Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!lipman From: lipman@decwrl.UUCP Newsgroups: net.women.only Subject: Use of profanity to degrade women? (warning--contains explicit profanity) Message-ID: <5624@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Sat, 18-Feb-84 00:58:57 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.5624 Posted: Sat Feb 18 00:58:57 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 14-Feb-84 01:24:40 EST Sender: lipman@decwrl.UUCP Organization: DEC Western Research Lab, Los Altos, CA Lines: 163 From: closus::nerad <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In response to Ariel's submission on the term "cocksucker" in which the point is made that "cocksucker" should be discouraged as an expletive, since it demeans women: Since you seem to be assuming strongly heterosexual males (since cocksucker is certainly not sex-specific to women in a world with free sexual preference) then f* and f*er should also be included in your campaign. I think the attempt is futile though. I also know some large numbers of men and women who use f* and f*er as expletives. I don't think that this trivializes sex any less, certainly, than calling someone a cocksucker. If a straight woman uses f*er as an expletive, does it demean men? Oral sex among males has this wonderfully tittilating aspect of being taboo (or was taboo, very short times ago), and something that *nice* girls usually don't do, and *no* nice boys do. :-) However, getting head is something devoutly to be wished, so to speak. Therefore, from desire and repression comes a term used as an expletive. It seems to me that if you examine the scatalogical terms of most languages you will find that they generally refer to taboo items in the culture of origination. Therefore, you will find scatalogical terms for feces (sh*t), urine (piss), sex (f*, cocksucker, motherf*er...). General curses (damnation, hell, may the bird of paradise...), and insults (your mother..., who taught you to be so ugly or were you born like that...) tend to take more thought and be used less often, unless like "damn" or "hell" they can be condensed. When I have children I intend to teach them to use more creative forms of swearing, such as curses and insults. At least, if an individual takes time to think up an insult or curse, they will: (A) possibly take time to cool down; (B) THINK about the implications of what they are about to call someone...assuming they are using the terms in anger. I would make the point that in my generation, growing up in Central Vermont, swearing of the standard sort was casual, and even affectionate. Words that carried the stamp of mortal insult to my parents are bandied about in design meetings at DEC with no more thought than using terms like "awesome" "wicked" "fubar" (which has its own roots) and "rats." You specify that you are speaking of "the worst thing" that someone could think of calling someone else, but remember, fairly casual terms can be used nastily ("You louse!") or "reserved words" be used affectionately ("...a cute little bastard."). Shava Nerad decvax!decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad (P.S. for anyone who cares, this Shava is the diminuitive of Elisheva, the biblical original of Elizabeth. I am most assuradly female, although I am told that it is a man's name in some languages.) From: ROLL::FEATHERSTON "Ed Featherston HLO1-1/P06 225-5241" 9-FEB-1984 17:12 To: CLOSUS::NERAD Subj: ROLL::USENET no longer forwards articles Attached find your recent submission to "net.women.only" via ROLL::USENET. Due to the ad-hoc way contributions from the ENET are set up, there has been a large amount of confusion on the USENET as to where our articles are coming from. This is even true if you contribution directly to the newsgroup. The confusion doubles if you contribute to ROLL::USENET, and it gets contributed from there. Due to this confusion, ROLL::USENET will no long forward articles to the USENET. If you wish to contribute, you must do so directly ( read ROLL::ENETDIS.DOC for details on contributing directly ). When contributing directly, please be sure to attach a valid return mail address to your article ( again, due to the confusion, it helps clarify who sent the message ). You will notice that ROLL::USENET has already attached such an address to your article. Let me know if you have any questions. /ed featherston/ DEC Advanced Semiconductor Development Group (ENET) ROLL::FEATHERSTON (UUCP) {decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!rhea!roll!featherston (ARPA) decwrl!rhea!roll!featherston@Berkeley decwrl!rhea!roll!featherston@SU-Shasta ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: USENET "USENET Newsgroup Distributor" 8-FEB-1984 11:26 To: USENET_DISTRIBUTOR Subj: None Begin Forwarded Message: ------------------------------------------- Newsgroup : net.women.only >From : CLOSUS::NERAD Organization : Digital Equipment Corp. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In response to Ariel's submission on the term "cocksucker" in which the point is made that "cocksucker" should be discouraged as an expletive, since it demeans women: Since you seem to be assuming strongly heterosexual males (since cocksucker is certainly not sex-specific to women in a world with free sexual preference) then f* and f*er should also be included in your campaign. I think the attempt is futile though. I also know some large numbers of men and women who use f* and f*er as expletives. I don't think that this trivializes sex any less, certainly, than calling someone a cocksucker. If a straight woman uses f*er as an expletive, does it demean men? Oral sex among males has this wonderfully tittilating aspect of being taboo (or was taboo, very short times ago), and something that *nice* girls usually don't do, and *no* nice boys do. :-) However, getting head is something devoutly to be wished, so to speak. Therefore, from desire and repression comes a term used as an expletive. It seems to me that if you examine the scatalogical terms of most languages you will find that they generally refer to taboo items in the culture of origination. Therefore, you will find scatalogical terms for feces (sh*t), urine (piss), sex (f*, cocksucker, motherf*er...). General curses (damnation, hell, may the bird of paradise...), and insults (your mother..., who taught you to be so ugly or were you born like that...) tend to take more thought and be used less often, unless like "damn" or "hell" they can be condensed. When I have children I intend to teach them to use more creative forms of swearing, such as curses and insults. At least, if an individual takes time to think up an insult or curse, they will: (A) possibly take time to cool down; (B) THINK about the implications of what they are about to call someone...assuming they are using the terms in anger. I would make the point that in my generation, growing up in Central Vermont, swearing of the standard sort was casual, and even affectionate. Words that carried the stamp of mortal insult to my parents are bandied about in design meetings at DEC with no more thought than using terms like "awesome" "wicked" "fubar" (which has its own roots) and "rats." You specify that you are speaking of "the worst thing" that someone could think of calling someone else, but remember, fairly casual terms can be used nastily ("You louse!") or "reserved words" be used affectionately ("...a cute little bastard."). Shava Nerad decvax!decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad (P.S. for anyone who cares, this Shava is the diminuitive of Elisheva, the biblical original of Elizabeth. I am most assuradly female, although I am told that it is a man's name in some languages.) (UUCP) {decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad (ARPA) decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad@Berkeley decwrl!rhea!closus!nerad@SU-Shasta ------------------------------------------- End Forwarded Message