General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsShit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits. George Carlin ...
was right about what one could say on television. I wonder what he would have made of Democratic "Underground"?
The dude would have been swarmed within 30 seconds, and then laughed his ass off about it. (But only after making his attackers look foolish.)
quinnox
(20,600 posts)even as we speak!
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Just pounding away...ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!
quinnox
(20,600 posts)A lab rat trying to get the cheese!
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)It started with the BEE word--all of a sudden people who had been using the word all along were getting slapped down for using it; and people who used to use it all the time were leading the charge.
DU is a crazy place, sometimes.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)iandhr
(6,852 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Liberal Veteran
(22,239 posts)Skittles
(153,160 posts)I WILL YOU KNOW
liberalmuse
(18,672 posts)If you actually swoon, there are plenty here who will catch you and offer you several sips of cool purified water.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)Warpy
(111,256 posts)who polished his art every time the automatic stoker on a coal furnace would get jammed by a clinker. I can remember hearing some blowhard hold forth when I was a little kid and giggling because I knew what most of the words meant and my dad could outcuss him in his sleep.
I also knew that nobody wanted to hear that stuff from a four year old so I just giggled.
I don't think the children need as much protection as people think they do.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)As he knew, and many here do not, context is everything.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)I'm sure you're trying to make a point, but there is no comparison
If Carlin had been a member here and his use of language violated the TOS or community standards or whatever, the community would police that
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)All the world's a stage
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
William Shakespeare
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)And what exactly was the sound of a furnace 'sighing' in Shakespeare's time?
countryjake
(8,554 posts)And this is what Shakespeare meant:
(I'll grab any chance to post this song... so shoot me.)
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)... great illustration of the Bard's metaphor.
Next up, "strange oaths and bearded like the pard".
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)That's the point many seem to miss. They can use the same words all day long. It doesn't mean they insightful or even mildly amusing. They do succeed in revealing who they are, however.
A HERETIC I AM
(24,368 posts)I've been listening to his humor since "Class Clown" was released on LP. I have seen him live on stage twice.
George Carlin would take two minutes looking through DU and consider it a HUGE waste of time.
And FWIW, DU is BOTH.
You must admit that there are many, many beloved (?) and well respected members, both current and former that use this message board to, as Carlin said, stand up and say "Hey! Dig me!"
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)I don't come here as often as I once did because I'M offended by all the third way rightwing policy apologia going on
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)people really need to lighten up and live a little. Your point is well taken and those trying to obfuscate and be offended? Those are some of the ones I'm commenting on. The whole fucking world is a stage: "all the world is a stage", Shakespeare, 'as you like it'. Rude is on the case. I don't care what the wall flowers say.
Skittles
(153,160 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Pretty badass! I love the intro!
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 20, 2014, 08:49 PM - Edit history (1)
They know is offensive to most people.
DU is a community which determines what is appropriate. Free speech on DU is not using vocabulary that is extremely offensive to some people. It is the same thing with the "n" word.
NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)It would be best not to use "no" in the very next sentence when "know" was appropriate. It spoils the effect.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)I hate making posts with it. I usually just read on it and go to my PC to make a reply.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)whathehell
(29,067 posts)Oh well..You do only have to be 13 to post here.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)savalez
(3,517 posts)Javaman
(62,530 posts)it's a reaction to the really ridiculous alert to a post regarding a Rude Pundit blog.
there was some mention of something in the title of the post that set someone's hair on fire.
there was a lot of negative reaction to the alert and hide.
so to "re-center" DU back to it's "let your filthy language fly" normalcy, people are now posting all sorts of threads with as many swear words as possible
and to a certain extent, I agree with them.
DU as it is now, is in some ways, a mere shadow of what it once was.
but I feel completely confident that as soon as a repuke is back in the white house, the over reaction to various "vulgarities" will be a thing of the past.
savalez
(3,517 posts)I'll take the overreactions and childish retaliations over a repuke in the office any day.
Javaman
(62,530 posts)but eventually, as much as we hate to hear it, there will be someone other than a Dem in the white house at some point.
randys1
(16,286 posts)A genius in some ways, actually.
He would have laughed at us for our political correctness, but knowing a little bit about him thru some people I know, he would never call a Woman the c word in person and so on, he saw a tremendous difference between performance and personal, he knew words hurt so he was careful to use them only in his performances or to not use them in hurtful ways one on one.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)I call everyone the "C" word. Whether male or female, whether I like them or not. In fact, I call my friends the "C" word a lot more than I call my enemies that. But I still use it in any (besides denigrating a female) scenario. Good and/or bad.
Just to be clear, I use it gender-neutral.
I know this post will get bombarded about the folly of my ways. To be honest, I can actually understand some of the reason some would be offended, but I'm really not trying to be offensive.
And of course, I could be totally wrong.
Warpy
(111,256 posts)and they use it like you do. I use it like you do. The Word Police would all have simultaneous CVAs if they ever read that board. There are a lot worse things there besides a vulgar word for vagina.
The c-word I've been using here that has them all in a tizzy is "censorship." Censorship by the easily offended has ruined more than one board. It's about to ruin this one.
Casual misogyny and homophobia should always be challenged, of course, but they need to be left right in the open where they can be seen for what they are. There have been some epic conversations here over the years, most pre jury system. The posts would have been hidden now and we'd all be the poorer for it.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)And even in an offensive context, the post should be left up to be ridiculed or defended on its own merits.
I use the "C" word like the Brits. Meaning it is used in every situation possible, including meeting your grand mum.
Hey, I'm an old school punk. It's part of the culture.
littlemissmartypants
(22,656 posts)Tell me more.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Honestly, anyone who hasn't been "educated" by the continual lectures on this shit for the past 10 years, isn't likely to now.
Far be it for anyone to suggest that those folks give it a rest, though, because then they'll spend another month melting down over someone saying that.
Warpy
(111,256 posts)I have only 2 of them off ignore right now because when they're not bloviating about words they don't like, they're quite good posters.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I have to figure that as the fall midterms approach this place will get a little less silly.
A man can dream!
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Yet we will still see the word wars over and over again.
Aldo Leopold
(685 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)just as Carlin did. I'm certain the RP would also not call anyone names in person. So I see no contrast between one person's working idiom and another's. You seem to be suggesting some difference between the two that is not actually present. The two men compare well, but the contrast is limited.
randys1
(16,286 posts)I am very aware of the feelings of Women but think censoring art, as RP really is, is wrong
i can see how you would think I was, no i dont think RP was being personal when he said what he said, and i didnt make that clear
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)and the Rude Pundit is performance.
I don't get people on DU who don't understand that and take offense. It only hurts the cause they are supposively promoting.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Oddly enough, of all the fuddy duddies on that show, she's probably the one who could, when the rubber met the road, deal with the most shit without losing it!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)YOU PISSED OFF THE CHICKEN LADY
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)Yet oddly enough I have seen some folks here express their disgust with the word tits and the word boobs. Bunch of fucking children.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Atman
(31,464 posts)Initech
(100,072 posts)Buns_of_Fire
(17,175 posts)...and Corn Tits, and Pizza Tits, and Sesame Tits...
And Tater Tits!
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Sounds yummy.
Initech
(100,072 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)You're welcome.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)I just love seeing them bouncing up and down, up and down...
frylock
(34,825 posts)I was.... stunned, to say the least. I had a post deleted just the other day for calling a dumbass post a dumbass post. didn't attack the poster, just the post, which has been SOP for not having a post deleted since forever. the times they are a changin'. I expect there to be another purge of longtime posters when primary season starts to pick up steam.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)if the history I remember since I've been here is any guide.
Some people are itching to pull some triggers.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)or they've just stopped posting. The news collection is about the only thing worth coming here for anyway.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)And its not a good omen for DU. Of course I have been think for some time now that the site is dying albeit slowly.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)it is, why discussionist I think. Can't prove it though
Logical
(22,457 posts)bluesbassman
(19,373 posts)We'll see how the alert goes as to whether or not any of his disciples are around today.
lpbk2713
(42,757 posts)BWAHAHAHA
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)From the terms of service
No bigoted hate speech.
Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic.
Simply using 'bad words' isn't against ToS. You have to actually use them in a way that's both an attack of someone, AND an attack that's tied to their race, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, etc to violate ToS.
Go ahead and knock yourself out simply cursing all you want.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)All that's necessary is to alert and label it "inappropriate" or "offensive".
"Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits."
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)then all hell breaks loose.
You've made a habit of taking up in defense of the crudest misogynistic slurs in the English language. This is your second thread on the C word alone.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)I am also, despite what you may believe, an ardent feminist. I just prefer to choose my battles.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Two OPs insisting the C word is acceptable.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)unfettered access to reproductive health services, those are a few of the things which I choose to get exercised about. I simply can't get my knickers in a twist about a bad word.
As I've said before, I don't use the word in conversation simply because many of the women I love, and especially my wife, hate it. But they agree with me that conversation and an internet message board are two vastly different things.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)I see what you post, as does every one else. You can keep good thoughts all day long, but people will know you by what you write here.
If you don't use the word, why have you created two OPs in defense of it? Why is it that you think women here should be insulted by a word you yourself don't use when speaking (as opposed to writing, where you obviously do use it).
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)And any attempt to conflate my desire for a little context with a supposed support for the use of a particular word would be laughable, were it not so tiresomely predictable.
It's a fucking word! It does not, despite your rabid insistence, mean the same thing in Australia, England, Ireland, or even in a Rude pundit rant; that it does in the fevered recesses of your mind.
Can you wrap your head around that simple fact? If so, then there might possibly exist a starting point for a reasonable discussion.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)There is no discussion of Australia here. The entire context is American.
The word is an insult that expresses hated for women. That's its meaning and that is why it is used. There is no other reason to defend it because one could just as well use any of thousands of other words. There is nothing reasonable about your insisting I should agree to be insulted just because you enjoy it. I could call you a lot of things, but I don't enjoy the same right to insult that you proclaim so proudly. Nor does the English language even provide comparable words. There is noting reasonable about your insisting on treating me as less than human and using animalistic terms to refer to my posts. What you call a rabid response was my citation in your other thread of a dictionary entry that showed the meaning to be precisely as we know it here: a crude term for female genetalia and an insult to demean a woman as nothing but a sex organ. My responses are neither rabid nor even as emotional as your own.
For someone who doesn't care what I think, you have a habit of sniping about me with some frequency. If you would act on this insistence that you don't care what I think, I would be eternally grateful.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I guess it's a matter of context.
I agree that it is often used in a most hateful manner.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)"The word is an insult that expresses hated (sic) for women"
Not always, thus my mention of Australia, England, etc, which you attempted to dismiss.
"There is no other reason to defend it."
I didn't, I merely attempted to ask for a bit of context, which you also attempted to dismiss.
"I should agree to be insulted just because you enjoy it."
Alright, that one has nothing to do with your genitalia, but rather was pulled directly from a neighboring orifice.
"I could call you a lot of words."
For the love of God, if it makes you feel better, then DO IT. In the course of my life, my tender ass has been pierced by RPG frag and bullets. There is nothing you can say to me that will cause me to (A) alert on your post; or (B) give a shit.
"You have a habit of sniping about me."
Umm, you insinuated yourself into this thread of your own volition. I too, would be eternally grateful if you could find someone else to stalk.
I will now leave you the last word, not only because it's impossible to reason with you, but because you also give me a fucking headache.
(But PLEASE, be aware that a whole bunch of men give me headaches as well. WHEW! I'm glad I remembered to include that little caveat!)
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 21, 2014, 12:20 AM - Edit history (1)
and this thread has nothing to do with Australia. Your campaign to normalize the world here on DU has absolutely nothing to do with Australia. It's all about you.
However, since you determinedly refuse to consider the most basic evidence I posted in your last thread on this word, I'll provide it for you yet again.
: cunt
// (say kunt) Colloquial
noun 1. the vagina and external female genitalia.
2. a contemptible person.
3. something which causes difficulty or aggravation.
4. women viewed collectively as sexual objects: there was a lot of cunt at the party last night.
5. sexual intercourse with a woman.
adjective 6. despicable or reprehensible: a cunt thing to do.
phrase 7. a bit of cunt, a woman viewed as a sexual object.
8. a cunt of a , an extremely difficult, unpleasant, disagreeable, etc. : a cunt of a job. [Middle English cunt(e), kunt, queinte, of Germanic origin; compare Old Norse kunta]
https://stilgherrian.com/cunt-macquarie/
Merriam Webster
cunt
noun \ˈkənt\
Definition of CUNT
1 usually obscene : the female genital organs; also : sexual intercourse with a woman
2 usually disparaging & obscene : woman 1a
See cunt defined for English-language learners »
Origin of CUNT
Middle English cunte; akin to Middle Low German kunte female pudenda
First Known Use: 14th century
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cunt
The use of the word varies in Australia, but it's essential meaning is the same, as the dictionary entry above demonstrates.
The purpose of words is to communicate the speakers intent, and the word you champion here is no different from any other in that regard. People choose their words deliberately, and they mean what they mean. Pretending they have some different meaning is disingenuous. If one wants to say something other than its stated meaning, he chooses a different word. In two threads you have taken up the cause of this word in particular. You do so deliberately.
I don't need to respond with vulgarity since I am capable to advancing an argument on substance. Besides, I prefer my insults to be more biting than vulgar.
Congratulations on your thread. It's turned into a vulgar free for all of insults against women. I've noticed these threads of yours tend to appear on Fridays. It's almost like you can't face the weekend unless you've lashed out at anonymous women online, whether it's an absurd strawman of an argument against feminists or one of these threads championing the most vulgar word in the English language used to demean women.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)The word fag also has a different meaning in the U.K. but guess what? Somebody better not call me that to my face or they're going to get slapped. This whole "but it means something different in England" excuse is something we can understand in any language -- BULLSHIT.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I'm in agreement with you. It is a word!
Words have lots of meanings depending on the full context in which they are used.
When we ban words, we lose a lot of history. We should never ban our history.
I put forth Mark Twain for an example: How could he tell his stories without the word that is now banned.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)That Martin Luther King and the leaders of the civil rights movement never complained or asked people to stop using the N word...not once.
Why? because they knew it was a distraction and their goal was not to have people stop using derogatory language against them but to secure equal rights...and "keep your eyes on the prize" was the slogan.
It was white people that banned the use of that word, because of guilt, not because black people demanded they do so.
There is a lesson in that if you can grasp it.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Looks like someone took your picture!
I can't resist, its worth the hide.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)The cave posts my pictures with some regularity. I'm surprised you missed them. I won't look that old when I'm in my coffin. It's in my genes. I have very good skin.
Thanks for proving my point about white men. You react to the mere mention of it with personal insults, whereas anyone who isn't white and male is supposed to laugh at being insulted with vulgarities. You don't, however. You were up in arms over the age remark and the comment about malcontents. And here you come, performing the very double-standard I spoke about.
Thanks for sharing yours.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)The word you describe was used in medical journals, and derives from the Latin word for "female pudenda". It wasn't removed from varnacular until the Victorian era, when it was replaced by the "more appropriate" "quaint". Which meant the SAME thing.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)and yet hell has still not broken loose, as near as I can tell.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)MineralMan
(146,307 posts)government control over speech. He also knew that non-government standards were different. He'd have told you that right upfront, as would have Lenny Bruce.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)I think he had a big problem with the pearl clutchers but prove me wrong, you made the assertion.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I believe he was talking about the pearl clutchers that were seeking to not be offended.
All speech offends somebody. Let's ban speech and become a silent world.
Then we can concentrate on physical gestures. So and so walks in a way that offends me. We must ban that particular way of walking.
We can all become pod people. No Voice, no movement, nothing to offend. We can all be left alone to our private thoughts.
A perfect world.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)On Fri Jun 20, 2014, 03:05 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits. George Carlin ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025127500
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Ya, no. A poster that is advocating sexist, homophobic and racist comments be allowed on du because we are progressives, does not get to put the offensive in a title. Lets not allow.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 20, 2014, 03:11 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster is trying to be offensive in order to draw a hide. I say, leave his offensive post up for all to see. It serves no purpose other than to reflect negatively on the OP.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: In context of the recent word wars I think this should stay.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Flame bait
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: How about we all talk about elections, politics and policy instead of words for a while?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 20, 2014, 04:00 PM - Edit history (1)
Does it matter that I am offended by the alterter? Or is the alerter the only one who gets to be offended?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)the only people who would bother to alert on that would be the OP or one of those people who wanted it to be alerted on so they could be proclaim their happiness when it wasn't hidden.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)And I have yet to see any celebratory glee over the fact that it wasn't hidden. Got any other theories?
(But you do raise an interesting question. Is it even possible to alert on one's own thread? I may have to check this out.)
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)you can't ignore yourself. (I'd heard that somewhere you could find out how many people were ignoring you, and was idly trying to find where that might be in the profile data, and clicked the ignore button. Now I'm wondering why you even have that button there, if all it's going to do is tell you you can't ignore yourself.)
MADem
(135,425 posts)awhile. Alerting on himself, then crying that he was being "targeted" by meanies.
The admins caught him out and I think they fixed the software so you can't hit yourself over the head.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)deserves the classic "legendary thread" seal of approval!
opiate69
(10,129 posts)quinnox
(20,600 posts)Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)Iggo
(47,552 posts)That's hilarious!
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)that women served some other purpose on this planet other than serving as an outlet for men's hostilities. The nerve of those two jurors. They ought to know that the purpose of DU is to give men who feel they've pulled the short straw in life a place to dump on anonymous women.
Iggo
(47,552 posts)BainsBane
(53,032 posts)One of the words above is widely regarded as the single most offensive in the English language to demean women. You expressed bewilderment that anyone would vote to hide a thread that insults and demeans. Now, not everyone believes women deserve to be subject to that level of insult. Some people, myself included, believe women are human beings worthy of respect. That is probably why those two jurors voted to hide. They may have also judged the OP to be inflammatory.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #80)
Iggo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Iggo
(47,552 posts)BainsBane
(53,032 posts)I figured the discussion wasn't going anywhere anyway.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)with a string of those in the title?
Maybe someone should post Carlin's rant about how horrible men are.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)and that gibberish just offended me.
I have a fucking brain. Quit trying to protect me, please.
depending on your current mood.
lol.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)But the precedent's now been set with meegbear's thread getting hidden. Its a bad precedent.
A person only gets so many hides before they're booted off DU. There are some long standing grudges here on DU. When OP's that contain Carlin or RP content are fair game for a hide its opened up an avenue to get long term good posters shitcanned here.
It also feels like censorship and I guess we have to decide as a community if we're okay with shutting up progressive voices like the RP or Carlin.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)If it starts to become a pattern, I'm going to be very disappointed
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)... can hide behind their anonymous alerts.
MADem
(135,425 posts)discomfiting.
That RP "HIDE" has had a negative effect on me--I will probably be more likely to leave rude language than I have been in the past. If it's aimed AT a DUer, with the goal to hurt feelings, I'll still vote to hide, but if it's just used to express generic outrage or annoyance, I'll probably head for the LEAVE side of things.
There can be too much net-nannying.
People should go read DU1 on occasion--they'd be HORRIFIED at the (gasp) LANGUAGE!!!!!!
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)Very insightful as well as talented.
MineralMan
(146,307 posts)had a much better string of obscenities, uttered by Candy after having strange sex with a hunchback. I won't repeat it, though.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Anansi1171
(793 posts)Blessed to see Carlin live in my lifetime. Among this black mans favorite comedians. When younger folks youtube Eddie Murphys delirious, im like Carlin and Richard Pryor...Fucking. Funny.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)I first heard him when I was maybe 11 or 12. My older neighbor friends turned me on to him. I still treasure those memories.
Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)It survived. But it was alerted on and got two votes to hide, the power of stupid is pretty damn strong around here.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)I actually find your post far more insulting than the OP ...
Thought you should know that ...
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)than the post you replied to.
Thought you should know that...
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Come back later and I can post some more stuff that you can ape ...
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I have no problem with you providing me with amusement.
Apes are fun and full of wonderment.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)"Shit, piss, fuck, c*nt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits. George Carlin"
Have at it ...
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)it just sounds so filthy.
I always take into consideration who is speaking and how the words are being used.
Does that work for you?
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I think. Words and acronyms are so confusing.
Where is my fainting couch? No, wait I need my pearls - must clutch.
ARGH, what to do?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Which are not the issue here.
OneCrazyDiamond
(2,032 posts)was "going away", for pets dying.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"I wonder what he would have made of Democratic "Underground"? "
I imagine he would have thought "there's certainly a lot of people on this political message board looking for different ways to justify the use of wholly irrelevant language rather than discussing politics and policy..." I too think he would have laughed... but much less at those who take offense than at those who give offense merely for the sake of giving offense.
"By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth." G. Carlin
And more relevant and apropos to the OP... "People who say they dont care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they dont care what people think."
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Seems like people have taken up where they left off over there.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)and good old Number 2!
deutsey
(20,166 posts)One of my favorite observations of his is something along the lines of: You can prick your finger just dont finger your prick.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)you know the rest. LOL
Alex P Notkeaton
(309 posts)The second and seventh, specifically.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)sarge43
(28,941 posts)Bunk and McNulty dis (cough) cussing the homicide
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)sarge43
(28,941 posts)BootinUp
(47,144 posts)Had to stop watching it midway and reply with amazement.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)I made it to minute 30 before I had to go vomit.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)BootinUp
(47,144 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)George Carlin never intended to use such words to promote, for instance, misogyny. Rather he used them to shed light on such issues.
There is a difference.
And it's a HUGE difference.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)in the thread which was hidden. Kind of the whole point.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 20, 2014, 07:07 PM - Edit history (2)
Even if it's Liz Cheney.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)with her sister Mary right.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)BootinUp
(47,144 posts)ARE YOU SURE?????????
Some people disagree, some people have other agendas....
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)Intent does make a big difference, and that puts Carlin in stark contrast to this thread. He was also funny. People can get away with a lot more if they are funny and their humor says something.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)It's very easy to misinterpret intent especially for those looking for something to be outraged over.
ms liberty
(8,574 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)Sheesh, sometimes I feel as if surrounded by a bunch of five year olds giggling at all the naughty words they've learned, without the slightest notion of context.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I am in tears.
Thank you FiveGoodMen.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)people really need to rethink what is offensive. Words are just that. Actions are what matters.
I'll leave it at that.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)That was one of Carlin's particular strengths: astonishingly long lists of things we've already encountered.
Check this one out:
WillyT
(72,631 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Thank you again.
Carlin and Hicks - RIP
I would love to buy you a "what ever floats your boat".
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I feel like I've just crawled out of the rectory into the church of alter boys!
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)I don't think I've ever made a more well-received post!
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)benld74
(9,904 posts)onenote
(42,702 posts)Interesting bit of trivia: Several years ago some members of Congress put together a proposed piece of legislation that would have codified the seven dirty words. Leaving aside the amusement factor in seeing the words in print in a formal piece of legislation, the men behind the bill (and I believe that they were all men), made one change in Carlin's list -- they substituted "asshole" for "tits." The only thing we could figure is that these guys liked saying tits, so they didn't want to make that illegal, but they hated being called asshole, so they needed to get that on the list.
OneCrazyDiamond
(2,032 posts)fart, turd, twat asshole, ballbag, hardon, pisshard, blueballs, taint, nooky, snatchbox, pussy, pecker, peckerhead, peckertracks, jizzum, joint, donacor, dork, poontang, cornhole, and dingleberry
But I never really heard they "Made the list."
at one point mother-fucker was dropped from the list.
I seen him live once. I got a shirt: "An incomplete list of 10,000 vulgar words and phases."
The list was categorized front and back.
sarge43
(28,941 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)....thanks to RP's scenario re: Liz Cheney!
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Yodeling in the gulley was one of my favorites.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)what about the children?
By the way, brought my own ...
And
So do not even bother offering.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I was fresh out of fainting salts and I had to sell the couch to eat.
Oh my!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)when you use those things, like for real, people at times get down right aggressive, and some will gag and vomit.
After that, you welcome, plenty more where those came from.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I offer spirits and a good meal.
Oh, and, intelligent conversation. Nothing fancy. I'm quite poor.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is not money that makes us rich, in my mind that is ideas. "A full belly is good, but not the only thing that matters."
That is a paraphrase from a town elder in the Sierra Juarez... his town is dirt poor, but they use ancient Native American wisdom regularly. They are also quite in sync with the land.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)As poverty stricken as I am money wise, I have always felt rich in friends, family and ideals.
ms liberty
(8,574 posts)Thanks for the moment of positive in this cauldron of disunity!
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)It is a shame that so many here don't understand such a simple truth.
De Leonist
(225 posts)But what I want to know is what is more offensive ?
Cunt or Cumdumpster
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)Measuring our penises by trying to come up with the most offensive language?
De Leonist
(225 posts)This entire thread is about offensive language and word related stupidity in general. I was simply wondering what was more offensive at the time, the word cunt or the word cumdumpster. I have never used either word in relation to women or men. Nor do I think of women in those terms. But after reading all the hallabalooh about cunt I just began wondering which was more offensive. Quite frankly I didn't think it that out of place nor that offensive given the context of this thread. If my comment offended you than that is regrettable. As that is not what I intended. I don't deny I did expect a few WTFs though. I like making people go WTF. If you do it right you get the pleasure of watching someone's brain short circuit for a second or two with out really offending them.
As far as penis measuring goes though I'm not one for such things. It was more an inquiry than any sort of attempt to egg on some contest as to who can think up the most offensive comment.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)It's very offensive and I can't believe a jury let it stand, and if you had any decency you would delete them both.
De Leonist
(225 posts)I think that is the first time I've had something I've posted equivocated to the KKK.
Jury? What Jury ?
I realize that yes both terms are offensive and that yes many probably do feel displeasure at the site of them. However I think your going over board with your reaction to what I posted.
I did not actually level an insult at anyone. I did not say that women were either. If you and others are offended my honest apologies. I do not use those words in day to day speech and do not really give them that much thought.
However to have someone equivocate something I said to the KKK simply because I wondered which was more offensive makes no sense to me. Had I actually leveled an insult at someone or made a big sweeping generalization about women as a whole your outrage at my statement would be more understandable to my mind.
As I said my honest apologies. But I don't like deleting my posts unless I drunk post and even than it's a rarity. Personally I don't regret that I posted it. I do regret that it is more offensive than I had anticipated but outside that nothing else. So no I will not be deleting them. Also I don't like being shamed into deleting a post either. Had you just explained why what I said bothered you so much than that might've been a different story.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)first: your post was alerted on by at least two people. Mine being at least the second.
second: you leveled an insult to every woman, no not to any one in particular
third: you obviously haven't given this much thought; even more of a reason to delete
fourth: offensive language is just that, offensive; rather it be racist or misogynist
fifth: your apology means nothing because you obviously don't give a shit that you're offensive since you won't delete and don't regret it.
sixth: I am not surprised you won't be shamed into deleting; most assholes can't be shamed
De Leonist
(225 posts)"first: your post was alerted on by at least two people. Mine being at least the second."
If my post really pissed you off that much than fine. Sit'n'stew
"second: you leveled an insult to every woman, no not to any one in particular"
How did I level an insult at every woman exactly ? So just by mentioning a term do I insult someone ? Is that it ?
"third: you obviously haven't given this much thought; even more of a reason to delete"
It's true I don't think about those two particular terms much. But the issue as a whole actually yes I have. My opinion just happens to differ from yours.
"fourth: offensive language is just that, offensive; rather it be racist or misogynist"
This entire thread is about offensive language. All I did was post a stray thought about wondering which of those two words was more offensive. Nothing More. Now let me guess. You're going to accuse me of being misogynist next right ? Despite the fact that not once did I ever mention regarding women in either of those fashions. If someone called a woman or women as a whole either cunts or cumdumpsters than on this point I'd agree with you. But just mentioning those offensive terms shouldn't be grounds for labeling or shaming anyone. A good example, I'm Autistic.
I ABSOLUTELY HATE IT when people call me or other people retard or retarded or say "That's retarded" about something they don't understand. I'm not alone on this either. Anyone else with an ASD I've ever met fucking hates too it when people use that word to insult people or deride something that they can't relate to. But I'm not going to shame someone simply because they said the term. Context should be king in determining how to react to someone's mention of a particular phrase or word.
"fifth: your apology means nothing because you obviously don't give a shit that you're offensive since you won't delete and don't regret it. "
I actually was sincere. I wasn't actually looking to outright offend people. That's the part I did regret. As for why I don't delete my posts it's because I just don't like too. I like to be able to go back and read what I said. That plain that simple But the main reason I didn't delete it in this instance is because of a dislike I have of people using shame to get people do to something they want. It's a form of manipulation and I hate feeling like I'm being manipulated. Now as to whether or not you meant to be manipulative I don't know and despite what you might think I'm not trying to be accusative here. That dislike comes more out of years of being taken advantage of by people in my teens. Those of us on the spectrum often have this problem as we are not very good at reading people or discerning their motivations as compared to most normal people.
sixth: I am not surprised you won't be shamed into deleting; most assholes can't be shamed
Do you honestly expect anyone to react in a constructive manner to being shamed ? As for calling me an asshole your the one who tried to shame me into deleting my post by comparing what I said to the KKK.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)at your previous post is hilarious.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)BootinUp
(47,144 posts)so they can react with outrage at words.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)This however is outrageous and only a dumbass or misogynist pig can't see it. Which are you?
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)You win that prize.
De Leonist
(225 posts)It's better than nothin'
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)But I guess that was too much to ask.
JVS
(61,935 posts)That's fucking bullshit. My royal jelly deserves better than to be denigrated in such a fashion.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I thought the use of "royal jelly" was especially funny.
So fucking sue me.
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)kentauros
(29,414 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 21, 2014, 01:01 AM - Edit history (3)
WARNING! WARNING WILL ROBINSON!
This is a long post, so y'all don't have to go looking at the links for each etymological meaning
Old English scitan, from Proto-Germanic *skit- (cognates: North Frisian skitj, Dutch schijten, German scheissen), from PIE *skei- "to cut, split, divide, separate" (see shed (v.)). The notion is of "separation" from the body (compare Latin excrementum, from excernere "to separate," Old English scearn "dung, muck," from scieran "to cut, shear;" see sharn). It is thus a cousin to science and [link: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=conscience&allowed_in_frame=0|conscience].
"Shit" is not an acronym. The notion that it is a recent word might be partly because it was taboo from c.1600 and rarely appeared in print (neither Shakespeare nor the KJV has it), and even in "vulgar" publications of the late 18c. it is disguised by dashes. It drew the wrath of censors as late as 1922 ("Ulysses" and "The Enormous Room" , scandalized magazine subscribers in 1957 (a Hemingway story in "Atlantic Monthly" and was omitted from some dictionaries as recently as 1970 ("Webster's New World" .
Extensive slang usage; meaning "to lie, to tease" is from 1934; that of "to disrespect" is from 1903. Shite, now a jocular or slightly euphemistic and chiefly British variant of the noun, formerly a dialectal variant, reflects the vowel in the Old English verb (compare German scheissen); the modern verb has been influenced by the noun. Shat is a humorous past tense form, not etymological, first recorded 18c. To shit bricks "be very frightened" attested by 1961. The connection between fear and involuntary defecation has generated expressions since 14c., and probably also is behind scared shitless (1936).
shit (n.)
Old English scitte "purging, diarrhea," from source of shit (v.). Sense of "excrement" dates from 1580s (Old English had scytel, Middle English shitel for "dung, excrement;" the usual 14c. noun seems to have been turd). Use for "obnoxious person" is since at least 1508; meaning "misfortune, trouble" is attested from 1937. Shit-faced "drunk" is 1960s student slang; shit list is from 1942. Up shit creek "in trouble" is from 1937 (compare salt river). To not give a shit "not care" is from 1922. Pessimistic expression Same shit different day attested from 1997. Shitticism is Robert Frost's word for scatological writing.
The expression {the shit hits the fan} is related to, and may well derive from, an old joke. A man in a crowded bar needed to defecate but couldn't find a bathroom, so he went upstairs and used a hole in the floor. Returning, he found everyone had gone except the bartender, who was cowering behind the bar. When the man asked what had happened, the bartender replied, 'Where were you when the shit hit the fan?' [Hugh Rawson, "Wicked Words," 1989]
late 13c., from Old French pissier "urinate" (12c.), from Vulgar Latin *pissiare, of imitative origin. To piss away (money, etc.) is from 1948. Related: Pissed; pissing. Pissing while (1550s) once meant "a short time."
He shall not piss my money against the wall; he shall not have my money to spend in liquor. {Grose, "Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue," 3rd edition, 1796}
piss (n.)
late 14c., from piss (v.). As a pure intensifier (piss-poor, piss-ugly, etc.) it dates from World War II. Piss and vinegar first attested 1942. Piss-prophet "one who diagnosed diseases by inspection of urine" is attested from 1620s. Piss proud "erect upon awakening" is attested from 1796.
until recently a difficult word to trace, in part because it was taboo to the editors of the original OED when the "F" volume was compiled, 1893-97. Written form only attested from early 16c. OED 2nd edition cites 1503, in the form fukkit; earliest appearance of current spelling is 1535 -- "Bischops ... may fuck thair fill and be vnmaryit" (Sir David Lyndesay, "Ane Satyre of the Thrie Estaits"), but presumably it is a much more ancient word than that, simply one that wasn't written in the kind of texts that have survived from O.E. and M.E. Buck cites proper name John le Fucker from 1278. The word apparently is hinted at in a scurrilous 15c. poem, titled "Flen flyys," written in bastard Latin and M.E. The relevant line reads:
Non sunt in celi
quia fuccant uuiuys of heli
"They (the monks) are not in heaven because they fuck the wives of (the town of) Ely." Fuccant is pseudo-Latin, and in the original it is written in cipher. The earliest examples of the word otherwise are from Scottish, which suggests a Scandinavian origin, perhaps from a word akin to Norwegian dialectal fukka "copulate," or Swedish dialectal focka "copulate, strike, push," and fock "penis." Another theory traces it to M.E. fyke, fike "move restlessly, fidget," which also meant "dally, flirt," and probably is from a general North Sea Germanic word; cf. M.Du. fokken, Ger. ficken "fuck," earlier "make quick movements to and fro, flick," still earlier "itch, scratch;" the vulgar sense attested from 16c. This would parallel in sense the usual M.E. slang term for "have sexual intercourse," swive, from O.E. swifan "to move lightly over, sweep" (see swivel). But OED remarks these "cannot be shown to be related" to the English word. Chronology and phonology rule out Shipley's attempt to derive it from M.E. firk "to press hard, beat."
Germanic words of similar form (f + vowel + consonant) and meaning 'copulate' are numerous. One of them is G. ficken. They often have additional senses, especially 'cheat,' but their basic meaning is 'move back and forth.' ... Most probably, fuck is a borrowing from Low German and has no cognates outside Germanic. (Liberman)
French foutre and Italian fottere look like the English word but are unrelated, derived rather from L. futuere, which is perhaps from PIE base *bhau(t)- "knock, strike off," extended via a figurative use "from the sexual application of violent action" (Shipley; cf. the sexual slang use of bang, etc.). Popular and Internet derivations from acronyms (and the "pluck yew" fable) are merely ingenious trifling. The O.E. word was hæman, from ham "dwelling, home," with a sense of "take home, co-habit." Fuck was outlawed in print in England (by the Obscene Publications Act, 1857) and the U.S. (by the Comstock Act, 1873). As a noun, it dates from 1670s. The word may have been shunned in print, but it continued in conversation, especially among soldiers during WWI.
It became so common that an effective way for the soldier to express this emotion was to omit this word. Thus if a sergeant said, 'Get your ----ing rifles!' it was understood as a matter of routine. But if he said 'Get your rifles!' there was an immediate implication of urgency and danger. (John Brophy, "Songs and Slang of the British Soldier: 1914-1918," pub. 1930)
The legal barriers broke down in the 20th century, with the "Ulysses" decision (U.S., 1933) and "Lady Chatterley's Lover" (U.S., 1959; U.K., 1960). Johnson excluded the word, and fuck wasn't in a single English language dictionary from 1795 to 1965. "The Penguin Dictionary" broke the taboo in the latter year. Houghton Mifflin followed, in 1969, with "The American Heritage Dictionary," but it also published a "Clean Green" edition without the word, to assure itself access to the lucrative public high school market.
The abbreviation F (or eff) probably began as euphemistic, but by 1943 it was being used as a cuss word, too. In 1948, the publishers of "The Naked and the Dead" persuaded Norman Mailer to use the euphemism fug instead. When Mailer later was introduced to Dorothy Parker, she greeted him with, "So you're the man who can't spell 'fuck' " (The quip sometimes is attributed to Tallulah Bankhead). Hemingway used muck in "For whom the Bell Tolls" (1940). The major breakthrough in publication was James Jones' "From Here to Eternity" (1950), with 50 fucks (down from 258 in the original manuscript). Egyptian legal agreements from the 23rd Dynasty (749-21 B.C.E.) frequently include the phrase, "If you do not obey this decree, may a donkey copulate with you!" (Reinhold Aman, "Maledicta," Summer 1977). Fuck-all "nothing" first recorded 1960.
Verbal phrase fuck up "to ruin, spoil, destroy" first attested c.1916. A widespread group of Slavic words (cf. Pol. pierdolić) can mean both "fornicate" and "make a mistake." Fuck off attested from 1929; as a command to depart, by 1944. Flying fuck originally meant "have sex on horseback" and is first attested c.1800 in broadside ballad "New Feats of Horsemanship." For the unkillable urban legend that this word is an acronym of some sort (a fiction traceable on the Internet to 1995 but probably predating that) see here, and also here. Related: Fucked; fucking. Agent noun fucker attested from 1590s in literal sense; by 1893 as a term of abuse (or admiration).
DUCK F-CK-R. The man who has the care of the poultry on board a ſhip of war. ("Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue," 1796)
"female intercrural foramen," or, as some 18c. writers refer to it, "the monosyllable," Middle English cunte "female genitalia," by early 14c. (in Hendyng's "Proverbs" -- ʒeve þi cunte to cunni(n)g, And crave affetir wedding), akin to Old Norse kunta, Old Frisian, Middle Dutch, and Middle Low German kunte, from Proto-Germanic *kunton, of uncertain origin. Some suggest a link with Latin cuneus "wedge," others to PIE root *geu- "hollow place," still others to PIE *gwen-, root of queen and Greek gyne "woman."
The form is similar to Latin cunnus "female pudenda" (also, vulgarly, "a woman" , which is likewise of disputed origin, perhaps literally "gash, slit," from PIE *sker- (1) "to cut," or literally "sheath," from PIE *kut-no-, from root *(s)keu- "to conceal, hide."
Hec vulva: a cunt. Hic cunnus: idem est. {from Londesborough Illustrated Nominale, c.1500, in "Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies," eds. Wright and Wülcker, vol. 1, 1884}
First known reference in English apparently is in a compound, Oxford street name Gropecuntlane cited from c.1230 (and attested through late 14c.) in "Place-Names of Oxfordshire" (Gelling & Stenton, 1953), presumably a haunt of prostitutes. Used in medical writing c.1400, but avoided in public speech since 15c.; considered obscene since 17c.
in Middle English also conte, counte, and sometimes queinte, queynte (for this, see q). Chaucer used quaint and queynte in "Canterbury Tales" (late 14c.), and Andrew Marvell might be punning on quaint in "To His Coy Mistress" (1650).
"What eyleth yow to grucche thus and grone? Is it for ye wolde haue my queynte allone?" {Wife of Bath's Tale}
Under "MONOSYLLABLE" Farmer lists 552 synonyms from English slang and literature before launching into another 5 pages of them in French, German, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese. (A sampling: Botany Bay, chum, coffee-shop, cookie, End of the Sentimental Journey, fancy bit, Fumbler's Hall, funniment, goatmilker, heaven, hell, Itching Jenny, jelly-bag, Low Countries, nature's tufted treasure, parenthesis, penwiper, prick-skinner, seminary, tickle-toby, undeniable, wonderful lamp, and aphrodisaical tennis court. Dutch cognate de kont means "a bottom, an arse," but Dutch also has attractive poetic slang ways of expressing this part, such as liefdesgrot, literally "cave of love," and vleesroos "rose of flesh."
Alternative form cunny is attested from c.1720 but is certainly much earlier and forced a change in the pronunciation of coney (q.v.), but it was good for a pun while coney was still the common word for "rabbit": "A pox upon your Christian cockatrices! They cry, like poulterers' wives, 'No money, no coney.' " {Philip Massinger: "The Virgin-Martyr," Act I, Scene 1, 1622}
1890s, "one who does fellatio" (especially a male homosexual); 1920s as "contemptible person," American English, from cock (n.1) in phallic sense + sucker (n.). Used curiously for aggressively obnoxious men; the ancients would have recoiled at this failure to appreciate the difference between passive and active roles; Catullus, writing of his boss, employs the useful Latin insult irrumator, which means "someone who forces others to give him oral sex," hence "one who treats people with contempt."
also mother-fucker, mother fucker, usually simply an intensive of fucker (see fuck), attested from 1956; implied in clipped form mother (with the context made clear) by 1928; motherfucking is from 1933.
"breast," Old English titt "teat, nipple, breast" (a variant of teat). But the modern slang tits (plural), attested from 1928, seems to be a recent reinvention, used without awareness of the original form, from teat or from dialectal and nursery diminutive variant titties (pl.).
1972, short for tits and ass (a phrase attributed to Lenny Bruce), in reference to salacious U.S. mass media; earlier it was medical shorthand for "tonsils and adenoids" (1942).
ms liberty
(8,574 posts)kentauros
(29,414 posts)That's one of my favorite sites
And I added the "T&A" bit at the end due to laughing out loud when I read it had originally meant "tonsils and adenoids"
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)GusBob
(7,286 posts)dear word police: have a nice day!
randome
(34,845 posts)...much of this celebration of all things lewd sounds like smokers demanding the right to breathe smoke in your face and gun-thumpers demanding to carry their weapons into shopping malls.
It's low-class behavior that you're 'defending' here.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)what you say here on DU is "gutter speech". Certainly not deadly, but "low-class behavior".
I can not defend what you say. Do you see how that works?
Maybe you think your experience trumps all others. I don't know, you tell me.
randome
(34,845 posts)We actually agree on what constitutes low-class behavior because it's precisely why some want to use 'Fuck', 'Cunt' and 'Shit' -to sound low-class and join the 'exalted' ranks of shock jocks.
If you didn't think it was low-class, then why use language that imparts no information?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesnt always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one youre already in.[/center][/font][hr]
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I was clear in what I posted.
mythology
(9,527 posts)I agree with you that it is low class to not be able to converse without using some of these words, but that's a matter of opinion. Other people can disagree. But it is objectively not as dangerous as blowing a cancer causing substance in somebody's face or the increased likelihood of being shot by being around people with guns.
And in the right context using words that are regularly regarded as offensive can be a powerful tool. Look at the use of the n word in Huck Finn or Blazing Saddles for example. I've never said any derivation of the n word in regular conversation, but I'll happily recite lines from Blazing Saddles while watching it.
randome
(34,845 posts)It's when the profanity becomes the message that it devolves into gibbering nonsense.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Offensive to most people just as the "c" word is, and if you are trying to justify the use of those words, then you have failed, or have a very limited vocabulary
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)we have removed things like Huck Finn from school curricula and kids literally faint when they see oh I don't know bills of sale from the period in question, and a few shake their heads when they hear of the United Negro College Fund. It gets down right funny when a person at the airport was wondering, in spanish mind you, where he parked his "Chevrolet negro," translated to his black chevy. Yup, somebody almost had his head bashed in for that one.
As to the C word, well, it is in the seven deadliest for the same comical reasons. And you would do good to look up how we got those seven words in the United States Supreme Court and the challenge issued by Carlin to the Justices.
As to community standards, will not rewrite it...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5128216
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Of the "n" word has such negative connotations, when used it generates a strong reaction.
The "c" word has a similar connotation to many women.
Is there a reason to use such language to express oneself? Probably not, unless quoting someone else.
Therefore the only reason one would use it is to push someone who would be offended by it. Similar to what a bully would do
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)an allegory, a play on words, and these days Sam Clemens, and quite a few other authors could not publish. It is the offensive language man, we really cannot deal with offensive language.
Hell, 1984 would not be published today, or Star Ship Troopers... for that matter, the Archeology of Language (which you should read), would not be published today either. And you know what? It is truly a shame.
And yes, Huck Finn was published in an age of extreme violence against a group of individuals.
We have these conversations from time to time in this country. This, believe it or not, is part of this conversation...
http://cbldf.org/2014/06/ala-report-shows-internet-filtering-curtails-free-speech/
So if you want to hide from words, and give them actually more power than they should have, by all means. Do so. Just don't ask the rest of us to do that in the name of some nebulous community standards that mean nothing. The USSC made the wrong decision in that case because of the children... and we have seen a constant erosion of what we are allowed to see or watch or read. It is as if I were back in childhood and big daddy decides what I can be exposed to.
That my friend is what totalitarian governments do.
That is the set of values you are accepting... and as I said, as far as community standards, catch all to what we do not want to see.
Oh and I expect the alert brigade to push alert on this post by the way.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Some Southern states where parents want to actually ban books.
Movies are rated as a guide so people will not be surprised or perhaps offended when they see those movies.
There is no such "rating" system on DU
There is no question that what one person finds offensive, someone else may not.
It always is a balancing act, the rights of one person verses another person, or perhaps at the expense of the other person.
If someone goes into court and uses certain language they are going to be held in contempt. It is definitely a form of censorship, but it is also based on a set of rules. If the same person uses that language in their house or personal environment, there is no censorship
Also, the OP may get alerted but I do not think it would be hidden since it is being used for a general discussion on acceptable standards at DU
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)in school districts across the country. It is related.
It is part of the environment we are developing, a non healthy one.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)The word "cunt" is a derivative of the Latin "cunnus". Also, from above:
"First known reference in English apparently is in a compound, Oxford street name Gropecuntlane cited from c.1230 (and attested through late 14c.) in "Place-Names of Oxfordshire" (Gelling & Stenton, 1953), presumably a haunt of prostitutes. Used in medical writing c.1400, but avoided in public speech since 15c.; considered obscene since 17c.
in Middle English also conte, counte, and sometimes queinte, queynte (for this, see q). Chaucer used quaint and queynte in "Canterbury Tales" (late 14c.), and Andrew Marvell might be punning on quaint in "To His Coy Mistress" (1650). "
Notice when it became considered "obscene", and remember what was going on in England at the time. Also, using the word "quaint" in it's place is interesting...
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Or Martin Luther's I have a Dream Speech? Listen carefully...
Negro has had context, and that was one reason Richard Pryor, after King, bless his heart and both RIP, never backed off either.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)but the slang "nigger".
For the record, I am on your side of this argument.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and rightly so.
I love the man for doing that. He took all the power away from it. And that is what we need to do with a lot of language.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)But it was the comparison of "nigger" to "cunt". Not even in the same ballpark.
One is meant to belittle a black person. The other is slang for vagina.
However, context is ALWAYS important.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)as you can see, I am coming at this from a linguistic POV. Language has as much power as we surrender to it. I admit, most people give in to the language. But especially racial and sexual insults have to be disarmed. And going to what originated all of this discussion, some folks need to learn how to deal with that. If they can't, and admittedly some people can't, this site has the tools to do it. A global block on "rude pundit" will solve that problem. Alerting and getting the post hidden had the exact contrary effect.
There are a few other words that need to be disarmed, tyke comes to mind, dick, and a few others.
Cunt should be a priority though, and I think a few comics who are edgy, can do that. I chose comics, becuase comedy is the best way to deal with this problem. For the record, I wish I could do comedy at times.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)They love to throw it around. And they're both quite edgy. Also, they're both quite funny.
Of course, I've just had a hide for quoting Carlin (to point out that sometimes he just said dirty jokes, and not everything had context).
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and see what I mean? Some people really need to relax, and use the ignore feature, because they cannot grow a thicker skin. Perhaps it is also my years as a medic... trust me, we were salty, away from the public. Oh the things we said after especially bad calls. So I have a lot more leeway with language, but I also learned to let language not have that much power. I mean, in the field as a medic, or these days as a reporter, at times people call you every name in the book and then some.
So you learn to not take it personally.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)I use the ignore and trash thread feature here on things that enrage me. It helps me to not into a pissing match with another poster about our opinions on something. Which is something I'm prone to doing.
More people should use this feature. It would help with the general discourse as well. I'd rather interject thoughtfulness in my comments to OPs than derisiveness.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and I have a couple groups on universal ignore. I really do not want to deal with them.
For the record, one of them is the Feminist group. Part of the reason is I broke barriers and ceilings, I never really got caught up on the linguistic arguments, while I became one of the first field medics in Mexico and later an instructor. I just did it. Many others have followed on those steps, but the few, happy few, that went to school with me, if we had failed...
So the arguments at that group over rape culture (there is one, but the way they want to deal with it is sad), and a few other arguments make me shake my head.
Many of the members of that group are also on ignore. And it is them who are leading this charge to take control of the language here. It is making the place less and less useful, and more about this.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)and I have not ignored you.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)here to you too
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)not aimed at themselves, I always have to ask why.
"This forum has standards" - Yes it is for liberal leaning democrats. Liberals are not afraid of words. We do not believe in censorship.
As far as your use of the word "profane"
adjective: showing a lack of respect for God or religious objects, places, or beliefs.
Do you really want to go there?
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)The "c" word. Using vocabulary or actions that hurt people are symptoms of a bully
Anyone has the right to use whatever words they want. However, I wonder how many of those folks who hide behind a keyboard would go up to people they know would be offended by those words and say it to their faces.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)what I don't say face to face.
I do not censor my own or anybody else's words. I use what "little" intellect I have to counter what they have to say.
I'm not known for fainting. I do sometimes offend. Some people need to be offended.
On a side note; if you think you are "lostincalifornia", you should try being "lost in Texas".
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Offend some.
Example, movies have a rating system so people avoid a movie if they believe they would be offended. Of course the rating system is also used so parent can decide what is appropriate for their children.
There is no rating system on DU, and what offends one person does not offend someone else
It is a balancing act
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I just believe we should not ban words. It is perfectly fine to argue the concept in which the word was used.
Banning words does not change peoples bigotry. It does make it harder to recognize their bigotry.
The very words some want to ban can be very useful in pointing out bigotry.
A lot of people are offended by those of us living in poverty. Maybe we should concentrate on banning poverty.
What can we, as a society, do to put an end to poverty?
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I was going to San Diego State, an institution of higher learning I presume, to do some research at the Library. I happened to have opened on my E-reader an actual, honest to goodness, slave bill of sale from the 1820s. For some silly reason the actual bill of sale, a photo of it. had the word NEGRO on it. A kid besides me, who is also attending such institution of higher learning had a virtual meltdown at seeing this actual historic document. I mean he went from zero to 1000 in ten seconds flat.
Yes, he happened to be African American, and I happen to be melanin challenged but have a thick accent. So that had something to do with it. But he could not believe anybody would be looking at this... pearl clutching all around. So I was in a trolley with an extremely angry kid, who was a first semester student, who went to a public school where he never was exposed to any of these bills of sale in Social Science class (think of the children) that he was proof positive I had to be something akin to the KKK, which is kind of funny, for having an actual primary source on my E-Reader and I happen to be Jewish... so comedy all around.
Now I did not get defensive... I actually get where the kid is coming from since I have been working in social justice since I was 18 at least... and took the time to explain to him what this bill of sale with a crude engraving was all about, and the CONTEXT of the word. Perish the though, some of the other bills of sale I had on that e-reader have the words NEGRESS and NIGGER on them. It took twenty minutes. The first five or so were uncomfortable as hell... the next fifteen where quite incredible. He was inspired to find out more of the context of the word and what has happened to the word over the last 200 years or so. I also told him, recapture the language from those who want to hurt you with it. And pointed out to a certain African American comic who in the 1990s that is what he did on HBO... he recaptured the language and people wanted to ban him for it (Richard Pryor)
But this is how bad it has gotten. We cannot even safely look at a fucking primary source in public transportation out of the fear of insulting somebody, or worst. I highly recommend you read Foucault, I really do. And no, I no longer read those primary sources on the trolley. Though I still ride it regularly.
So no, will not back down from the PC, pearl clutching, my god, the horror, a WORD brigade. And I think I am not alone.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Is that certain words trigger visceral reactions is some people, and they won't have a discussion but close their ears.
You made your point, and it is a good one
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)they have taken over the person.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)the nebulous "community standards" are more of a way to control people.
Many of us real old timers don't post that much original material any more, here that is. This place used to have vibrant discussions. They are mostly gone. There was a time the WAPO looked at us, these days not really. And many of us would like a shadow of that back, but with the constant bickering of factions and personal attacks, look down-thread, one of my stalkers is at it again, that is the kind of community standard that has taken over. I will not alert on him. It makes no difference, his shit is allowed, regularly.
We have a bunch of juveniles, who have nothing better to do, attacking people, but that is allowed. People go hysterical over a word, but over the Iraq war and actual sodomy and rape... Just don't mention the C word, or the R word, or the S word... or a slew of other words...
This is why this "community standard" is getting such a push back anymore. Truth be told, old timers are also quietly leaving for other, more fertile ground... and that is by design by the owners I suspect. I just wish they were open about it.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Members base their judgements not if it is a violation of a rule or standard, but whether they agree with the subject of the alerted post. At least that is what I sense from some of the comments of the jurors
I sure would not want to be a defendant with a juror that has that view
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)Words, foul language etc.
Just wanted to clarify that
liberalmuse
(18,672 posts)I remember the uproar over Carlin's "naughty words" from the 1970's. It was glorious! I had a comment scrubbed (maybe rightfully so, maybe not - I am a feminist who uses that word sparingly, but sometimes it just fits) because I used one of those words to describe Sarah Palin. While I was ashamed at being juried out, i still stand by my opinion, because Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin, in my mind, are the absolute worst the female genome has produced at this point in time. I'm pretty certain DU would've banned Jonathan Swift for suggesting child abuse and cannibalism because there is a minority here who simply don't "get" satire.
NuttyFluffers
(6,811 posts)still miss him. he, cosby, pryor, winters, nichols & may, etc. were foundational to my childhood development. used to listen to those comedians on cassette way back when i was barely in grade school. crucial to critical thinking and language skills; should be taught alongside phonetics and cursive from 1st to 5th grade.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Not sure how many here will get it.
Now where is my fainting couch?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Although I have a dog and cat that both shed. Could I have something a little less white.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)RKP5637
(67,108 posts)csziggy
(34,136 posts)reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)JoeyT
(6,785 posts)or RP against what might be a misguided attack, had people not needed to keep controversy ginned up and remind us all how oppressed and censored they are, people need to get in the threads about him and start defending George Will against the mad ravings of the PC Police.
Come on folks, if you're going to pick a hill to die on, might as well die on one that's actually drawing fire instead of standing in a random meadow accusing clouds of conspiring against you.
Edited to add: Given Carlin's hatred for the Redskins moniker, another favorite of the "It's just a WORD WHY DO THE PC POLICE OPPRESS ME SO?!" crowd, I doubt his reaction to DU would be what y'all think it would.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)The adolescents are still at work.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)I think I remember us as being sensitive to verbal slights. IIRC, we have the attitude that we should never give an inch and that semantics play a part in the struggle.
*Yeah, afaik we still point out that not saying "Democratic" is an insult.
Words can be used to brainwash and to change attitudes and opinions. Think of all the propaganda from the tobacco industry over the 20th century. Do we now allow Joe Camel to come back and entertain the kids, or is there indeed a line we don't cross?
The military gives names to the enemy so they can be dehumanized and killed with no hesitation. That technique can be bent to use in the civilian world. When your boss is a C*** you don't have to respect her, or heed her.
Who would want to share a seat with a dirty c*** s*****?
So, let's not dismiss out of hand the power of words.
Edit: My post is to the thread in general and to the conversation in other threads it relates to.
BootinUp
(47,144 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Zenlitened
(9,488 posts)In 1972.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)It has become difficult to tell the difference between the grumpy, stick-up-your-ass pissing and moaning about language from the LEFT and the same behavior from religious conservatives.
BainsBane
(53,032 posts)And who complains about the mere mention of privilege. The point is clear enough. Insulting the subaltern is "liberal," but the privileged and entitled must be protected at all costs. Insulting women, people of color, and LGBT is a sacred calling. But what no one dare do under any circumstances speak about privilege. People of color and women need to keep their mouths shut, stay in their place. They have no right to respond or even speak about how they are treated by those who consider themselves superior. That is essentially to maintaining power and inequality, a performance we are currently witnessing.
Because we all know conservatives are all about respecting the feelings of women, people of color, and LGBT Americans. Talk about irony. Only on DU can people make the exact same argument that right-wingers do and claim those who disagree with them aren't liberal.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)I pointed out your hypocrisy.
WCLinolVir
(951 posts)Not because it made him look smart. Now it just makes people look tacky and outdated.
mia
(8,360 posts)while the neocons plundered on.
4lbs
(6,855 posts)"Shit, piss, and tits."
Those three are commonly used on programs on those two cable networks.
The other four will take a little longer.
Still waiting for The Disney Channel and Family Channel to catch up.....
MADem
(135,425 posts)And I've heard the rest on premium cable.
littlemissmartypants
(22,656 posts)Makes it a DUsy.
JVS
(61,935 posts)doxydad
(1,363 posts)Who do you think you are? The rude Pundit??? This is GENIUS
armed_and_liberal
(246 posts)It says little about what constitutes a genius.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]
treestar
(82,383 posts)seems to occur. All comedians want to use offensive words, and he was simply whining that there was a sense of decorum somewhere.
TBF
(32,060 posts)and then he nailed it with his social critiques.
I can never let an opportunity go by to post his "american dream" speech. They got us "by the balls" indeed. Watch the whole thing:
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)OK, cept for the tits!
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Pretty sure he was smart enough to do so. Then again, he probably wouldn't want to. This has gotten really funny. To the point that completely laughable hypotheticals are being made up to bolster a point that is weak in the first place.
Do you know that Bush would be swarmed within 30 seconds here? So would Condi and all of the other republicans. I can't for the life of me figure out why being judged by a community of ones peers is such a difficult concept. So the standards aren't at the exact point you would like them to be. That is the case for most here. Some would like more restrictions, some would like less. This whole thing is a joke. It has been eye opening as to how many have such anger just under the surface. This has been a great exercise in some letting some of that anger out.
packman
(16,296 posts)when I tried to post a picture of KITTENS nestled in among the cleavage of amply endowed women. Now, I guess anything goes. Frankly I find those words posted on DU distasteful - what purpose other than saying "Hey, I can do it?" does it serve. Now I suppose one can show various body parts, violent acts , feces, urine and other things on the DU if it somehow enforces a point. Let me look up all those shit images , I have something to say about Cheney. Let me look up those images of women who are raped, I have something to say about how the Rep's are raping our country. Let me post those pictures of dicks/cunts because I want to post about Bachman or GW Bush. Let me use every four letter word , because - hell - I just should. Somehow I thought we were better.
Really, the point is made and Rude Pundit was correct in his anger Why was the Carlin joke posted, did we really have to go overboard with that? Wouldn't a pic of a bathroom wall in a gas station been as suitable?
canoeist52
(2,282 posts)kpete
(71,991 posts)and
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kp
kentauros
(29,414 posts)I'll just resort to made-up obscenities like "Ni!", "Belgium", and "Frak."
"Oh Belgium man! Belgium!"
Ni!
DesertDiamond
(1,616 posts)davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)OMG. You said these things on DU?!? Didn't you think about the children? The children who will read this and then grow up to be violent criminals, racists, sexists, and overall bad people because they read some bad words on the net? Seriously, what the fuck were you think? I mean, what the cock-suckery, fuckity shittery was going on in your head? God damn. Fucking shitass vulgar posts. You should wash your mouth out with soap, pray to Jesus for forgiveness, and never ever say naughty words again. Ever. How dare you. Rawr. Grr. Arg. Okay, I think I'm done now.
Tits
supercats
(429 posts)In a way that only he could do it. He would probably get censored here for "fowl language". What a joke the DU is at times. "Oh he said a bad word"..."Oh that person said something that wasn't nice"...."We feel you can't say that so we deleted it" DU is politically correct....you better not really ruffle anyones feathers, just like the corporatist network WNBC. They speak a little truth, but when it cuts to close to the bone(i.e. corporation core beliefs) they don't allow it. Remember Phil Donoghue? So DU and MSNBC aren't Free Speech TV or Democracy Now, they just aren't. So don't pretend to be!!!
kpete
(71,991 posts)the din around here is deafening...
peace 11 Bravo!
love your post,
kp
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)The experiment is on at the other site where the blog nannies haven't invaded and taken over yet ...like this place.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Certain prominent individuals have written more at the other place in the past 3 months, than they have on DU in the past 3 years.
Go figure.
JVS
(61,935 posts)Maybe I'm reading and posting in the wrong forum.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Seriously, shoot me a PM. Its not a state secret, but i like to leave DU on DU and the other on the other.
Autumn
(45,082 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)VATCH VAT YOU SAYYYY!
Autumn
(45,082 posts)MadrasT
(7,237 posts)It's basically a toxic cesspool with no community standards, whatsoever.
With this thread being a perfect illustration of that case.
It's like a pack of 6 year olds just learned about dirty words.
Juvenile bullshit.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)But they are.