minded (though by no means less intelligent) find offensive or vulgar commentary on the notion of our less glamours functions funny or amusing. Thus they use the vulgar terms, both to amuse and to offend. But this is not any more authentic or natural than the high-minded approach. In essence, the vulgar approach AGREES that these functions are vulgar, and merely embraces that vulgarity.

What is needed, in my view, is a means of referring to our more basic functions in a manner which accepts them as a legitimate and necessary part of what it means to be human, and to find ways to refer to these functions which are neither scientific nor vulgar but accepting. Gosh darnitt, I would like a way to refer to my genetalia which does not sound like a medical journal or a pornographic magazine. One which speaks to me as a partially sexual being who has the need for physical and emotional union with that special someone (accompanied by the appropriate Al Green records).

Seriously, I think the fact that we can only refer to certain aspects of our existence in two ways that equally alienate us from them bespeaks a deeper rejection of the reality of human existence. It is a mark of immaturity in my mind.

trekbette

I use a limited amount of profanity in my daily life. I tend to stick to the same ones, fuck, bastard, damn, hell, bitch, shit and pelican.

However, there are some words I personally won't say. They don't offend me as much as they sound so silly coming out of my mouth that I choose not to say them. I have come up with substitutes. I get strange looks but that happens with just about everything I say and do, so I just go on with my life.

Some examples: rooster, cat (works for both words), cuent (sue-ent), breast (chest or boob)--I can't get the "t" word out.

I have had several people tell me I should do phone sex (my voice is much different on the phone than in person). I would be quite happy doing that for a living, except that I can't say the words.

Part of it is that for as long as I can remember, my Dad gets this look on his face when I cuss. He usually doesn't say anything. He just looks uncomfortable. Since I am almost 30, that may seem a bit extreme, but I am a Daddy's girl. (And proud).

Babble, babble, babble...

j-ogenes

One thing that occurred to me the other day is that a common substitute for "shit" is "shoot." But why is it any better than referring to feces to make a sort of "you understood" statement that verbally fires a trigger?

Jamie_L

The first time I started thinking about profanity in this context, I was thinking often about use of profanity as explitives, in which the meaning of the word is really irrelevant - it's just a way to vent emotion. Yet, as mentioned, some words are acceptable for this purpose and some aren't - even though they are all essentially meaningless (in a dictionary sense) in this context.

So, I started making up my own "profane" explitives - things I say in the same context, with no meaning attached other than my personal conviction that this grouping of words is emotionally charged. I get all sorts of strange looks when I do this, which amuses me, and sometimes helps diffuse the emotion that required the explitive in the first place.

My favorite is: "Smoky Kittens", usually substituted for "shit". I don't know where I came up with such a ludicrous swear, but it is so ludicrous that it's stuck with me.

I also like to use the swear words from other English-speaking cultures that most people 'round hin the States don't get. "Bugger" is my favorite in that sense, and "Bugger me sideways" ranks right up there with "Smoky Kittens."

Jamie

Enai

Pelican?? Isn't that a bird (and a firm that produces paper, ink, pens and related things)? How is that profane? Please explain.

Enai

luvluv

edited to add: whooo!!

dangin

Yet, as a christian you would evangelize, and this is equally potentially offensive. But the rest of your post is pretty thoughtful.

trekbette

It's a bad, bad, evil, evil, icky word. It never sounds right when you say it. Horrible, filthy, bad, bad, bad word. Ahhhhhhh. I almost wish I could be religious because I would go around trying to convince people that the pelican is satan's bird. But, as an Atheist, I just have to hate them quietly.

You may think I'm nuts. That's okay.

Jackalope

One substitute I use for "You stupid [explecative]" is "You minivan driver!"